U-2400

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
ALBEMARLE
NORTHEAST CONNECTOR
FROM US 52 TO NC 740
STANLY COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
STATE PROJECT NO. 9.8100163
T.I.P. NO. U-2400
STATE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE
NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL BRANCH
OF THE DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
For Further Information, Contact:
L. J. Ward, P.E.
Manager, Planning and Environmental Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611
Phone: [phone]
APPROVED:
Date L.J. Ward, P.E.
Manager, Planning and Environmental Branch

F
11

t
t
l
l

11

1
1

1
1
1
1
1
[I J
1
1
1

t
i
I
ALBEMARLE
NORTHEAST CONNECTOR
FROM US 52 TO NC 740
STANLY COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
STATE PROJECT NO. 9.8100163
T.I.P. NO. U-2400
STATE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
September 1991
Documentation Prepared By
CRS Sirrine Engineers, Inc.
eter . Strub, P.E.
Project Manager
o4? CAR01
•; •.•??o?ESS1pNq?9
• SE AL :
i 15298 =
:.,FN01 N??... J?
100

fl
1
1

1

1
1

1

7
t
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER PAGE
SUMMARY 1
Description of Action 1
Summary of Environmental Impacts 1
Alternatives Considered 1
Coordination 2
Actions Required By Other Agencies 2
Basis for Environmental Assessment 3
Additional Information 3
1.0 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR PROPOSED ACTION 4
1.1 General Description of Project Area 4
1.2 History, Thoroughfare Plan and Feasibility Studies 5
1.3 Traffic Volumes, Capacity and Levels of Service 5
1.4 Accident Information 6

2.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT 8
2.1 General Description 8
2.2 Proposed Recommended Alternative 8
2.2.1 Project Termini and Length 8
2.2.2 Design Criteria 8
2.2.3 Typical Roadway Section 8
2.2.4 Right-of-Way 9
2.2.5 Access Control 9
2.2.6 Intersection Treatment and Type of Control 9
2.2.7 Horizontal and Vertical Alignment 10
2.2.8 Railroad Work Required 10
2.2.9 Bridge Work Required 10
2.2.10 Parking 10
2.2.11 Sidewalks 11
2.2.12 Bicycles
2.2.13 Construction Staging 11
11
2.2.14 Special Permits Required of the Division of Highways 11
2.2.15 Relation to the State Highway System 11
2.2.16 Utilities 11
2.2.17 Speed Zones 12
2.2.18 Landscaping/VisualIssues 12
2.2.19 Cost Estimates 12
r
1

i
l
[7
1
1
1
r
1
1

1

F
1
1

TABLE OF CONTENTS
(continued)
CHAPTER PAGE
3.0 ALTERNATIVES 13
3.1 Construction Alternatives 13
3.1.1 Alternative A 13
3.1.2 Alternative B 13
3.1.3 Alternative C 14
3.2 'Do Nothing" Alternative 14
3.3 Alternate Modes of Transportation 14
3.4 Alternatives Considered But Rejected 14
3.5 Preferred Alternative 15
3.6 Reasons For Selection of Preferred Alternative 15
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS AND
PROJECT IMPACTS 16
4.1 Land Use 16
4.1.1 Existing Land Use 16
4.1.2 Proposed Land Use and Zoning 17
4.1.3 Farmland 18
4.2 Social Impacts 18
4.3 Economic Impacts 19
4.4 Visual Impacts 19
4.5 Displacement and Relocation 20
4.6 Historic/Cultural/Archaeological Resources 22
4.7 Biotic Resources 22
4.7.1 Plant Communities 23
4.7.1.1 Uplands 23
4.7.1.2 Wetlands 24
4.7.1.3 Rare/[Jnique Natural Areas 26
4.7.1.4 Summary of Impacts
4.7.2 Animal Communities 26
27
4.7.2.1 Terrestrial Communities 27
4.7.2.2 Aquatic Communities 28
4.7.2.3 Summary of Impacts 28
4.8 Physical Resources 29
4.8.1 Water Resources 29
4.8.1.1 Flood Hazard 29
4.8.1.2 Surface Water and Water Quality 29
4.8.2 Physiography 30
4.8.3 Geology, Soils and Rock 30
4.8.4 Mineral Resources 31
4.8.5 Summary of Impacts 31
4.9 Special Topics 32
4.9.1 Wetlands: Jurisdictional Issues 32
4.9.1.1 Summary of Impacts 32
4.9.1.2 Permit Requirements 32
4.9.1.3 Avoidance, Minimization and Mitigation 33

1
lJl
1
l1
1

i
1
1
11

TABLE OF CONTENTS
(continued)
CHAPTER PAGE
4.9.2 Protected Species 33
4.9.2.1 Federally-Protected Species 33
4.9.2.2 State-Protected Species 34
4.10 Construction Impacts 35
4.11 Air Quality Analysis 36
4.12 Traffic Noise Analysis/Construction Noise Analysis 39
4.12.1 Noise Abatement Criteria 39
4.12.2 Existing Noise Levels 39
4.12.3 Future Noise Levels 40
4.12.4 Traffic Noise Impacts 43
4.12.5 Abatement Measures
4.12.6 Construction Noise 44
44
4.12.7 Summary 44
4.13 Hazardous Waste Involvement and Underground Storage Tanks 45
4.14 Secondary Impacts 45
4.15 Special Permits Required of the Division of Highways 46
5.0 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT 47
5.1 Agency and Public Comments 47
6.0 APPENDICES
Appendix A - Typical Sections, Preferred Alignment and Profiles
Appendix B - Wetland Assessment Data Forms, On-Site Review Locations and
Photo Log
Appendix C - Scoping Letter and Responses and Other Correspondence
Appendix D - Relocation Report
1
1
1
1
1

I
Fj
1
1

1
11
1
t
t
l
t
1
r
r,
r
1
1
1
1
1
FIGURES
FIGURE
FOLLOWING PAGE
Figure 1- Project Location Map 4
Figure 2 - Project Corridor Map 4
Figure 3 - 1990 and 2010 Average Daily Traffic Volumes 5
Figure 4 - 1990 and 2010 Average Daily Turning Movement
Volumes 5
Figure 5 - Design Alternatives 13
Figure 6 - Generalized Current Land Use 16
Figure 7 - Wetland Locations 24
Figure 8 - Flood Hazard Area 29
Figure 9 - Air Quality Receptors 38
Figure 10 - Noise Analysis Receptor Locations 39
Figure No. A-1
Figure No. A-2
Figure No. A-3 - A-5
Figure No. A-6 - A-8
Figure B-1
Figure B-2
APPENDIX FIGURES
Typical Sections - Preferred Alternative
Typical Bridge Sections
Roadway Plans - Preferred Alternative
Profiles - Preferred Alternative
Wetland On-Site Determination and Photo Log
Photo Log of Wetlands and Drainageways

1
11
1
1
f
i
1

1
1
J
11

i SUMMARY
Description of Action - The North Carolina Department of Transportation, Division of
Highways, proposes to construct a connector on the northeast side of Albemarle from US
52 at Centerview Church Road (SR 1534) to NC 740 in Stanly County. The distance of
the project is approximately 3.4 miles.
The recommended improvement is a two-lane facility on right-of-way approximately 100
feet wide which would allow for future expansion to a multi-lane section. The total cost of
the project including right-of-way and construction is estimated to be $7,186,000. The
estimated cost in the 1990-1996 Transportation Improvement Program (T.I.P.) is
$4,990,000.
Summary of Environmental Impacts - The proposed project will have a positive
overall impact on the area involved by providing a direct route from the north side of
Albemarle to the southeast side of the city. There will be two residential relocations and
one business relocation as a result of the proposed improvements. There may be some
erosion and siltation during the construction period, and there will be some delay and
inconvenience to motorists during construction along the segments where existing roadway
will be used; however, these effects will be short-term in nature. No significant effects to
animal or plant life are expected and no sites listed on the National Register of Historic
Places will be involved. Right-of-way will be acquired from one park facility which was
purchased with federal funds; however, replacement property will be provided and no
active park or recreation facilities will be adversely affected. Thirty-one (31) receptors are
predicted to experience noise levels which approach or exceed the FHWA noise abatement
criteria. Based on project experience of NCDOT, traffic noise abatement measures are not
considered reasonable and feasible and none are recommended.
Alternatives Considered - A number of alternative alignments were considered within
two separate route location corridors. Both corridors followed in the same general
direction to connect US 52 to NC 740 on the east side of Albemarle. Each corridor also
utilized a combination of existing right-of-way and new right-of-way. Following
preliminary analyses, the easternmost corridor (Corridor Two) was eliminated from further
evaluation and two major alternatives were detailed for Corridor One. An additional
alternative was studied following the public involvement workshop. A preferred alternative
was selected on the basis of an intensive evaluation of impacts. All sections as
recommended will provide adequate capacity at an acceptable level of service and will
comply with existing and anticipated development.
Postponement of the proposed improvements was considered but was rejected because the
improvements are warranted at the present time. A public transportation alternative was
eliminated because public transportation is unavailable. Providing such a system as an
alternative is beyond the scope of this project.
The "do-nothing" or no-build alternative was also considered, but rejected because the
existing roadway system in and around Albemarle cannot adequately service the need for a
cross-town traffic route which will avoid the use of local residential streets.
t

I
1
1
i
1
1
I
1
1
1
1

di
C
ti Th
f
ll
i
f
oor
na on -
e
o
ow
ng
ederal, state and local agencies were consulted during the
preparation of this environmental assessment (an asterisk denotes the agencies that
submitted comments):
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
* Albemarle City Schools
Centralina Council of Governments
* City of Albemarle, City Manager
Mayor of Albemarle
* NC Department of Administration, State Clearinghouse
* NC Department of Cultural Resources, Division of Archives and History
NC Department of Human Resources, Division of Health Services
NC Department of Natural Resources and Community Development,
* Division of Environmental Health
* Division of Forest Resources
*
* Division of Land Resources
NC Department of Public Instruction
NC Department of Environment, Health & Natural Resources,
Environmental Assessment Section
NC Department of Transportation
* Division of Aviation
Hydrographics Unit
Landscape Unit
* Geotechnical Unit
Location & Survey Unit
* Right of Way Branch
Traffic Engineering Branch
* Statewide Planning
* Bicycle Coordinator
* Division Engineer, Division Ten
* NC Wildlife Resources Commission
Stanly County Board of Commissioners, Chairman
*
* Stanly County Board of Education
Soil Conservation Service
* US Army Corps of Engineers
US Department of Housing and Urban Development
US Environmental Protection Agency
* US Fish and Wildlife Service
US Geological Survey
Actions Required By Other Agencies
Based on available information, no actions will be required of state or local agencies in
conjunction with the proposed project. It is anticipated that the effects to the 0.95 acres of
identified wetlands will be appropriate to most conditions set forth in U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers' (USACOE's) Nationwide Permit 26. The wetland associated with the crossing
of Little Long Creek was determined to be below the headwaters location; therefore, it is
anticipated that authorization through bridge general and box culvert construction permit
SAWC082-N-0840031 will be appropriate.
A Section 6(f) authorization will be required for the park property from the National Park
Service prior to the initiation of right-of-way acquisition.
1 (2)

It
n
1

1

r
t
Basis for Environmental Assessment - Based on an analysis of potential
environmental impacts of the proposed project, it has been determined that no significant
adverse effects on the quality of the human or natural environment will result from the
construction of the proposed project. The project has been reviewed by appropriate state
and local agencies and no objections have been raised.
Additional Information - Additional information concerning the proposal and
assessment can be obtained by contacting the following person:
L. J. Ward, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
P. O. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Phone [phone]

1

t
1 (3)

1
J
4

1

1 1.0 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR PROPOSED ACTION
1.1 General Description of Project Area
The proposed project begins at the intersection of US 52 and Centerview Church Road (SR
1534) in the north sector of the City of Albemarle (see Figures 1 and 2). Existing US 52 is
a five-lane urban section in this area of Albemarle. The facility has two travel lanes in each
direction separated by a bi-directional turn lane. Right-of-way totals approximately 100
feet. Numerous private drives associated with adjacent businesses and residences are
located along this section of US 52. There is no control of access.
Centerview Church Road intersects with US 52 on the east at a right angle in basically a
"T" type intersection with stop sign control. Russell Road (SR 1413) is an unimproved
roadway on the west side of US 52 that is offset from Centerview Church Road just to the
south. Existing Centerview Church Road consists of a 20-foot variable width asphalt
pavement with one lane in each direction and unpaved shoulders. Right-of-way along
existing Centerview Church Road is 60 feet.
Talbert Road, Ridge Street, Moss Springs Road, Mountain Creek Road and other
roadways in the immediate area of the project are all paved two-lane rural roadways with
unimproved shoulders. Pavement width is a variable 20 feet. Rebel Road is currently a
gravel road. Badin Highway and NC 740 are two-lane roadways with unpaved shoulders
and 12-foot lanes in the vicinity of the proposed intersections with the Connector.
US 52 is a well-traveled highway which provides service between Salisbury and
Wadesboro and smaller municipalities in between the two cities. The posted speed limit
along US 52 is 45 miles per hour (mph). NC 740 is also a commuter route providing
traffic service between Albemarle and Badin. The other roadways within the project
corridor are residential roadways serving local traffic. Speed limits are generally 45 mph
outside the city limits of Albemarle and 35 mph within the city limits.
The degree of roadside development varies from scattered rural residential development to
farmland or pastureland. The land use is primarily rural residential and agricultural in
character. Businesses are sited near the termini of the project along US 52 and along NC
740 to the south. The major commercial development serving Albemarle is located just to
the south of the southern terminus of the project and includes Albemarle Mall and Eastgate
Shopping Center. Several subdivisions are located near the project termini, including:
Heathwood along NC 740; Forest Drive, Holbrook, and Meadowbrook Estates in the areas
of Talbert Road and Ridge Street; and North Springhaven, Springhaven, and Eastwood
?j Park off of Moss Springs Road and NC 740.
Drainage occurs in roadside ditches which parallel the roadway. Major utilities such as
telephone, electric, water and sewer also parallel the existing roadways.
Traffic operations along the local streets are controlled by stop signs at intersections. There
are no signals within the project limits. A bridge crossing over the Winston Salem
Southbound Railway is located on Mountain Creek Road between Centerview Church
Road and Talbert Road.
1
A (4)

1
I

1
1
r
r

1
7
1
ROWAN COUNTY
V70 S44/SQ?Ry ; .- '-----
52
49 Richfield r
PEPS/ Pop. 373
.jOMS
v New
6 Pop.
J /
0 A TO CONCORD , 73
J /
QQm? /
O?
r0 /
oatic ? ?
?" Lut
Poocp. 1s
,590
TO CHARLOTTE /2aC
1
1
1
1
I
?/.
Stanfield
Pop.463
?• 200
0
2
UNION COUNTY
v
Albemarle)
Pop 15,110
F
Oakboro
Pop. 587
i

?
l

740
on

j

0 Badin
74
Pop. 1,514

z

f. o

27 '
Norwood
Pop. 1,818
74
'?• A w
190,
"04 o ANSON COUNTY
E::f
w
0
O
0
' X90 ~
A Z
/ O
1
410
\ G\??
Y'
Scale ® Project Limits
1 0 1 2 3 4 ,,,,,,,,,,,, Proposed Corridor
rt City Limits

Project Location Map Figure 1
Albemarle Northeast Connector ?pf NORTH C,904
s?
From US 52 To NC 740
Stanly County, North Carolk7a
OF tN

1
1
t
r

1
[7
Project Corridor Map
Legend
D Proposed Corridor
Albemarle City Limits
Albemarle Northeast Connector
From US 52 To NC 740
Stanly County, North Carolina
Figure 2

i
1
1
11

r

1 1.2 History, Thoroughfare Plan and Feasibility Studies
Planning studies were initiated in 1979 by NCDOT to determine the most feasible
improvement along the general corridor of Centerview Church Road (SR 1534) and Laton
Road (SR 1537) to provide a connection from US 52 to NC 24/27 north and east of
Albemarle. Three possible locations for the roadway were identified. The project was
included in the 1979-1985 North Carolina Transportation Improvement Program with
construction scheduled for 1980. The proposed improvements consisted of upgrading
existing secondary roads with approximately 2.0 miles on new location to provide a
modern two-lane roadway.
From these studies, it was determined that the project would be stopped at NC 740 and
would not continue to NC 24/27. Termination of the project at NC 740 would still allow
traffic to move along NC 740 to connect with NC 24/27 just to the south. This revised
terminus would also avoid additional impacts associated with the section of the project from
NC 740 to NC 24/27.
The project is part of a loop system included in the Albemarle Thoroughfare Plan. Both the
1973 and 1988 adopted plans include the. Northeast Connector from US 52 to NC 740.
The preferred alternative is representative of the alignment shown on the 1988
Thoroughfare Plan. The Albemarle planning staff and City Council provided considerable
input on the selection of this general alignment during the development of the 1988 plan.
This alignment has also been endorsed by a number of area organizations, including the
Eastside Volunteer Fire Department and Anderson Grove Baptist Church.
The proposed connector is included in the 1991-1997 Transportation Improvement
Program (T.I.P.) as State T.I.P. Project No. U-2400. The project provides for a 3.4-mile
northeast connector consisting of a two-lane facility on multi-lane right-of-way with some
new location. Right-of-way acquisition is scheduled to begin in Fiscal Year 1996 with
construction scheduled to begin in the post-year.
1.3 Traffic Volumes, Capacity and Levels of Service
The projected 1990 traffic volumes for the connector range from a low of 3,000 vehicles
per day (vpd) between Badin Highway and NC 740 to a high of 7,200 vpd in the vicinity
of US 52 (see Figure 3). By the year 2010, traffic volumes are expected to increase to
5,300 vpd and 13,000 vpd respectively (see Figure 3). These volumes represent an 80
percent increase in traffic flow.
Capacity analyses were performed using the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM-1985) as a
guide. Average Daily Turning Movement Volumes were obtained from NCDOT (see
Figure 4). Because of the number of intersecting streets along the connector, the arterial
level of service (LOS) was estimated from the levels of service on the connector at the
intersecting streets as shown in the table on the following page.
All turning movements at the unsignalized intersections operate at acceptable levels of
service given the projected 1990 traffic conditions. As the design year (2010) approaches
and traffic volumes increase, turning movements from the minor roads will experience
increasing delays. The increasing traffic volumes have little effect on the turning
Ali& i

1 `5>

1
1
e

t
l

r
1

1-
U

1990 and 2010 Average Daily Traffic Volumes

Legend
Albemarle City Limits ? Proposed Connector
0 Project Limits
100 1990 Average Daily Traffic Volume (in Hundreds)
200 2010 Average Daily Traffic Volume (in Hundreds)
Albemarle Northeast Connector
From US 52 To NC 740
Stanly County, North Carolina
Figure 3
i NII
1
1
i
i

1
1
U.S. 52 A- -A
37 35
67
1 63 c
10
Rotary 2 18 Palestine
Drive
-LIA Z 1 Road
2 2
9 4
Johnson 7 16 IC 7 Ridge
Street -L-A 10 Street
4 6 2 18
11 Chuck 1-
Morehead Rebel 1 y
Memorial Road
Park
5 7
Blanche 9 ':?f 9 3
6
Moss
Street Springs
7 11 Road
2 20
Continental 4 w 17
Drive z moss
Springs 30
2 Road
4

Mountain 16
29 5
< 4
7? 16
29
Badin
Creek
Road
11
?3
? 2
Highway
20 5 3 3
A--- ---A
27 3
48 -Y IC 5
NC 740
1990 and 2010 Average Daily
Turning Movement Volumes
Legend
35 1990 Average Daily Turning Movement Volume (in Hundreds)
63 2010 Average Daily Turning Movement Volume (in Hundreds)
Albemarle Northeast Connector
From US 52 To NC 740
Stanly County, North Carolina
Figure 4

11

movements from the major road which will continue to operate at LOS "A". Future traffic
projections do not warrant traffic signals at any of these locations (except US 52). The
NCDOT Division Engineer and Traffic Engineer will make final recommendations on the
need for and location of any traffic signals. Unsignalized intersections will be stop sign
controlled.
LEVELS OF SERVICE*
ALBEMARLE NE CONNECTOR

1
H

Proposed Future
Location (1990) (2010)
• US 52 at Centerview Church Road
(signalized) B B
• Rotary Drive A A
• Johnson Street (SR 1533) A A
• Chuck Morehead Memorial Park
(entrance) A A
• Blanche Street (SR 1575) A A
• Continental Drive A A
• Mountain Creek Road (SR 1535) A A
• Palestine Road (SR 1534) A A
• Ridge Street (SR 1542) A A
• Rebel Road (SR 1576) A A
• Moss Springs Road North (SR 1538) A A
• Moss Springs Road South (SR 1538) A A
• Badin Highway A A
• NC 740 B F
Arterial Level of Service A A
* Levels of service (L.O.S.) range from A to F with L.O.S. "A" representing ideal
conditions and L.O.S. "F" representing a complete breakdown in traffic flow. Levels
of service D through F are considered unacceptable.
Traffic signal warrants found in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices
(M.U.T.C.D.) were evaluated at the intersections where traffic data was available. One
intersection, US 52 and the Northeast Connector, requires the installation of a traffic signal
to accommodate the projected traffic volumes along the connector. Warrant 1, Minimum
Vehicular Volume, and Warrant H, Peak Hour Volume, were satisfied at this location. The
remaining intersections do not satisfy any traffic signal warrants and were analyzed as
unsignalized intersections.
1.4 Accident Information
1
Over the past three years, the overwhelming majority of accidents within the study corridor
have occurred along Centerview Church Road between US 52 and Mountain Creek Road
(SR 1535). Roughly 79 percent of all accidents occurring within the corridor, or a total of
22 accidents, have taken place along this section of the project. Further analysis of this
section shows that 95 percent of the accidents reported have occurred at intersections.
(6)

The primary type of accident within the corridor during the studied period involved running
off the road. This type of accident accounted for approximately 36 percent of all accidents.
The next highest frequency of accident was collisions involving left turning movements.
The proposed improvements will enhance the safety of motorists by increasing lane widths,
providing usable shoulders, increasing turning radii at intersections and providing adequate
sight distances. Additional safety benefits will be realized by providing a direct connection
between the north and south sides of Albemarle relieving through traffic from local
residential streets. The connector will offer needed relief to Main Street, NC 24/27(13, US
52 and First Street.

c

1

e
L

1 (7)

i
1
1

[i

1

1

1 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT
2.1 General Description
The North Carolina Department of Transportation, Division of Highways, proposes to
construct a 3.4-mile connector on the northeast side of Albemarle from US 52 at
Centerview Church Road (SR 1534) to NC 740. The facility will consist of a two-lane
roadway on multi-lane right-of-way. The estimated cost of this improvement including
1 right-of-way and construction is $7,186,000.
The proposed connector follows along existing Centerview Church Road for a distance of
approximately 2,850 feet. From this point it departs on new alignment in a southeasterly
direction, crossing the Winston Salem Southbound Railway on a structure and connecting
with existing Talbert Road (SR 1541) roughly 1,800 feet northwest of Ridge Street (SR
1542). At Ridge Street, the proposed connector turns southward and departs existing
alignment for a distance of approximately 1,400 feet where it connects with Rebel Road.
The new roadway follows Rebel Road south, departs existing alignment for 1500 feet and
ties into existing Moss Springs Road. The connector then follows Moss Springs Road for
a distance of 700 feet, then follows new alignment to the south across Badin Highway to
its southern terminus at NC 740.
A bridge crossing over the Winston Salem Southbound Railway is located on Mountain
Creek Road between Centerview Church Road and Talbert Road. A new bridge structure
will be required to cross the railway at a point east of the existing crossing.
2.2 Proposed Recommended Alternative
2.2.1 Project Termini and Length
The proposed project begins at the intersection of US 52 and Centerview Church Road (SR
1534) in the north sector of the City of Albemarle and terminates at NC 740 in the southeast
sector of Albemarle. The total project length is 3.4 miles.
2.2.2 Design Criteria
The design speeds and posted speeds for the typical roadway sections recommended for the
proposed improvements are shown below:
Section Design Speed Posted Speed
Proposed two-lane roadway 50 mph 45 mph
Future multi-lane roadway 50 mph 45 mph
2.2.3 Typical Roadway Sections
Typical Section I (see Figure No. A-1) consists of improving the existing two-lane
roadway and acquiring new right-of-way for future multi-laning. There will be a 12-foot
lane in each direction. A two-foot paved shoulder will be constructed along the outside
edges of pavement in both directions. Improvements to the existing roadways along
a (8)

1
1
I
I]
1

1
I
1

Centerview Church Road (SR 1534), Talbert Road (SR 1541), and Rebel Road (SR 1576)
will generally occur symmetrically on each side of the roadway. Approximately 20 feet of
new right-of-way will be acquired on either side of the roadway.
Typical Section II (see Figure No. A-1) on new location will also consist of two 12-foot
lanes and a two-foot paved shoulder along the inside edge of pavement. Total right-of-way
to be acquired on new location is 100 feet or 50 feet on either side of the centerline.
Typical Section III (see Figure No. A-1) shows future widening of the connector to a
multi-lane urban section. Total right-of-way will remain 100 feet. A two-foot, six-inch
concrete curb and gutter will be provided. Provisions are included in the typical section to
accommodate a five-foot sidewalk on each side of the roadway.
2.2.4 Right-of-Way
Right-of-way along portions of the existing roadways being utilized for the Connector is
generally 60 feet. The proposed right-of-way width is 100 feet which requires acquisition
of 40 additional feet of right-of-way. Right-of-way will be acquired without control of
access.
2.2.5 Access Control
No access control is recommended for the proposed project.
1 2.2.6 Intersection Treatment and Type of Control
A discussion of levels of service is included in Section 1.3. At the northwest terminus of
the project where US 52 intersects with Centerview Church Road, the following
improvements are recommended:
• Provide dual right turn and left run lanes on the westbound approach to US 52
• Provide two lanes eastbound with taper
• Provide an exclusive right turn lane northbound on US 52
• Install a traffic signal
For intersections at Mountain Creek Road (SR 1535), Palestine Road (SR 1534), Ridge
Street (SR 1542), Talbert Road (SR 1541), Lee Lynn Drive, Rebel Road (SR 1576), and
Moss Springs Road (SR 1538), a bulb type configuration is recommended in order to
channelize turning movements and provide safer travel conditions. The vertical profiles
will be reconstructed to meet current design standards.
Proposed intersection improvements include:
• Mountain Creek Road Provide exclusive left turn lanes on all approaches.
• Moss Springs Road Separate and form two "T" type intersections.
Provide left turn lanes on Moss Springs Road.
• Lee Lynn Drive Realign to tie into the connector.
• Badin Highway Provide exclusive left turn lanes on all approaches.
• NC 740 Provide left turn lane eastbound on NC 740.
Continue five-lane section west of Connector to east
of Connector.
A (9)

For other intersections within the project corridor, the recommended improvement is to
provide adequate turning radii. All intersections on the proposed project are at-grade. No
traffic signals are proposed along the project except at US 52.
Sight distance is currently restricted at several intersections along existing roadways. The
proposed improvements will alleviate any existing sight distance problems in areas of
existing location and will be designed to avoid sight distance problems in areas of new
location.
2.2.7 Horizontal and Vertical Alignment
The horizontal and vertical alignments are compatible with the proposed design speed of the
project. Rolling terrain exists along the proposed connector with maximum grades of 5.3
percent. Grade separation will be required at the crossing of the Winston Salem
Southbound Railway. There are no horizontal curves greater than six degrees, 30 minutes
(with the exception of intersecting side roads).
2.2.8 Railroad Work Required
A line of the Winston Salem Southbound Railway runs. through the corridor in a
south/southwest direction and roughly parallels Palestine Road east of Mountain Church
Road. It will be necessary to cross the railroad line with the connector. Inquiry was made
regarding the schedule and frequency of trains on this line through discussions with the
Traffic Manager's Office of the Winston Salem Southbound Railway. One northbound and
one southbound train per day are scheduled although it is common that more than two
trains per day use this route. By combining this information with traffic data received from
NCDOT, it was determined that a grade separation is warranted based upon the
computation of the exposure index. Further support for a grade separation structure is
provided by the existing grade separation on Mountain Creek Road sited just southwest of
the proposed connector crossing.
2.2.9 Bridge Work Required
In conjunction with the bridge crossing described above, a bridge over the Winston Salem
Southbound Railway will be required. The proposed typical section is shown as Figure
No. A-2. A section is also provided to show future multi-laning. Along Centerview
Church Road where the connector crosses Little Long Creek, existing corrogated metal
pipe culverts will be extended to accommodate the widened roadway.
2.2.10 Parking
Parking is not presently provided for along existing roadways in the project corridor
although cars will occasionally park on the grassed shoulder where possible and desired.
Parking will not be provided for along the proposed Northeast Connector. Several parking
areas next to the roadway may be minimally affected with the proposed improvements.
a (10)
t
1 2.2.11 Sidewalks
There are no existing sidewalks located along the proposed project and none are proposed
to be constructed within this project. However, right-of-way will be sufficient such that
sidewalks could be constructed at a later date should they be warranted.
2.2.12 Bicycles
The Bicycle Coordinator for NCDOT commented that the "Piedmont Spur", a state
bicycling highway system route which generally follows an east-west direction throughout
this sector of the state, passes through Albemarle on Main Street (SR 1274) and NC 740.
It has been requested that bicyclists' needs be considered during the planning and design
phases of the project.
The southern terminus of the proposed connector will intersect with NC 740. In keeping
with NCDOT"s request, attempts will be made in the design phase to prevent any new
barriers to bicyclists traveling through Albemarle on the "Piedmont Spur". In addition,
along the connector for the two-lane section, two feet of paved shoulder will be provided.
Consideration will be given during the final design phase to striping along the future multi-
lane section for bicycle travel.
2.2.13 Construction Staging
Construction will be staged to minimize traffic impacts on the existing roadways within the
construction limits of the connector.
2.2.14 Special Permits Required of the Division of Highways
It is anticipated that the effects to the 0.95 acres of identified wetlands will be appropriate to
most conditions set forth in U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' (USACOE's) Nationwide
Permit 26. The wetland associated with the crossing of Little Long Creek was determined
to be below the headwaters location; therefore, it is anticipated that authorization through
bridge general and box culvert construction permit SAWC082-N-084-0031 will be
appropriate. There are no other special permits anticipated for the project.
2.2.15 Relation to the State Highway System
The new roadway will be added to the State Highway Classification System. This will
likely result in a change in classification for Centerview Church Road (SR 1534) and the
sections of Talbert Road (SR 1541), Rebel Road (SR 1576) and Moss Springs Road
(SR 1538) that will be used for the connector from the collector system to the state arterial
system. The other existing roadways in the project corridor will remain the same in the
I state system.
2.2.16 Utilities
Electric lines were observed overhead on both sides of existing roadways within the project
corridor. Telephone lines are located both overhead and underground along both sides of
existing roadways. A major transmission line crosses the project in an east-to-west
I (11)
t

5
u

t
1

11

direction. The Albemarle Water District provides service within the project area. The City
also owns its sewer treatment facilities and provides this service within the corridor.
. Other major utility companies servicing the corridor include Duke Power Company
(electric), Public Service Company of North Carolina (natural gas), and the Concord
Telephone Company (telephone). Several newspapers service the study area. The
construction of the proposed improvements is not expected to cause any serious disruptions
in utility service. Before construction begins, a pre-construction conference involving the
contractor, pertinent local officials, and the Division of Highways will be held to discuss
specific construction practices, including precautionary steps to be taken during the time of
construction that will minimize interruption of service. In all cases, the contractor is
required to notify the utility owner in advance of any work.
2.2.17 Speed Zones
Current speed limits within the corridor range from 35 mph within the incorporated area of
the City of Albemarle unless otherwise posted to 45 mph in the unincorporated area within
Stanly County. The posted speed limit will be 45 mph for the connector.
2.2.18 Landscaping/Visual Issues
The project area is part of a larger rural residential and agricultural setting which is
enhanced by the rolling topography and views afforded by the open fields, corn fields and
other plantings of crops, and pastureland. The areas along existing alignment (Centerview
1 Church Road, Talbert Road, Rebel Road and Moss Springs Road) have a pleasant view
from the road of the elements described above as well as of natural vegetation in the forms
of grasses, brush, hardwood species and some mixed pine-hardwood forests. The only
stream crossing, over Little Long Creek and located next to Centerview Baptist Church,
has been fortified along the stream bank to prevent erosion and the natural setting has been
altered with rip-rap. The view of the road from neighboring residences and fields is good
due to the rural character of the area. The existing narrow two lane facility is a rural section
with shoulder which minimizes the urban effect present with curb and gutter. Roadway
user views are somewhat limited due to the narrowness of the existing roadway and the
curvilinear nature of the road which require concentration on the part of the driver.
2.2.19 Cost Estimates
The estimated costs for the proposed improvements are provided below from the 1990-
1996 Transportation Improvement Program (T.I.P.).
T.I.P. Project No. U-2400:
• Prior Years Cost $ 640,000 (including planning and design)
• Construction Cost: $3,600,000 (including engineering and construction)
• Right-of-Way Cost: S 750.000 (including acquisition and utility)
TOTAL COST $4,990,000
The estimated cost for the proposed improvements as developed in the planning and design
phase is $7,186,000 which includes $1,236,000 for right-of-way acquisition and
$5,950,000 for construction.
(12)

1 3.0 ALTERNATIVES
3.1 Construction Alternatives
Several alignments within two corridors were developed. Due to public and governmental
opposition to the use of the easternmost corridor, this corridor was deleted from further
investigation. All alternatives consist of a two-lane roadway on multi-lane right-of-way
with construction scheduled for the post-year. The alternatives utilize Centerview Church
Road from the northwest project terminus at US 52 to roughly the intersection of
Centerview Church Road and Mountain Creek Road. From this point, the alternatives vary
in their location within the general corridor.
All alternatives include the taking of approximately 0.10 acres of land from Chuck
Morehead Park along the north side of Centerview Church Road. Because this taking will
invoke a conversion regulation under Section 6(f) of the Land and Water Conservation Fund
(LWCF) Act of 1965, design considerations evaluated avoidance of this property. It was
determined through the development of preliminary design alternatives that avoidance of the
park property would necessitate the relocation of six additional residences which are
currently sited on the south side of Centerview Church Road. Coordination with the City of
Albemarle Recreation Department indicated that the 0.10 acres of land required for the
proposed connector are not in active park or recreation use and that the Recreation
Department would be agreeable to replacement property from a contiguous parcel.
Discussed below are the three major alternatives considered (see Figure 5). The typical
sections for the alternatives are the same as discussed in an earlier section of this document
and are included in Appendix A as Figures A-1 through A-5.
3.1.1 Alternative A
Alternative A begins at the intersection of US 52 and Centerview Church Road (SR 1534)
and follows existing alignment along Centerview Church Road until it crosses Mountain
' Creek Road (SR 1535) (see Figure 5 and Figures A-3 - A-5). From this point, the new
roadway proceeds in a southeast direction on new location, crosses the Winston Salem
Southbound Railway and ties into Talbert Road. Just north of the Talbert Road/Ridge
Street intersection, the roadway turns southward and connects with Rebel Road. The
connector then follows Rebel Road to Moss Springs Road where it departs existing
alignment and follows new alignment in a southerly direction to NC 740 just south of
Heathwood subdivision. The length of improvements along Alternative A is approximately
3.4 miles.
The total cost for Alternative A is $7,186,000 which includes $1,236,000 for right-of-way
acquisition and $5,950,000 for construction.
3.1.2 Alternative B
Alternative B also begins at the intersection of US 52 and Centerview Church Road (SR
1534). It follows the same alignment as Alternative A until the roadway intersects with
Ridge Street (see Figure 5). Here Alternative B parallels Rebel Road to the east of Rebel
Road, crosses Moss Springs Road and proceeds due south just west of Eastwood Park
subdivision. The connector crosses Badin Highway and ties into NC 740 just south of
Heathwood subdivision. The length of this alternative is approximately 3.3 miles.
1 (13)

1

1

1

Design Alternatives
Legend
_ Albemarle City Limits
. Alternative A
(Preferred Alternative)
N Alternative B
Alternative C
® Project Limits
Albemarle Northeast Connector
From US 52 To NC 740
Stanly County, North Carolina
Figure 5

1

1

LF]

1

t
The total cost associated with this alternative is $7,146,000. This includes $1,246,000 for
right-of-way acquisition and $5,900,000 for construction.
3.1.3 Alternative C
Alternative C follows the same alignment at the beginning of the project as do Alternatives A
and B (see Figure 5). At the intersection of the connector with Mountain Creek Road,
Alternative C follows an eastward alignment and intersects the crossing of the Winston
Salem Southbound Railway at a roughly 45 degree angle. It continues in an easterly-
southeasterly manner and follows an alignment to the north of residential development
located just north of Talbert Road and above Rosebud Lane. North of Rosebud Lane, the
connector curves to the south to tie into Rebel Road. From this point to the termination of
the project, Alternative C follows the same alignment as Alternative A. The length of this
alternative is approximately 3.6 miles.
' The total cost for Alternative C is $8,186,000 which includes $1,236,000 for right-of-way
acquisition and $6,950,000 for construction.
r 3.2 "Do Nothing" Alternative
The "do nothing" or no-build alternative would have a negative impact on transportation in
the proposed corridor. Currently, there is no good continuous road system on the fringe of
the Albemarle urban area in the north/northeast. The demand for this type of facility has
long been recognized. Once the Northeast Connector is completed, the facility will offer
needed relief to downtown streets as well as NC 24/27/73 and US 52. The connector will
allow for cross-town movement for all types of traffic without the use of small, residential
streets.
The improved access to the area, savings in operating costs, reduced travel time and the
general improvement in the ease and convenience of travel will benefit the state and region
as well as the local neighborhoods adjacent to the route. Because of these identified
benefits, the do nothing alternative was dropped from further consideration.
3.3 Alternate Modes of Transportation
Alternate modes of transportation include transit options, High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV)
lanes, and associated traffic operations improvements. Currently, there is no public transit
service available within Albemarle or surrounding areas. The dominance of the single unit
vehicle in this area precludes further evaluation of other modes of transportation.
3.4 Alternatives Considered But Rejected
With the postponement alternative, it is presumed that the proposed action would be
implemented at some time in the future but not within the current schedule. The short-term
advantages of this alternative are similar to the "do nothing" alternative. There would be no
immediate capital investment required for right-of-way acquisition nor would there be
disruption to residents or businesses located along or nearby the proposed connector. No
temporary disruption due to construction or right-of-way acquisition would occur.
(14)

The disadvantages to the postponement alternative include steadily worsening traffic and
safety conditions and poor traffic operations, particularly at intersections. The possibilities
may be more restrictive at a future date due to potentially higher acquisition and construction
costs. Also, funding for the improvements is available in the T.I.P. Postponement is not
recommended
Some short-term, limited improvements could be made by improving traffic operations at
high volume intersection locations along existing internal streets. Traffic volumes,
however, are anticipated to increase to a level that the costs of evaluating and upgrading
signalization outweigh the immediate short-term benefits. Capacity analyses performed at
key intersections indicated poor traffic operations with future projected traffic expected to
affect these intersections more adversely.
3.5 Preferred Alternative
Following an intensive analysis of the social, economic and physical impacts of all
alternatives, Alternative A was selected as the preferred alternative for the construction of the
Albemarle Northeast Connector.
r
3.6 Reasons For Selection of Preferred Alternative
On the basis of cost, human and physical impacts, and environmental considerations,
Alternative A is the most economical alignment with the fewest adverse impacts. Alternative
B follows an alignment which utilizes more new location than Alternative A, thereby
increasing the right-of-way requirements and associated costs. This alternative would have
more "people" impacts such as noise and construction effects because of its location just
west of existing subdivision development. In addition to the same impacts associated with
Alternative A on the existing location part of the project, Alternative B has: two additional
residential relocations; increased noise, air quality and construction impacts on adjacent
subdivisions, including Eastwood Park, North Springhaven and Springhaven; and potential
for 0.23 acres of additional wetlands impacts and associated mitigation requirements.
Alternative C was studied following the public workshop. It is similar to Alternative A
except between Mountain Creek Road and Ridge Street where it follows an alignment on
new location. This alternative reduces the number of residential relocations by one but it
will cost $1,000,000 more to construct than Alternative A. By departing from existing
alignment on new location north of Talbert Road, the alternative does not take advantage of
existing right-of-way along Talbert Road, thereby increasing right-of-way and construction
costs. Alternative C is also roughly 0.15 miles longer than Alternative A. In addition,
Alternative C crosses the railroad at an angle which would increase the construction costs
associated with the required grade separation.
Further support for Alternative A was received in the form of written endorsement by the
Albemarle City Council. This letter is included in Appendix C.

1 (15)

r?

1

I
LJ

1

?Il

1 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS AND PROJECT IMPACTS
1 4.1 Land Use
4.1.1 Existing Land Use
Land use throughout the project corridor consists of single family residential units of fair to
good quality along the residential streets, wooded areas, farmland and pastureland, and a
small number of "in-home" businesses (see Figure 6). The area can best be characterized
as rural agricultural/residential although it is developing as a residential suburban area of the
City of Albemarle.
Several small to medium sized subdivisions of suburban character and ranging in number
from approximately 10 to 95 lots are scattered throughout the project area. These include
Holbrook, Loftin Farms, North Springhaven, Springhaven, Meadowbrook Estates and
Eastwood Park. Mobile homes are interspersed with single family dwellings throughout
the project area. One small mobile home community exists north of Talbert Road. Several
medium sized farms are intact and in operation. Three multi-family communities are
located either within the immediate limits of the Connector (The Chimneys) or just to the
east of the southern terminus (Forest Oaks and Woodhaven). These complexes have
recently been developed.
Business activity is concentrated on the north and south termini of the project corridor.
Along US 52 in the vicinity of Centerview Church Road, there are a number of retail
commercial businesses which are located primarily in small strip centers. A chiropractic
business is sited at the southeast corner of US 52 and Centerview Church Road. Several
"in-home" businesses such as a day care facility, hair/beauty salons, and an equipment
repair shop are scattered within the residential areas. The south terminus of the Connector
at NC 740 is within the area of the most concentrated commercial activity in Albemarle.
Albemarle Mall, Eastgate Plaza, and a number of other shopping centers in addition to strip
commercial/retail development are all located just south of the southern project terminus.
Other single retail businesses such as Lowe's, service stations, restaurants and service
businesses are located along Badin Road and NC 740 at the south end of the project.
The project will traverse the old Stanly County Fairgrounds at its southern terminus. East
Albemarle Elementary School is just to the south of the southern sector of the connector.
Several churches, including Centerview Baptist, Dunn's Grove Baptist, Church of Jesus
Christ of Latter Day Saints, and East Albemarle Baptist are sited in various portions of the
study area. City Fire Station # 2 is located at the north project terminus along Centerview
Church Road. Directly to the east of the fire station is Chuck Morehead Park which is the
major active recreation area within the City of Albemarle. This 65-acre facility offers picnic
and playground areas, basketball courts, pool, ballfields, tennis courts, track/trails as well
as passive recreation activities for area residents.
Other major community facilities which serve the project corridor are located nearby the
study area within the City of Albemarle. The major medical facility serving the corridor is
the 124-bed Stanly Memorial Hospital located in downtown Albemarle. Smaller medical
clinics and physicians offices are scattered throughout the community. Police protection is
handled by the City Police Department. The Albemarle-Stanly County Airport is located to
' the northeast of the study area near Palestine. No public transit service is provided within
Albemarle. Specialized service is available on a demand-response basis.
r
(16)

1

J

t

r

11
r-I
52
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Generalized Current Land Use
Legend
Albemarle City Limits . Proposed Connector
Single Family Residential € Public/Semi-Public
IIIIIII Commercial/Businesses ? Agricultural/Undeveloped
® Project Limits
Albemarle Northeast Connector
From US 52 To NC 740
Stanly County, North Carolina
Figure 6

1

1
1
jl
1

1

j
Ir?
L

A land use windshield survey was conducted for the project area in December 1989 and in
October 1990. The survey indicated that there are over 450 single family dwellings, eight
mobile home units, and over 200 multi-family residential units sited within the study area
for the connector. Commercial uses accounted for approximately 40 individual businesses
which are primarily concentrated along US 52 or in the Badin Road and NC 740 areas. By
applying an average persons per dwelling unit rate for Stanly County to the units identified,
the residential population of the corridor was calculated to total approximately 1,800
persons.
The recommended alignment for the proposed connector requires taking approximately 0.10
acres of land from Chuck Morehead Park along the north side of Centerview Church Road.
Taking of park land for a non-recreational use will invoke a conversion regulation in the
federal Land and Water Conservation Fund Act due to the fact that the park was purchased
with monies from the federal Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF).
Section 6(f) of the LWCF Act of 1965 states that:
"No property acquired or developed with assistance under this section shall, without the
approval of the Secretary (of the Interior), be converted to other than public outdoor
' recreation uses."
The provisions of Section 6(f) will pertain to park land used for the construction of the
proposed connector. The National Park Service, on behalf of the Secretary of the Interior,
will approve a conversion to a non-recreational use only if the converted land is replaced with
land of equivalent value, usefulness, and location.
To fulfill the requirements of the LWCF Act, an amount of land from a parcel(s) in the
project area, equal in value to the park land needed for the road right-of-way and
accompanying easement, will be purchased by the NCDOT and donated to the park. The
' land exchange will be contingent on approval of the U.S. National Park Service. In
conjunction with this requirement, the park owner, the City of Albemarle, was contacted to
determine the location of an acceptable replacement parcel. Correspondence concerning this
coordination is included in Appendix C.
4.1.2 Proposed Land Use and Zoning
Land uses within the study area are expected to remain fairly stable. New residential
subdivisions are planned with the area and the expansion of already existing subdivisions
will occur. The impact of the connector on land use will be evaluated on an ongoing basis
to ensure orderly development within this developing sector of Albemarle.
Although the last comprehensive plan for the City was completed in the mid-1970's, there
have been other ongoing planning tools to assist the City and Stanly County in land use
planning and zoning activities. These have included the Thoroughfare Plan, prepared by
NCDOT, and the Environmental Scan which was completed by Centralina Council of
Governments for Stanly County in 1986 as part of an overall strategic plan.
The Community Development Department of the City Albemarle administers zoning within
the City limits of Albemarle. The Stanly County Planning Department administers zoning
within Stanly County. Currently, no extraterritorial jurisdiction is in place. Zoning
classifications for the two jurisdictions are compatible but are not the same.
(17)

11

t
11
1-1
1
The majority of the study area is zoned for residential uses which is compatible with
existing land uses. Residential zones range from R8A which allows for high density
residential development (Woodhaven and Forest Oaks multi-family complexes) to R-20
which is a low density residential classification intended to insure that residential
development not having access to public water supplies and dependent on septic tanks for
sewage disposal will occur at sufficiently low densities to provide a healthful environment.
This zoning category applies to the majority of the study area.
Other zoning in place within the project area includes: R-10 (medium density residential),
' LID (light industrial) and GHBD (general highway business). The LID classification is in
place along a small portion of NC 740. The general highway business category applies to
the commercial areas along US 52, Badin Road and NC 740.
Zoning will likely continue to be compatible with existing and expected land uses within the
study area. An examination of current planning efforts and the existing zoning
configuration will occur as the planning and design phases of the project are completed.
The project is compatible with the current adopted Thoroughfare Plan for Albemarle
(adopted November 18, 1988). All of the planning entities are aware that the design for the
Northeast Connector is underway and representatives of the planning agencies agree that
the improvements are needed.
4.1.3 Farmland
The project has been coordinated with the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) as required by
the Farmland Protection Policy Act. The findings of the SCS indicate that this project will
not affect any farmland as defined by the Farmland Protection Policy Act, since it essentially
involves land already in or committed to urban development (see letter in Appendix C dated
May 1, 1990). Thus, the project is exempt from the provisions of the Farmland Protection
Policy Act.
1 4.2 Social Impacts
There are a number of residential subdivisions within the overall study area where
' neighborhood cohesion and residential community characteristics are prevalent. The
proposed improvements will not split any neighborhoods that are not already divided by the
existing roadway system. There will be displacements of two established residences and
one active business. As indicated in a later discussion on relocation impacts, every effort
will be made to relocate displacees in nearby areas which should help to mitigate the
negative impacts.
The most densely developed neighborhoods within the corridor are Eastwood Park,
Springhaven and North Springhaven. The connector will not divide these areas in any way
and will improve their access. Overall traffic flow and safety in the study area will be
improved. The connector is intended to alleviate stress which now exists on the internal
street system, thereby lessening congestion on residential streets within Albemarle.
The population of the area will not be adversely affected by the construction of the
connector. Population trends show that City of Albemarle and Stanly County populations
are increasing at a steady rate. Between 1970 and 1980, the population of Stanly County
grew by over 13 percent from approximately 42,800 persons to 48,500 persons. By 1984,
I the population had increased another 2.5 percent to 49,700 persons. During the ten-year
1 (18)

E

1

E

' period, the City of Albemarle grew from 11,126 persons to 15,110 persons, an increase of
almost 36 percent with an increase of another one percent to 15,266 persons by 1984. This
' population increase can partially be attributed to the spillover effect of growth from
Mecklenburg County.
In Stanly County, 78 percent of all housing units in 1980 were owner-occupied. Data was
not immediately available indicating the breakdown of single-family, multi-family and
mobile home units. Within the study area, the single family residence is by far the most
prevalent type of housing unit. Regional statistics indicate that Stanly County witnessed
' the largest increase in owner-occupied median value of any selected neighboring county
between 1970 and 1980.
4.3 Economic Impacts
Stanly County is primarily agrarian based although manufacturing is a major employer in
' the County. Rural/urban growth trends indicate that Stanly County is slowly moving
towards an urban economy. In 1984, the County was roughly 69 percent rural and 31
percent urban. Between 1970 and 1983, Stanly County experienced a continued decline in
the agricultural work force with major emphasis on a both a manufacturing-based economy
and an expansion in the service sector. Almost 55 percent of the labor force was employed
in manufacturing in 1983 although this represented an overall decline in manufacturing of
33 percent from 1970. During the same period, Stanly County witnessed a 20 percent
' increase in employment within the service sector.
The increase in the service sector can be attributed to employment in business and repair
services; personal services; amusement, entertainment and recreation services; and hotel,
motel and tourist courts. The unemployment rate in 1985 was 6.2 percent which is lower
than the national trend but higher than the State.
The construction of the proposed improvements will have a positive overall economic
impact on the area. The new roadway will facilitate traffic flow and will reduce commuter
time within the corridor, thereby stimulating development in the corridor. The business
which will be displaced by the project may experience some inconvenience during the
relocation period, but it should be able to relocate within the same general area with little
long term adverse effect.
' Some temporary tax revenue may be lost from the conversion of privately owned land into
highway right-of-way. The amount of this loss is small when compared to the total tax
base of Albemarle and Stanly County. The loss of taxable land will likely be offset by the
new development which will be stimulated from the improvements.
1 4.4 Visual Impacts
The No-Build Alternative will not directly alter any visual resources within the study area.
Future traffic increases along existing roadways will, however, make it increasingly difficult
to enjoy roadside views. Upgrading the existing roadways within the project corridor will
provide wider roadways which will make travel and roadside viewing easier. In areas of
new location along the connector, there will be benefits and losses. Existing vegetation will
' be lost, consisting of some wooded areas, grasses and brush, farmland and pastureland.
(19)

1
1
t

This will have a low adverse effect upon the quality of views from the roadway. The view
of the road from the scattered permanent residents located immediately within view of the
connector will have an adverse effect relative to the undeveloped nature of adjacent property
which now exists. Design of the roadway will help alleviate adverse effects where possible.
4.5 Displacement and Relocation
The proposed improvements will result in the displacement and relocation of three
residences and one professional service business. A vacant business will also be affected.
Relocation studies indicated that the proposed improvements will not require the relocation
of any minorities. No large families, elderly, disabled persons or others who would have
special problems relocating were identified.
An evaluation of the availability of replacement housing for those families who will be
displaced by the project was conducted. The relocation study showed a current availability
in the general area of two homes in the $20,000 to $40,000 price range for sale, ten homes
in the $40,000 to $70,000 price range for sale, 16 homes over $70,000 for sale, and five
homes for rent ranging from $150.00 to $400.00 per month. The evaluation concluded
that no real problem is anticipated in the future relocation of displacees into decent, safe and
sanitary housing within their financial means. Please refer to the relocation report included
as Appendix D.
The involuntary relocation of families and businesses causes disruptions and
inconveniences which cannot be avoided. It is the policy of the NCDOT to ensure that
comparable replacement housing would be available prior to construction of transportation
projects. Furthermore, the North Carolina Board of Transportation has the following three
programs to minimize the inconvenience of relocation:
' Relocation Assistance
• Relocation Moving Payments, and
• Relocation Replacement Housing Payments or Rent Supplement
With the Relocation Assistance Program, experienced NCDOT staff will be available to
assist displacees with information such as availability and prices of homes, apartments, or
businesses for sale or rent, and financing other housing programs. The Relocation Moving
Payments Program, in general, provides for payment of actual moving expenses
encountered in relocation. Where displacement will force an owner or tenant to purchase or
rent property of higher cost or to lose a favorable financing arrangement (in cases of
ownership), the Relocation Replacement Housing Payments or Rent Supplement Program
will compensate up to $22,500 to owners who are eligible and qualify, and up to $5,250 to
tenants who are eligible and qualify.
The relocation program for the proposed action will be conducted in accordance with the
Federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970
(Public Law 91-646), and the North Carolina Relocation Assistance Act (GS-133-5
through 133-17). The program is designed to provide assistance to displaced persons in
relocating to a replacement site in which to live or do business. At least one relocation
officer is assigned to each highway project for this purpose.
' The relocation officer will determine the needs of the displaced families, individuals,
businesses, non-profit organizations, and farm operations for relocation assistance
advisory services without regard to race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. The
NCDOT will so schedule its work to allow ample time, prior to displacement, for
1 (20)

1
1

u

J

1

1
1

negotiations, and possession of replacement housing which meets decent, safe, and
sanitary standards. The displacees are given at least a 90-day written notice after NCDOT
purchases the property. Relocation of displaced persons will be offered in areas not
generally less desirable in regard to public utilities and commercial facilities. Rent and sale
prices or replacement housing offered will be within the financial means of the families and
individuals displaced, and be reasonably accessible to their places of employment. The
relocation officer will also assist owners of displaced businesses, non-profit organizations,
and farm operations in searching for and moving replacement property.
All tenant and owner residential occupants who may be displaced will receive an
explanation regarding all available options, such as (1) purchase of replacement housing,
(2) rental of replacement housing, either private or public, or (3) moving existing owner-
occupant housing to another site (if possible). The relocation officer will also supply
information concerning other state programs offering assistance to displaced persons and
will provide other advisory services as needed in order to minimize hardships to displaced
persons in adjusting to a new location.
The Moving Expense Payments Program is designed to compensate the displacee for the
costs of moving personal property from homes, businesses, non-profit organizations, and
farm operations acquired for a highway project. Under the Replacement Program for
Owners, NCDOT will participate in reasonable incidental purchase payments for
replacement dwellings such as attorney's fees, surveys, appraisals, and other closing costs,
and if applicable, make a payment for any increased interest expenses for replacement
dwellings. Reimbursement to owner-occupants for replacement housing payments,
increased interest payments, and incidental purchase expenses may not exceed $22,500
combined total.
' A displaced tenant may be eligible to receive a payment, not to exceed $5,250, to rent a
replacement dwelling or to make a down payment, including incidental expenses, on the
purchase of a replacement dwelling. The down payment is based upon what the state
determines is required.
It is a policy of the state that no person will be displaced by the NCDOT's construction
' projects unless and until comparable or adequate replacement housing has been offered or
provided for each displacee within a reasonable period of time prior to displacement. No
relocation payment received will be considered as income for the purposes of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1954 or for the purposes of determining eligibility or the extent of
eligibility of any person for assistance under the Social Security Act or any other federal
law.
' Last Resort Housing is a program used when comparable replacement housing is not
available or when it is unavailable within the displacee's financial means, and the
replacement payment exceeds the federal and state legal limitation. The purpose of the
program is to allow broad latitudes in methods of implementation by the state so that
decent, safe, and sanitary replacement housing can be provided. It is not felt that this
program will be necessary since it is used, as the name implies, only as a "last resort" and
there appear to be adequate opportunities for relocation within the area. However, it will be
available if necessary.

(21)

1

1

F
L _1

1

4.6 Historic/Cultural/Archaeological Resources
' An Architectural Resources Survey for the proposed connector was conducted to identify
all historic resources within the determined "area of potential effects". The survey resulted
in the identification of one property which is potentially eligible for the National Register of
Historic Places. This property, the Moss-Coble Farm, consists of a substantial farmhouse
' and a large and varied collection of outbuildings set in the midst of a tract of approximately
137 acres of rolling farmland, pasture, and wooded areas. The ca. 1912 transitional
Victorian/bungalow farmhouse, which is still occupied, is substantially unaltered on the
exterior and interior. The outbuildings include a privy, a blacksmith's shop, a large barn,
and numerous storage sheds, most of which appear to be contemporary with the house.
The proposed connector will follow existing alignment along Moss Springs Road in the
immediate vicinity of the farmhouse on the Moss-Coble Farm property. The connector will
depart existing alignment just below the farmhouse site and will traverse pastureland and
farmland associated with the 137-acre tract. The farmhouse and outbuildings located on the
west side of Moss Springs Road will be outside of the right-of-way of the proposed
connector (see Figure A-4). Right-of-way will be required from the pastureland and
farmland located on the east side of Moss Springs Road.
' No properties on or eligible for listing on the National Register were identified.
Correspondence from the State Historic Preservation Officer concurring with the findings
of the Architectural Resources Survey report is included in Appendix C (see letters dated
' October 11, 1990 and January 3, 1991 from the North Carolina Department of Cultural
Resources, Division of Archives and History).
' Although no archaeological sites within or near the project are listed on the National
Register of Historic Places, an archaeological survey of the proposed project area was
undertaken (Jones 1990). The survey report was transmitted to the State Historic
' Preservation Office. The archaeological survey resulted in the discovery of three historic
sites, one prehistoric site, and 13 isolated finds. A possible slave cemetery, lacking
gravestones, was revisited. As the cemetery has no grave markings and is well outside the
boundaries of the proposed improvements, avoidance rather than removal is recommended.
No additional archaeological work is recommended for this project.
Correspondence received from the SHPO is included in Appendix C.
4.7 Biotic Resources
Field investigations of the project area were conducted in December 1989 and May 1990 to
determine and document the floral and faunal communities existing in the project area, and
to determine how the proposed Connector would affect these communities. Special
' attention was given to the possible presence of threatened and endangered species, and
wetlands that would be affected by the project.
' The project corridor for the Albemarle Northeast Connector was surveyed on May 17,
1990 for wetland resources. A brief review of the roadway crossings for all creek and
drainageways was made. Routine wetland determinations, based on the Federal Manual
for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands, were made at Little Long Creek
and the crossings of six intermittent streams. Wetlands were also reviewed at six other
locations where alternate roadway alignments were under consideration. The data forms

(22)

1

1

11

for all of these areas are shown in the Appendix. Wetland boundaries have not been
verified by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and are based on the best professional
' judgement of the wetland assessment staff.
Wetland function and value assessments were based on field observations and research on
' local environment and cultural conditions. Formal wetland or wildlife assessment studies
such as WET H or HEP were not conducted for this project.
The approximately 3.4-mile segment of roadway associated with the Albemarle Northeast
' Connector traverses a suburban/rural agricultural area which contains mixed residential and
agricultural development. Only remnants of natural vegetation remain along the roadside
segments where the proposed connector will utilize existing roadway. Areas of new
location will cross some undeveloped area, including pastureland, farmland and small
wooded areas.
The proposed project will disturb approximately 38 total acres of new right-of-way. This
total includes less than one acre of upland pine timber, approximately 6.8 acres of upland
hardwood timber, 11 acres of farmland, approximately 3.7 acres of pastureland, 0.95 acres
of wetlands, and roughly 0.5 acres of watercourses. The remaining acres are either
occupied by intersecting roadways, parking lots, residential or public/semi-public
development, cut-over power line rights-of-way, or disturbed mowed roadside rights-of-
way.
' 4.7.1 Plant Communities

H

C
4.7.1.1 Uplands. Major ecological communities in the study area are identified as
agricultural lands, lesser areas of pasturelands, and wooded upland areas which generally
consist of second growth hardwood forests and mixed pine-hardwood forests. The
dominant canopy species include a variety of oaks, including post (Quercus stellata), red
(Q. rubra), southern red (Q. falcata), white (Q. alba), and rock chestnut (Q.prinus) and to a
lesser extent in the urban complex soils black jack (Q. marilandica). Other canopy species
commonly occurring include loblolly pine (Pines weda), short-leaf pine (P. echinata), and
Virginia pine (P. virginiana), American chestnut (Castanea dentata), chinquapin (C.
pumila), and sweet gum (Liquidambarstyraciflua).
Less common canopy species include black walnut hickory (Juglans nigra), shagbark
hickory (Carya ovata) and bittemut hickory (C. cordinformis). Subcanopy species include
black cherry (Prunus serotina), red maple (Acer rubrum), ash-leaved maple (Acer
negundo), American holly (Ilex opaca), dogwood (Cornus florida), blackgum (Nyssa
sylvatica), sourwood (Oxydendrum arboreum), redbud (Cercis canadensis), and saplings
of sweet gum.
Much of the upland property immediately adjacent to the existing roadway where the
majority of the improvements will occur has already been disturbed by residential
development or by clearing for agricultural fields or pastureland. The remaining land,
covered in part by woods, provides an effective, although unplanned, greenbelt.
Herbaceous growth in forest understories and in altered successional areas is predominated
by honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), brier (Smilax rotundifolia), blackberry (Rubes sp.),
broomsedge (Andropogon sp.), poison ivy (Rhus radicans), honeysuckle (Loniceea
japonica), grasses and other successional species. The openings in the project area that are
not currently mowed or cultivated contain broomsedge (Andropogon sp.), wild onions
(Allium sp.), rabbit tobacco (Gnaphalium sp.), vetch (Vicia sp.), goldenrods (Solidago
(23)

1

G

ssp.), dog fennel (Eupatorium capillifolium), blackberry (Rubus sp.), sumac (Phus glabra
and R. copallina), along with mixed grasses. Native and ornamental plantings are evident
around private residences.
4.7.1.2 Wetlands. Wetland soil investigations were conducted by selected field
observations and by reference to the Soil Survey of Stanly County, North Carolina. The
following soil series phases were identified for the intermittent streams, Little Long Creek
and other isolated wetlands:
' Oakboro silt loam
• Kirksey silt loam
• Goldston very channery silt loam

t
1

None of these soil series are included in the list of Hydric Soils of North Carolina (1989),
but field observations of hydrophytic vegetation provide evidence of hydric soil conditions.
In some cases, soils were observed in the field to be gleyed, mottled or saturated.
Description of Existing Wetlands. Approximately one acre of jurisdictional wetlands
can be found within the proposed right-of-way of the Albemarle Northeast Connector.
Figure 7 shows the wetland locations. The table below summarizes the wetland
information by wetland location.
Approximate
Wetland Plant Stream Size Within
Location Community Tvne ROW
Station 16+15 Wooded/grassland Perennial 0.18 acre
Station 35+75 Woodland Intermittent (ditch) 0.14 acre
Station 68+50 Woodland Intermittent (pond) 0.10 acre
Station 88+00 Woodland Intermittent 0.21 acre
i
Station 115+00 Woodland Intermittent 0.02 acre J
Station 121+00 Grassland Intermittent 0.09 acre
Station 133+00 Grassland Intermittent (pond) 0.21 acre , j
TOTAL 0.95 acre
The proposed alignment for the Albemarle Northeast Connector will cross one floodplain at
Little Long Creek and six intermittent streams. The wetland communities in these
waterways are within woodland or grassland plant communities. The wetlands range in
quality from sparse pasturelands (poor) to relatively undisturbed wooded floodplains
(good).
Natural wetland ecological processes in this study area have been modified by human
activities such as:
• Farming or grazing
• Roadway embankments or cuts
• Creek or drainageway alterations
(24)

1

t

J

'?I
17
1
1

1

1
E
t

1

Wetland Locations
Legend
Albemarle City Limits = Proposed Connector
Intermittent Stream W Wooded Plant Community
P Perennial Stream G Grassland Plant Community
® Project Limits
Albemarle Northeast Connector
From US 52 To NC 740
Stanly County, North Carolina
Figure 7

1
1
t
r
1
1

1

1

1

I
fl
r
11
I
[1

1
Based upon casual observations, it appears that these activities have degraded the functional
values of each wetland and have limited their potential for natural development. Some
wetland and riparian plant communities have been changed and/or broken into smaller
parcels by these activities.
Wetlands at Little Long Creek (Station 16+15): Little Long Creek is crossed by the
proposed Albemarle Northeast Connector between US 52 and Mountain Creek Road. The
proposed Northeast Connector follows the existing alignment of Centerview Church road
at this location. There are approximately 0.2 acre of jurisdictional wetlands within the
proposed right-of-way at Little Long Creek.
On the north (downstream) side of the road, Little Long Creek flows through a wooded
floodplain. The width of the wetland community is approximately 130 feet wide. This
does not include the 20 to 30 foot wide creek channel. The wooded wetland is relatively
undisturbed within the surrounding quiet residential area. The only visible evidence of
disturbance is a 15-foot wide utility easement where trees and large shrubs have been
removed.
The creek channel on the south (upstream) side of the road has been cleared of all large
shrubs and trees. Only small willows, rushes and sedges can be seen along the edges of
the modified creek channel. The water saturated banks of Little Long Creek are
jurisdictional wetlands. The width of this wetland community is estimated to be 10 feet.
This includes five feet of vegetation on each side of a 20 to 30-foot wide creek channel.
The soil series for this floodplain is Oakboro silt loam and is frequently flooded.
Floodplain maps from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) show the 100-
year floodplain to be approximately 480 feet wide at this crossing (see Figure 8 within the
Flood Hazard section). Saturated soil conditions were observed along the margins of the
creek, as well as in small swales and shallow depressions in the wooded floodplain.
Obligate, facultative and facultative wetland plant species observed on both the north and
south sides of the Centerview Church Road include:
• Alder (Alnus serrulata)
• American Elm (Ulmus americana)
• Black Willow (Salix nigra)
• Bulrushes (Scirpus spp.)
• Green Ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica)
Hornbeam (Carpinus caroliniana)
• Oak (Quercus phellos)
• Rushes (Juncus spp.)
• Sycamore (Platanus occidentalis)
The functional values for this wetland were observed to include wildlife habitat, floodwater
detention, pollution abatement and sediment removal.
Wetlands within Grassland Communities. The proposed Albemarle Northeast Connector
crosses two grassland drainageways that have jurisdictional wetlands within the channel
bottoms. There are approximately 0.09 acre of jurisdictional wetlands at Station 121+00
and 0.21 acres at Station at 133+00 (See the table included earlier, Figure 7 and Data
Forms for Stations 121+00 and 133+00). These intermittent streams carry runoff from
adjacent open pasture lands or agricultural fields. Some of these drainageways were
observed to have small flows of water.

(25)

11
11
11
11
11
1

1
1
1
J

The wetland at Station 133+00 surrounds a small pond. All have saturated soil conditions.
The most common soil series is Oakboro silt loam and is described by the Soil Survey of
Stanly County, North Carolina to be frequently flooded, with moderately slow permeability
and moderate to high water holding capacities. Wetland vegetation in and along the
drainageways includes:
¦, Bulrushes (Scirpus spp.)
Rushes (Juncus spp.)
• Sedges (Caret spp.)
• Spikerushes (Eleocharis spp.)
Wetland functions for these grassland drainageways include flood water detention, nutrient
Q. removal, habitat for grassland wildlife and waterfowl, and sediment removal.
Wetlands within Woodland Communities. Wooded drainageways are crossed by the
proposed Albemarle Northeast Connector in four places (see the table included earlier,
Figure 7 and Data Forms for Stations 35+75, 68+50, 88+00 and 115+00). The total
acreage of wooded wetlands found within the right-of-way is 0.65 acre. These forested
drainageways are heavily vegetated with obligate, facultative and facultative wetland trees
and shrubs, such as:
• American Elm (Ulmus americana)
• Black Willow (Salix nigra)
• Currant (Ribes spp.)
• Green Ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica)
• Honeysuckle (Lonicera sempervirens)
• Oak (Quercus phellos)
• Sweet gum (Liquidambarstyraciflua)
• Sycamore (Platanus occidentalis)
• Yellow poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera)
Flowing water and saturated soil conditions were observed in many of the drainageways.
There is a small pond associated with the wetland at Station 68+50. The most common soil
series for these drainages is Kirksey silt loam. Hydric soil conditions are assumed to be
present in those areas dominated with wetland plant species.
4.7.1.3 Rare/Unique Natural Areas. Information received from the Natural
Heritage Program of North Carolina states that they have no records of rare or unique
natural areas that would be affected by the proposed project.
4.7.1.4 Summary of Impacts. The acquisition of a total of 37.77 acres of new right-
of-way as well as construction easements will reduce the supply of natural vegetation and
habitat. The new right-of-way includes less than one acre of upland pine timber,
approximately 6.8 acres of upland hardwood timber, 11 acres of farmland, approximately
3.7 acres of pastureland, 0.95 acres of wetlands, and roughly 0.5 acres of watercourses.
The remaining acres are either occupied by intersecting roadways, parking lots, residential
or public/semi-public development, cut-over power line rights-of-way, or disturbed mowed
roadside rights-of-way.
On the following page is listed the amount of upland vegetation by general cover type that
will be affected by the construction of the connector. The amount of upland vegetation that
will be removed will total approximately nine acres, or about 24 percent of the total right-
of-way required for the improvements.
r (z6)

1
1
I
i
r
1
A
1

J

i
1

# of Acres
Cover Tyne Affected
Hardwood 6.80
Pine 0.55
Mixed 1.65
Farmland/Open Fields 10.94
Pastureland L(&
Total Acres Affected 23.60
It is difficult to quantitatively estimate the remaining amount of upland vegetation that will
be affected by right-of-way requirements due to the fact that roadside areas are mixed with
trees, shrubs, grasses and areas that have been disturbed by clearing for development.
Wetland vegetation that will be affected has been described in an earlier section.
The loss of this upland vegetation is irreversible and irretrievable and will result in some
erosion and instability to surficial soils, thereby upsetting the natural process of plant and
animal succession. Overall, however, environmental impacts will be minimized by the fact
that much of the proposed construction route has already been highly altered by agricultural
and residential development. No temporary detours or fills are anticipated. Existing
culverts and conduits are to be extended across the additional width of highway in areas of
existing location.
The NCDOT will employ the use of "best management practices" (reduce side slopes, no
staging in lowland sites, minimize canopy removal, limited fill placement, etc.) in order to
minimize impacts to the biota of the area. The contractor will be required to implement an
effective erosion and sedimentation control program, approved by NCDOT, to control
runoff, and to minimize water quality degradation at the points of impact and to other
downstream receptors. The contractor will also be required to make all efforts during
construction to salvage any merchantable timber. Protection of the remaining standing trees
outside the right-of-way boundary and construction limits will be accomplished through
best management practices in preventing erosion, sedimentation and construction damage.
4.7.2 Animal Communities
4.7.2.1 Terrestrial Communities. Due to the effects of prior disturbance because of
residential development and agricultural activities along the areas of the project corridor
which follow already existing routes, opportunities for wildlife habitat are limited. The
undeveloped and wooded areas, however, do provide some habitat opportunities for animal
life, especially the smaller animals.
Agricultural lands, which are actively farmed during the growing seasons, support a variety
of animal life including Eastern cottontail rabbit (Sylvilagus f loridanus), bobwhite quail
(Colinas virginianus), gray squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis), house mice (Mus musculus),
striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis) and red and gray fox (Vulpes vulpes and Urocyon
cinereoargenteus, respectively).
The adjacent hardwood forests which are scattered throughout the project study area
support a variety of animal species including the gray squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis),
raccoon (Pryocyon lotor), opposum (Didelphis marsupialis), red and gray fox (Vulpes
vulpes and Urocyon cinereoargenteus, respectively), striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis),
and Eastern chipmunk (Tamias striatus), and to a lesser extent white-tailed deer
(Odocoileus virginianus). Other small mammals that are likely to occur in or near the area
1 (27)

1
t

1
[l
1
r
L?
1
I

include beaver (Castor canadensis), least shrew (Cryptotis parva), Eastern mole (Scalopus
aquaticus), red bat (Lasiurus borealis), muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus), golden mouse
(Ochrotomys nuttalli), Eastern harvest mouse (Reithrodontomys humulis), and hispid
cotton rat (Sigmodon hispidus).
Song birds inhabiting the project area include: the warblers; brown thrasher (Toxostoma
rufum); woodpeckers, including hairy (Picoides villosus) and pileated (Dryocopus
pileatus); Carolina chickadee (Parus carolinensis); blue jay (Cyanocitta cristata); eastern
wood pewee (Contopus virens); cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis); rufous-sided towhee
(Pipilo erythrophthalmus); field sparrows (Spizella pusilla); and vireos. Forest raptors are
also common in the woods and around the fields and include a variety of hawks, including
the broad-winged (Buteo platypterus), red-tailed (Buteo jamaicensis), and sparrow hawk or
American Kestrel (Falco sparverius). Old fields also provide a suitable habitat for the
mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos), robin (Turdus migratorius), eastern meadowlark
(Sturnella magna) and American goldfinch (Carduelis tristis). Game birds such as
bobwhite quail (Colinus virginianus) and dove, both rock dove (Columba livia) and
mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), are common throughout the project area.
Many species of reptiles and amphibians are abundant along the ground, in the minor
stream bank areas and around/in fallen trees in fields and wooded parts of the project
corridor. Stanly County lies within a range of a large number of the amphibians and
reptiles which are found in North Carolina. For example, 11 of the 42 salamander species;
11 of the 29 frog and toad species; eight of the 19 turtle species; eight of the 10 lizard
species; and 23 of the 37 snake species could possibly occur in Stanly County. Several
reptiles including the eastern garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis), eastern fence lizard
(Sceloporus undulatus), eastern box turtle (Terrapene carolina), and southeastern
copperhead (Agkistrodon contortrix) are found in the woodlands as well as in other
habitats.
4.7.2.2 Aquatic Communities. Little Long Creek which crosses the project corridor
in one area along Centerview Church Road may contain a variety of aquatic invertebrates
and small fish although no substantial evidence of aquatic life was recorded during field
observations. Fish species such as sunfish, bluegill, chub, crappie, perch and bass may be
found in the larger channels and nearby streams both upstream and downstream and in the
Rocky River.
4.7.2.3 Summary of Impacts. Wildlife habitat in the study area will undergo
permanent primary impact due to the loss of vegetation associated with clearing, filling and
paving operations. Permanent impact to mammals will generally be minimal, since their
mobility allows them to leave a disturbed area; however, minor impacts may be experienced
by burrowing and/or nonmobile species.
Temporary impacts to wildlife may include the disruption of normal wildlife reproductive
cycles due to construction noise, dust and vegetation removal. Permanent impacts from
roadway noise, litter and maintenance will depend greatly on the individual species. Once
construction is completed, certain species will return to the disturbed areas. However,
displacement of species to outlying habitat areas could result in competition for habitat, at
least on a temporary basis.
Little or no effect is anticipated to aquatic resources in the area due to the urban, disturbed
nature of the channels associated with the improvements that will be required along
Centerview Church Road. Certain wildlife species, including any aquatic wildlife that may
be present, will be afforded movement across the roadway through enlarged culverts
constructed as part of the roadway improvements.
1 (28)

r
r
r
1
4
1
1

I toposed mitigation will take the form of "best management practices" during construction,
including attention to sedimentation and erosion control measures. Every effort will be
made to minimize impact in these now undeveloped areas where the best habitat conditions
exist. Avoidance of siltation into streams will help protect aquatic resources that may exist
within the project area.
P-4 4.8 Physical Resources
4.8.1 Water Resources
4.8.1.1 Flood Hazard. The only area of flood hazard recorded within the project
corridor is at the juncture of Centerview Church Road and Little Long Creek roughly 1,250
feet east of US 52 (see Figure 8). The 100-year floodplain occurs in a band approximately
480 feet wide immediately next to this stream crossing. Part of the floodplain along the
Centerview Church property has been filled in and the floodplain now is roughly 300 feet
wide in this section. No development exists within this low-lying land which downstream
(northside of Centerview Church Road) provides a natural boundary for Chuck Morehead
Park and upstream (southside) runs between a small area of residential development on the
west and the parking lot for Centerview Baptist Church on the east. Approaches on the
proposed crossing area are expected to require fill slopes of 2:1. The proposed
improvements will be designed to minimize the effects on the floodplain through the
implementation of appropriate erosion control measures.
4.8.1.2 Surface Water and Water Quality. Surface drainage is controlled by a
tributary of Town Creek (Little Long Creek) which flows into the Rocky River and finally
into the Pee Dee River. Little Long Creek and several of its small headwater drainages are
crossed by the proposed Connector. Little Long Creek has a Class C best usage rating
indicating suitability for fishing, fish and wildlife propagation, recreation, and other
secondary uses requiring water of lower quality.
A small pond in the bend of Rebel Road is within the project corridor. Two small ponds
near Eastwood park subdivision are adjacent to the project corridor. These ponds will not
be disturbed by the construction of the Connector.
The floodplain of Little Long Creek is roughly 480 wide according to Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) mapping available for the area; however, part of the
floodplain along the Centerview Church property has been filled in and the floodplain now
is roughly 300 feet wide. Alluvial soils along the floodplain are expected to be shallow
silty clays. Other drainages crossed by the project are much smaller. Siltation of these
drainages will be minimal because standard erosion control measures will be used during
roadway construction. The contractor will be required to implement an effective erosion
and sedimentation control program, approved by NCDOT, in order to control runoff, and
to minimize water quality degradation at the points of impact and to other downstream
receptors. Adverse impacts to the streams along the project are not anticipated.
The groundwater table is expected to be from 20 to 40 feet deep. Typical well yields are
from 10 to 100 gallons per minute (gpm). The majority of houses along the project are in
the city limits of Albemarle and are served with municipal water. Water wells are evident at
some older homes along the project and may be included within the construction limits of
the project. These wells will have to be abandoned in accordance with G.S 87-87,87-88.
Water table drawdown near roadcuts should be minimal and is not expected to adversely
affect nearby water wells.
1 (29)
1
f
N
1
1
t
i
1

1

Flood Hazard Area
Key To Map
500-Year Flood Boundary ZONE B
100-Year Flood Boundary
Zone Designations' With
Date of Identifcation
E.G., 12/2/74
100-Year Flood Boundary 500-Year Flood Boundary 30
30 ZONE B
Albemarle Northeast Connector
From US 52 To NC 740
Stanly County, North Carolina
Figure 8

L
1
1
Y
a

F
J
In addition, data from the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural
Resources, Division of Environmental Management, Water Quality Section, was reviewed
for further evaluation of water quality data. Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network
(BMAN) water quality review data indicated that this area of the Rocky River sub-basin, in
the Lower Yadkin-Pee Dee River drainage area, has overall fair water quality. No long-
term changes in bioclassification have been noted at the sampling location along Long
Creek nearest the project corridor.
Other regulatory agencies were contacted to determine potential impacts to any special water
resources within the general project area. No wild and scenic rivers nor natural, scenic and
recreational rivers will be affected by the proposed connector.
4.8.2 Physiography
Low hills, typically covered with thin silty soils are in the project area. Elevations range
from 480 feet at Little Long Creek on Centerview Church Road to 580 feet on Ridge Street
and Rebel Road. Town Creek and its headwaters, which flow into the Rocky River, drain
the proposed project.
4.8.3 Geology, Soils and Rock
Volcanic-Sedimentary rocks of the Carolina Slate Belt are found throughout the area.
Metamorphosed grey siltstones and argillites of the Late Proterozoic age Floyd Church
Formation underlie the entire project. These slightly metamorphosed, fine grained
sediments were deposited in still, deep ocean water about 600 million years ago. Recent
fossil discoveries in the Floyd Church Formation have been interpreted to be metazoian
Pteridium of the latest Precambrian age. Previous discoveries of trilobites named
Paradoxies are believed to be Cambrian. Air borne volcanic ash and cinder along with
water transported volcanic and continental sediments formed thin beds of siltstones one to
four inches thick. Occasional tuff beds are found within the formation. The source of
volcanic material at the time of deposition of the Floyd Church Formation appeared to be
from the Flat Swamp Mountain vicinity.
The project area is on the southeastern limb of the New London Syncline. At US 52,
sediments dip steeply to the northwest. The dip decreases gradually along the project and
is nearly horizontal at NC 740.
Outcrops can be seen along the entire length of the project. The best exposures are found
in the railroad cut to the east of Centerview Church Road where the siltstones and argillites
are grey when fresh, but weather to white and finally to bright pink and orange. Residual
soils derived from these fine grained parent rocks are dominated by tan or brown silts, and
red silty clays. Soils are typically one to five feet thick overlying weathered rock to a depth
of ten feet. Hard rock requiring blasting is expected below ten feet, especially in cuts
between Ridge Street and Centerview Church Road. Gumbo type clayey soils are found in
limited areas along drainages and near springs. Red silty clays are found on some
ridgetops.
The upland soils along the proposed construction route are almost exclusively of the Badin
series. This series consists of moderately deep, well drained, moderately permeable soils
on undulating to steep Piedmont uplands. These soils, as described above, consist of
channery silt loam at shallow depths and become silty clay, silty clay loam, and channery
silty clay loam at medium depths prior to reaching a weathered bedrock at the lower depths.
1 (30)

n
I
1
G
D
1
1
11
1
The soils are used primarily for woodland, crops or pastureland, and the remainder is used
for urban development. Within the project corridor, slopes are generally in the two to eight
percent range although the Badin channery silt loam (BaD) soil, limited to two small areas
within the corridor, is found on slopes ranging from eight to 15 percent.
The other soils series found in limited coverage within the project corridor include the
Goldston and Kirksey series and the Oakboro series within the creek channel of Little Long
Creek. The Goldston series consists of shallow, well drained to excessively drained,
moderately rapidly permeable soils on undulating to steep Piedmont upland side slopes and
knolls.The Goldston very channery silt loam (GoC) found within the corridor is well
drained and has slopes ranging from 4 to 15 percent. This Goldston soil is evident along
Centerview Church Road and north of Talbert Road and is used primarily as agricultural
fields and some woodland. Surface runoff is rapid. Permeability is moderately rapid, and
the available water capacity is very low.
The Kirksey series consists of deep, moderately well drained, moderately permeable soils
on broad ridges, in depressed areas, and around the head of drainageways. Within the
project corridor, slopes range from zero to six percent and the soil, Kirksey silt loam
(KkB), is located at the head of the drainageway of Little Long Creek and its small
tributaries. Surface runoff is medium. The permeability is moderately slow, and the
available water capacity is moderate to high which provide the main limitations for building
site development.
The Oakboro series consists of deep, moderately well drained, moderately permeable soils
on nearly level flood plains. The streams commonly flow over bedrock. Oakboro silt loam
(Oa), within the project area is subject to frequent flooding for brief periods and is found
along Little Long Creek. The soil is not used for building sites because of wetness and
flooding.
None of the soils found within the project corridor have been identified by the U.S.
Department of Agriculture as being a state or locally prime or important farmland.
4.8.4 Mineral Resources
No economic mineral resources are known to exist within the project corridor.
4.8.5 Summary of Impacts
A summary of impacts includes:
• Economic mineral deposits are not known to exist in or near the project.
• A limited number of older water wells may be sited within the construction limits
of the proposed project. Water wells outside of construction limits should not be
adversely affected.
• Three small ponds are located on the edge of the project corridor but should not
be adversely affected
• Adverse impacts to surface water are not expected.
• Shallow blast rock may be encountered in cuts from Ridge Street to Centerview
Church Road.
• No prime or unique farmlands or farmlands of statewide or local importance are
located within the project corridor.
(31)

4.9 Special Topics
' 4.9.1 Wetlands: Jurisdictional Issues
4.9.1.1 Summary of Impacts. The wetland impact assessments and findings are
presented in compliance with Executive Order 11990 "Protection of Wetlands", 23 CFR
771 and 777. This assessment was based on the field investigation conducted in May
1990, the selection of a preferred alignment location in mid April 1991, and the completion
of the preliminary roadway design in April 1991. Every effort will be made to avoid
wetland impacts during design and construction.
Permanent wetland impacts were based on an estimated width of new roadway pavement
and embankment. Approximately one acre of wetlands will be permanently displaced by
the construction of the new roadway. These impacts are scattered along the project corridor
at the seven different wetland locations. The area of impact at each wetland is very small.
Most impacts effect an average of 0.2 acre per wetland.
Wetland impacts, their location and type, are summarized in the table below.
Wetland Plant Stream Permanent
Location Community Tvne Impacts
Station 16+15 Wooded/grassland Perennial 0.18 acre
Centerview Church Rd.
Station 35+75 Woodland Intermittent (ditch) 0.14 acre
W-S Railway/
Agricultural Ditch
Station 68+50 Woodland Intermittent (pond) 0.10 acre
Talbert Rd. and
Rosebud Lane
¦ Station 88+00 Woodland Intermittent 0.21 acre
Rebel Road
Station 115+00 Woodland Intermittent 0.02 acre
Rebel Rd./Moss
Springs Rd.
Station 121+00 Grassland Intermittent 0.09 acre
Moss Springs Rd.

Station 121+00 Grassland Intermittent (pond) 0.21 acre
Moss Springs Rd.
TOTAL 0.95 acre
4.9.1.2 Permit Requirements. It is anticipated that the effects to the 0.95 acres of
identified-wetlands will be appropriate to most conditions set forth in U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers' (USACOE's) Nationwide Permit 26. JT a and associatedwith-the-cresg ng-----?
1 (32)

1
1

1

1

of Little Long Creek was determined to be below the headwaters location; therefore, it is
anticipated that authorization through bridge general and box culvert construction permit
SAWC082-N-084-0031 will be appropriate.
4.9.1.3 Avoidance, Minimization and Mitigation. The North Carolina
Department of Transportation has a policy to avoid, to the extent possible, adverse impacts
on wetlands wherever there is a practical alternative. The recommended Albemarle
Northeast Connector will result in wetland encroachments at seven drainageways. It is
estimated that the permanent impacts of the wetlands along the proposed roadway will be
under one acre.
The nature of the project, which involves widening existing roadways and the construction
along new location in some areas, and the topography in the project corridor, prohibits the
shifting of the alignment to completely avoid the wetlands areas along the project. Safety
considerations in the design of the roadway also prohibit complete avoidance of wetland
impacts. In the absence of feasible alternatives which would avoid the wetland areas, all
practical measures to minimize harm to the wetlands will be used where feasible, including
erosion control during and after construction and other "best management practices".
Bridging over Little Long Creek at Centerview Church Road instead of extending the
existing box culvert was considered; however, the cost of constructing a bridge in this area
is prohibitive and was not considered a practicable alternative, particularly in light of the
fact that there would be no net savings in habitat by bridging the creek.
In many areas where roadway widening will fill in existing wetlands within roadside
drainage swales, new swales will be designed to accommodate new wetland conditions.
The bottom of the swale will be graded slightly deeper and with a more gentle slope, to
allow runoff to pond and saturate the soils. Wetland topsoils from the affected wetlands
may be stripped and placed along these swales to facilitate growth of sedges and rushes.
All wetland areas that are not to be affected by the project will be protected from
unnecessary encroachment. No staging of construction equipment, or storage of
construction supplies will be allowed in a wetland or near any water-related area. These
wetland areas to be protected will be flagged by a qualified NCDOT representative and if
necessary, will be temporarily fenced. Standard erosion control measures will be observed
and included in the design plans to the contractor. All bare fill or cut slopes adjacent to
streams or intermittent drainages will be stabilized as soon as possible. No fertilizer,
hydrofertilization, or hydromulching will be allowed within the proximity of any stream,
intermittent drainage, and/or wetland.
Based on the above considerations, it is determined that there is no practicable alternative to
the proposed new construction in wetlands and that the proposed action includes all
practicable measures to minimize harm to wetlands which may result from such use.
4.9.2 Protected Species ,
4.9.2.1 Federally-Protected Species. Federally listed endangered (E) and/or
threatened (T) species and/or species proposed for listing as endangered (PE) or threatened
1 (PT) which may occur in the proposed project corridor include:
• Bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) - E
• Schweinitz' sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzit) - E
1 (33)

Bald eagles typically make their nests in the tops of tall trees at lakes within the inland
portions of the Carolinas and along the coast. It was determined through the field
investigation that the appropriate habitat conditions for the bald eagle does not exist within
the limits of the proposed project.
Schweinitz' sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii) is typically found in clearings and edges
of upland woods, thickets and pastures of the southern piedmont region. The sunflower
has been found in Cabarrus, Columbus, Mecklenburg, Rowan, Stanly and Union Counties
in North Carolina and in Lexington County, South Carolina. This perennial sunflower is
characterized by a fascicle of slenderly carrot-like tuberous roots and can reach 15 feet in
height. The flowering season is from September to frost.
Helianthus schweinitzii prefers moist to dryish clays, clay-loams or sandy clay loams. It is
a plant of full sun or the light shade of open stands of oak-pine-hickory, the oaks
consisting of primarily upland species (A Report on Some Rare, Threatened, or
Endangered Forest-Related Vascular Plants of the South, Volume II, US Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Technical Publication 8-TP 2, March 1983).
No evidence indicating the presence of Schweinitz' sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii)
was noted during field investigations. A scientific survey was conducted by NCDOT in
the project corridor to ensure that the species will not be affected. A plant by plant search
indicated that the project will not affect this species. A memorandum documenting the
survey is included in Appendix C.
In addition, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has identified species which, although not
now listed or officially proposed for listing as endangered or threatened, are under status
review by the Service. Status Review (SR) species are not legally protected under the
Endangered Species Act and are not subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7,
until they are formally proposed or listed as threatened or endangered. However, the
Service has requested that these species receive special consideration prior to any activity
that may adversely affect their existing habitats. These status review species include:
• Nestronia (Nestronia umbellula)
• Heardeaf plantain (Plantago cordata)
Nestronia (Nestronia umbellula) is usually found in deep, moist to quite dry sands, sandy
loams or sandy clays. Based on this criterion, the soil conditions within the project
corridor are not conducive to support this species. However, other habitat conditions
described in the literature indicate that the species could possibly be found in this area. No
evidence of this species was observed during the field investigations.
Heartleaf plantain (Plantago cordata) is generally found in swamps, shallows and banks of
creeks where very wet, shaded sites exist. The desirable habitat for this species was not
indicated through field investigations.
4.9.2.2 State-Protected Species. Information from the Natural Heritage Program
of North Carolina states that the following threatened (T), endangered (E), or special
concern (SC) species occur within Stanly County and may be affected by the proposed
project:
• Carolina Darter (Etheostoma collis) - SC
• Schweinitz' sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii) - E
• . Nestronia (Nestronia umbellula) - T
(34)

Of the sitings listed by the Natural Heritage program, the Carolina Darter has been
identified in Long Creek south of Albemarle, roughly one mile south of NC 24/27. This
would make it possible for the Carolina Darter to find its way into the reaches of Little
Long Creek although the species was not identified during field investigations. The
proposed connector will not disturb the existing flow of Little Long Creek. No adverse
effects to existing habitat are expected.
The sunflower species was not noted during field investigations; however, as mentioned
previously, NCDOT will conduct additional scientific surveys in the project corridor to
ensure that the species will not be affected prior to the expenditure of construction funds.
A discussion of the findings on Nestronia is included under the Federally-Protected Species
section.
4.10 Construction Impacts
11
t
1

1

C

There are a number of environmental impacts normally associated with roadway
construction. These are generally of short term duration and measures will be taken to
mitigate these impacts.
Traffic along the project route may experience brief periods of delay and disruption during
construction. Because the Albemarle Northeast Connector improvements will occur along
the existing alignment, traffic lanes should be open during the majority of the construction
period. Some key intersections where the connector will depart on new alignment will be
reconfigured. Delays may be experienced in these locations but rerouting of traffic will be
accomplished to minimize disruption to traffic flow.
Water, sewer, telephone, electric and gas lines exist in the project area. The Division of
Highways will hold a pre-construction conference between representatives of the NCDOT,
the contractor, representatives of the involved utility companies, and pertinent local
officials. Methods to coordinate utility adjustments and to minimize damage or rupture of
existing service will be discussed at this conference.
The general requirements concerning erosion control and siltation are covered in Article
107-13 of the Standard Specifications which is entitled "Control of Erosion, Siltation and
Pollution". The North Carolina Division of Highways has also developed an Erosion and
Sedimentation Control Program which has been approved by the North Carolina
Sedimentation Control Commission. This program consists of the rigorous requirements
to minimize erosion and sedimentation contained in the North Carolina Highway Standard
Specifications for Roads and Structures together with policies of the Division of Highways
concerning control of accelerated erosion and sedimentation on work performed by State
Forces.
Waste or debris shall be disposed of in areas that are 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 responsible engineer. Any
burning will be done in accordance with applicable local laws and ordinances, along with
regulations of the North Carolina Plan for Implementing National Ambient Air Quality
Standards. Burning will only be done on the right-of-way, under constant supervision,
with good atmospheric conditions, as remote from existing dwellings as possible.
(35)

J

II

1

1

L'
1

Borrow pits and all ditches will be drained insofar as possible to alleviate breeding areas for
mosquitoes. In addition, care will be taken not to block drainage ditches. An extensive
rodent control program will be established where structures are to be removed or
demolished to prevent the migration of rodents into surrounding areas.
Coordination will be initiated with the N.C. Geodetic Survey to ensure that geodetic
markers located along the project corridor will be protected.
4.11 Air Quality Analysis
The purpose of the air quality analysis for carbon monoxide (CO) is to determine the future
CO levels associated with the preferred alternative. The future predicted levels are
compared to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) established by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA).
Air pollution is the result of industrial emissions and emission 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
r (CO), nitrogen oxide (NO), hydrocarbons (HC), particulate matter, sulfur dioxide (SO2),
and lead (Pb) (listed in order of decreasing emission rate).
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
analysis presented is concerned with determining expected carbon monoxide levels in the
vicinity of the project.
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 emission 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.
1 (36)

Automobiles emit lead as a result of burning gasoline containing tetraethyl lead which is
added by refineries to increase the octane rating of the fuel. New cars with catalytic
converters burn unleaded gasoline eliminating lead emissions. Also, the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has required the reduction in the lead content of
leaded gasolines. The overall average lead content of gasoline in 1974 was 2 grams per
gallon. By 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 reduced. Because of these reasons, it is not
expected that traffic on the proposed project will cause the NAAQS for lead to be exceeded.
The proposed construction of the Albemarle Northeast Connector will have no adverse
effect on the local ambient air quality. This determination was made by performing a
microscale air quality analysis to determine future CO concentrations from the proposed
roadway construction. CALINE3 - "A Versatile Dispersion Model for Predicting Air
Pollutant Levels Near Highways and Arterial Streets", developed by the California
Department of Transportation, was used for this analysis.
This project has been coordinated with the North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources (NCDEHNR) - Division of Environmental Management and
NCDOT. Design Year 2000 and 2010 CO concentrations were modeled using the
MOBILE4 (EPA) emission factor data from NCDEHNR, which assumed the default
vehicle mix. These are shown in the table below. Other input variables from NCDEHNR
included background concentrations, persistence factor, mixing height of 400 meters and
atmospheric stability Class E for suburban areas. Vehicle traffic volumes, vehicle mix, and
directional split were obtained from the project engineers. Peak hour volumes were
estimated to be 10% to 13% of the average daily traffic (ADT). Traffic characteristics
which would yield worst case impacts on a regular basis were used to predict future CO
levels.
MOBILE4 Emission Factors (PPM) - (1)
MPH Year 2000 Year 2010
35 11.17 10.46
45 8.74 8.19
(11 Model run prepared by NCDEHNR 613191.
The persistence factor accounts for meteorological and traffic volume variability. EPA's
recommended persistence factor of 0.75, or 75%, was used to convert the one-hour
modeled concentration to an eight-hour concentration.
In order to determine the ambient CO concentration at a receptor near a highway, two
concentration components are used: local and background. The local component is due to
CO emissions from cars operating on streets near the receptors, and are derived from the
CALINE3 program. The background CO concentrations for this project area are estimated
(37)

to be 1.9 parts per million (ppm) for the one-hour concentration, and 1.2 ppm for the eight-
hour concentration. These background concentrations represent worst-case and were
obtained from NCDEHNR. The values (local and background) are added together to
determine the total CO concentration.
As shown in Figure 9, nine representative existing receptors were located along the
Albemarle Northeast Connector corridor to represent sensitive uses in different zones. The
wind angles of 270, 280, and 310 degrees were determined to yield the worst case results
for the design Year 2010.
The predicted Year 2010 one-hour and eight-hour average carbon monoxide concentrations
for the Albemarle Northeast Connector construction at representative receptors are shown
in the table below.
Maximum Worst Case CO Modeling Results (PPM)
Receptor One-Hour(l) Eight-Hour(2)
#1 2.9 2.0
#2 2.2 1.4
#3 2.9 2.0
#4 2.0 1.3
1

PJ

I

1

#5 1.9 1.2
#6 2.0 1.3
#7 2.1 1.4
#8 2.2 1.4
#9 2.1 1.4
(1) A background concentration of 1.9 ppm has been added to the computer results to total the values listed.
(2) A persistence factor of 0.75 has been applied to the computer results. In addition, a background
concentration of 1.2 ppm has been added to total the values listed.
Year 2000 was modeled in addition to the project design year to compare the improvements
in emission factors. Comparison of the Year 2010 total ambient carbon monoxide
concentration with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) (Maximum one
hour, 35 ppm; eight-hour average - 9 ppm) indicates no violation of these standards.
The project is located within the Metropolitan-Charlotte Interstate Air Quality Control
Region. The ambient air quality for Stanly County has been determined to be in
compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). 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.
(38)

1

CJ

r

r?

J,

1

1
a
1

F

1

D
Air Quality Receptors
Legend
Albemarle City Limits
. Proposed Connector
AL Receptor Location
0 Project Limits
Albemarle Northeast Connector
From US 52 To NC 740
Stanly County, North Carolina
Figure 9

1
1

Measures will be taken in controlling dust during construction when necessary for the
protection and comfort of the motorists and area residents.
4.12 Traffic Noise AnalYsis/Construction Noise Analysis
A noise analysis was performed to measure existing noise conditions and to predict future
noise levels associated with the proposed roadway. The noise study was made consistent
with procedures and guidelines of Title 23, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 772.
The design year used is Year 2010 and all assumptions represent probable traffic conditions
for that year. Receptors were selected based on proximity to the proposed road alignment
and the type of land use.
4.12.1 Noise Abatement Criteria (NAC)
The existing land uses along the preferred alignment are classified into two separate Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA) categories for noise sensitivity. According to FHWA
Noise Abatement Criteria (NAC: see attached table on the following page), the single
family homes and other residential dwelling units located along the preferred alignment fall
in Activity Category B and should not receive exterior noise levels of more than 67 dB(A)
Leq. The Centerview Baptist Church and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints
are considered to be very sensitive land uses which require quiet interior noise levels on a
daily basis, and are classified as Activity Category E. Category E land uses should not
experience interior noise levels of more than 52 dB(A) Leq. Refer to the table on the next
page for a complete description of the FHWA NAC.
1 4.12.2 Existing Noise Levels
As shown in Figure 10 and the table entitled Noise Monitoring Locations and Results,
existing exterior ambient noise measurements were taken at several locations along the
preferred alignment being studied. To represent sensitive receptors, the measurements
were taken at a 50-foot distance from the edge of the outside travel lane. Noise monitoring
was performed on Monday, December 4, 1989 and Wednesday, December 6, 1989, during
the PM peak hour to ensure the worst (loudest) case was monitored.
The field results are reported in the technical memorandum submitted to NCDOT and are on
file within the Planning and Environmental Branch office. Traffic data assumptions and
field data sheets are included in the appendix. Speeds in the project corridor were noted
between 35-40 mph on local streets and 40-55 mph on larger streets during the peak hour.
Traffic on the existing adjacent roadway was the predominant noise source.
The existing monitored ambient noise levels were below the FHWA NAC in all locations.
Existing monitored noise levels represent all exterior noise sources recorded at the site,
including natural and mechanical sources and human activities, whereas calculated noise
levels represent traffic-generated noise only.
V?

1 (39)
E

1
1

1

1

1
1

1

1

Lam'

1
11,
1
1

Noise Analysis Receptor Locations
Legend
Albemarle City Limits
Proposed Connector
A Monitored Receptor
C Church
R Residence
0 Project Limits
Albemarle Northeast Connector
From US 52 To NC 740
Stanly County, North Carolina
Figure 10

?J

1
1

rl

u

L

1

cn
n.
Cl)
O
Q
J
W
H
Q
J
Lu
W
J
W
Cl)
O
z
Cl)
W
Q
L=L
I
c
c
a
a
a
c
c
c
t
fl
a
c
1 =
y
d
v -
J
O
Z
C
OI C
o
Do OD
am
V
m
O y Gp

o L-
a
°
Q
O +-? e0 'O to Q 'p m N
C .F .O y V
O) ° m` s
- a C
m O o y
m m n
C L
i
y
0 f
m
L V
O C a'o OD
` .
+
m
m a
4) s

a
CL L

°
am`
?ct aay m
m
'
? E 0
L L) E aL+ O
°
?
+ V d
M& 0
a O •p C a
0 L
U
a>
3to
m N?
eo
za
im
v
i
m
m
m L y ? ?>
.
> °
C?
> -O
7 >
m
N
.. m
°
a`.. V
m y m m y m V m
m
p C to n
co .0 O
O
m L C
O
3 m,
90 V t,
O
C C m
L OD
?+ L (? I
y
'7
p p y y

m ects t
7
>
C
y
Q
C
V
y
- 0
V ±? _
. W
a >. m
m m
V 'O O m t V Q
OD ;
w
'> CL -p
E y
M cmi y 0 o c
c t
o 0 0
a0 0 y Y
` V
m`
m 4
v0Cv v m cc
yw O L.
° e
c
o
'C eo
a 0
(D

ca CL t o uai :: -
m c U SD m
y y
E
a; m
L ?' r+ V C C
20 C y m d
° O 'O
V C y C. a m
° o y C C
M a L
3 o°
$?
o 0 a in aea
? y
c a c to t
a c
L Y m N
m
` Q c° vi
'C m a 0
c O
t
o
0 >. m
v ' y V t
L d +r c v E a
m M m (% Ia
w y r- +r ? 4) M 7
CL 0 O
y
y
°d
y
yc? eomE mm? cCA
a
i
a
i
ay+ y_ 0 0 0_ C V V c
N m 0 .
O r ,
O
c m
`
y
C 77
F-mor aa2O• y
a3 a W.0
om m
?-O(.) D
p
a
cc ,_
Ic
_O
O_
.O_ c
°

cow t-
n U-J L
? x t1) •m
?..
... w
_ - c
O_ .° O O

LO m
co N ~
n x ' N a`D
to a+
_
W x
= _ C
N
Q
Nip u o w
.
e
'S? r
o a
y ?
U.
eco U_
? ? to
C
0
a o •?
>, 7
cc
M
L
Ch cm
m L m
d ? 'O
tL
O
M O m
Y a O
a0 U
O N
'O m m
y a
7 H
tv
y
Y z
to tv
m L O
ea a
o ? o
CL L m H
m 3 a U
v >
N a L- m
C
O O _N
O y O
v X z
m V
.Q a
E am
y y ? H
m w 3
03 m
O m
C to _
Am ?o E O
CD v E c
4) CD
E
v >>
V O
4-1
c a m
O
0 m m .n
O C L L
C m -0 10
< ID .C y C
m
d O y
J Ol"o C N
° Cc $ a` n
-j U
m Y M 7
w a tmo N
N
f

i
it
i
N
M L
ti
d R
lt
on
or
ng
o
se oca
ons an esu
s
Exterior Meter
Measurement Reading Distance to FHWA NAC
Location dB(A) Lea Noise Source dB(A)
U
'
#1 Centerview Baptist Church 61 exterior 50 67
36(l) 52 (interior)
#2 Residence at Blanche Street 53 rox
a
50' 67
.
pp
#3 Church of Jesus Christ LDS
@ Rid
e Road 54
29(l) 50' 67
52(interior)
g
#4 Residence at Rosebud Lane 50 approx. 50' 67
'
#5 Residence at Rebel Road 50 50 67
#6 Residence at Moss Springs Road 61 50' 67
(1) Exterior readings can be converted to interior readings for comparison to FHWA NAC
' by reducing the exterior noise readings by 25 dB(A) for brick structures, which include
both churches. This accounts for wall attenuation and interior ventilation systems. (Source:
NCDOT - Environmental Branch.)
4.12.3 Future Noise Levels
Peak hour traffic volumes and vehicle mix were derived from projected Design Year 2010
ADT. Traffic characteristics which would yield worst case hourly traffic noise impacts on
a regular basis were used to predict the future noise levels. Roadway design data was
obtained from project engineers to be used as input to the FHWA Highway Traffic Noise
Prediction Model STAMINA 2.0 (revised March 1983) to compute noise levels in terms of
the Equivalent Sound Level (Leq).
1?
L_J

?j

By definition, the Equivalent Sound Level is the equivalent steady-state sound level which
in a stated period of time contains the same acoustic energy as the time-varying sound level
during the same period. The computer-predicted Year 2010 Build noise levels are
identified in the table beginning on the following page.
1 (40)
0
1

rJ
l

1

1

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Future Noise Levels (2)
dB(A) Leq
1989 Ext. Yr. 2010 FHWA Distance Distance
Measured Build NAC to Existing to New
Receptor Noise Level Calculated Level (1) Rd. (Ft.) Rd. (Ft.)

1. Business East NM 77.5 72 30 40
of U.S. 52 (N)
2. Residence West of NM 72.5 67 404 0
Rotary Drive (S)
3. Residence East of NM 72.2 67 35 30
U.S. 52 (N)
4. Residence East of NM 71.2 67 40 55
Rotary Drive (S)
5. Residence West of NM 69.4 67 65 70
Johnson Street (S)
6. Fire Station (N) NM 69.6 72 53 53
7. Residence East of NM 69.0 67 60 65
Johnson Street (S)
8. #2R - Residence West 52.7 69.3 67 50 48
of Blanche Street (S) (active space)
9. Residence East of NM 69.0 67 50 52
Blanche Street (S)
10. Residence East of NM 68.7 67 48 51
Blanche Street (S)
11. #1C - Centerview 61 63.1 67 130 150
Baptist Church (S) 36(l) (active space) 52
38.1* (Interior)
12. Residence West of NM 66.5 67 70 90
Continental Drive (S)
13. Residence West of NM 67 67 70 80
Continental Drive (S)
14. Residence West of NM 64.7 67 50 100
Palestine Road (N)
15. Residence West of NM 68.3 67 450 50
Talbert Road (N)
16. Residence West of NM 64.7 67 400 100
Talbert Road (N)
(41)
17,

1

fJ

1

1
Fj

Future Noise Levels (2)
dB(A) Leq

Receptor 1989 Ext.
Measured
Noise Level Yr. 2010
Build
Calculated FHWA
NAC
Level (1) Distance
to Existing
Rd. (Ft.) Distance
to New
Rd. (Ft.)
17. Residence West of NM 60.6 67 440 180
Talbert Road (N)
18. Residence East of NM 63.0 67 180 120
Talbert Road (N)
19. Residence East of NM 66.8 67 100 70
Talbert Road (N)
20. Residence West of NM 67.1 67 75 55
Ridge Street (N)
21. #4R - Residence at 50.5 61.2 67 165 165
Rosebud Lane (N)
22. Residence West of NM 57.2 67 390 390
Ridge Street (S)
23. Residence West of NM 57.3 67 310 310
Ridge Street (S)
24. OR - LDS Church (W) 54 57.5 67 245 245
29(l)
25. #5R - Residence at 50.4
Rebel Road (E)(active space)
26. Business South of NM
Rebel Road (E)
27. Residence South of NM
Rebel Road (E)
28. #6R - Residence at 60.8
Moss Springs Road (W)
29. Residence at NM
Moss Springs Road (W)
30. Residence South of NM
Badin Road (W)
31. Residence South of NM
Badin Road (E)
(active space) 52
32.5* (interior)
61.5 67
160 160
61.6 72 150 150
61.9 67 150 150
65.9 67 80 80
(active space)
65.7 67 80 80
64.7 67 80 80
62.8 67 180 110
(42)

j

t

Future Noise Levels (2)
dB (A) Leq
1989 Ext. Yr. 2010 FHWA Distance Distance
Measured Build NAC to Existing to New
Receptor Noise Level C alculated Level (1) Rd. (Ft.) Rd. (Ft,)
32. Business East of NM 64.5 72 120 120
NC 740 (S)

33. Residence East of NM 63.4 67 130 130
NC 740 (S)
i (1) FHWA NAC level - Federal Highway Administration Noise Abatement Criteria.
(2) Exterior levels are shown unless otherwise noted.
NM - Monitored measurements not taken at these locations.
1 * The interior noise levels were calculated from the exterior readings.
The reduction takes into consideration wall attenuation characteristics and interior
ventilation systems for brick structures.
4.12.4 Traffic Noise Impacts
The methods for determining noise impacts are first, a comparison of the predicted noise
levels with the FHWA NAC. Any predicted noise level approaching (which is defined by
NCDOT as a value 1 dB (A) less than the value shown in the NAC table) or exceeding the
NAC level is considered an impact requiring consideration for noise abatement. The
second criteria is whether the future levels substantially exceed existing noise levels as
defined below:
' Existing LW (h) Increase
' 550 dBA >15 dBA
>50 dBA >10 dBA
As indicated in the table showing future noise levels, 33 receptors were modeled for the
Year 2010 build alternative. Two churches, three businesses, one fire station, and 27
homes were included in this analysis. The build alternative noise levels include above-
average increases in traffic volumes and new portions of roadway within the study area. A
comparison of existing monitored levels to future build noise levels shows an increase of
two to 17 decibels.

u

11

All receptors along the proposed Northeast Connector between US 52 and Continental
Drive, except for the fire station and Centerview Baptist Church, receive future build noise
levels that approach or exceed the FHWA NAC. Two residences (#15 and #19) near
Talbert Road on the north side of the connector receive future build noise levels that
approach or exceed the FHWA NAC. The other receptors in the vicinity of Talbert Road
may also have future build noise levels that substantially exceed existing noise levels.
Also, the residence (#20) near Rosebud Lane on the north side of the future connector
receives future build noise levels that exceed the FHWA NAC.
(43).

I

I

l

The monitored residence along Rosebud Lane receives future build noise levels that
substantially exceed existing noise levels. The two residences (#25 and #27) along Rebel
Road receive future build noise levels that substantially exceed existing noise levels. For
these reasons, these locations would be eligible for consideration of noise abatement. The
maximum extent of the 67 dB(A) noise level contour is estimated to be approximately 85 to
110 feet from the centerline of the Northeast Connector. This distance varies throughout
the corridor due to the changing traffic characteristics.
' 4.12.5 Abatement Measures
Title 23, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 772 requires that noise abatement
measures be considered if a traffic noise impact is identified. An analysis of noise
abatement reasonableness has been prepared for this project.
Noise barriers do not appear to be reasonable for any of the locations that were identified as
receiving a noise impact. The reason for this is that almost all of these receptors have direct
access from the highway and the constant breaks that would be required in order to
accommodate this access would severely compromise the effectiveness of a noise barrier or
' earth berm.
Alignment selection and traffic system management have been analyzed as noise abatement
' measures for this project. Alignment selection has already been utilized to minimize
environmental impacts and cost for the project. Traffic system management measures
which limit vehicle type, speed, volume and time of operation are not considered
reasonable alternatives in regard to the scope of the project.
The proper use of land use control by local jurisdictions is one of the most effective noise
mitigation measures to minimize future noise impacts.
' 4.12.6 Construction Noise
' No abnormal construction noise impacts are anticipated with this project. The major
construction tasks are expected to be earth moving and removal, hauling, grading, and
paving. General construction noise impacts such as temporary speed interference for
passby and individuals living adjacent to the project corridor can be anticipated during
certain phases of construction. If noise problems due to construction activities are
identified, the most effective means to control the noise is by limiting the hours of
' construction activities to daytime hours (7:00 AM to 5:00 PM). Other measures to be
considered are noise shields (temporary barriers) and to plan detours which do not create
additional noise impacts for sensitive receptors.
4.12.7 Summary
Generally, most (17) of the receptors that are immediately adjacent to the Northeast
Connector north of Rebel Road experience traffic noise impacts and are eligible for noise
abatement consideration. Based on project experience of NCDOT, traffic noise abatement
measures are not considered reasonable or feasible, and none are recommended.

1 (44)

1
11

1 4.13 Hazardous Waste Involvement and Underground Storage Tanks
An environmental screening survey was conducted as part of the environmental assessment
for the Albemarle Northeast Connector project. Both an on-site survey and a file search
were conducted as part of this effort. No known or potential waste sites were discovered
in the project area. No visual evidence of hazardous material spills, or soil contamination
' was found during the visual survey.
A closed automotive body repair shop located in the northeast quadrant of the intersection
of US 52 and Centerview Church Road is suspected to have fuel tanks buried on the north
side of the building. An abandoned single fuel pump island (with pump station removed)
was found by the building along with two vent pipes which protrude from the ground.

1

'.l
11

fl

Also discovered by the audit team is an area where tires have been dumped near the route
for the proposed connector. This area is located between East Cannon Avenue and Pond
Street, north of Badin Highway. North Carolina Bill III was passed adopting the North
Carolina Scrap Tire Disposal Act (effective March 1, 1990). This Act requires
owners/operators of scrap tire collection sites to notify the North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and Natural Resources by April 1, 1990. Also, scrap tire haulers are
required to be registered. Landfilling of whole tires is prohibited
A copy of the Environmental Screening Survey is on file with NCDOT. Mitigation
measures will include removal of any UST's that fall within the proposed right-of-way
limits prior to the initiation of any construction.
4.14 Secondary Impacts
Roadway improvements may stimulate indirect effects (secondary impacts) which are not
directly related to the construction of the facility. These secondary impacts may include
such items as more rapid land development or changed patterns of social or economic
activities. It is difficult to accurately gauge secondary impacts quantitatively; however,
generalized secondary impacts may be noted based on similar projects in similar areas.
Roadway improvements such as the proposed Albemarle Northeast Connector tend to
stimulate more rapid development in areas adjacent to or nearby the improved roadway.
This trend is usually more noticeable in areas where development pressures already exist.
The project could stimulate some additional development adjacent to the connector;
however, due to the zoning and existing development patterns in the area, it is likely that
this development would be primarily residential in nature.
Effects to the biological community can also occur in a secondary manner. Accelerated
development encouraged by the highway improvement may lead to the conversion of
biologically productive land to other uses sooner than if the improvement were not made.
The land surrounding the Albemarle Northeast Connector corridor is not developing at a
rapid pace presently so secondary impacts are not expected to be as severe as they would if
the area were more developed. Additional residential development may be stimulated
because of the improved access for commuters who wish to live in a more rural
environment.
1 (45)

4.15 Special Permits Required of the Division of Highways
' It is anticipated that the effects to the 0 95 acres of identified wetlands will be appropriate to
most conditions set forth in U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' (USACOE's) Nationwide
Permit 26. The wetland associated with the crossing of Little Long Creek was determined
to be below the headwaters location; therefore, it is anticipated that authorization through
bridge general and box culvert construction permit SAWC082-N-084-0031 will be
appropriate.

1

i

1
1 (46)

1

1
I

1
1

1

5.0 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
In accordance with the planning objectives, policies and procedures of the Division of
Highways, NCDOT, public participation is an essential element in the environmental
assessment process. Coordination with appropriate governmental agencies and organizations
occurred at the outset of the project as part of the "scoping" process.
"Scoping" consisted of sending a letter to key agencies and officials requesting input in
determining and classifying any outstanding issues relative to the project. The scoping
letter is included in Appendix C prior to key comment letters received as described in the
Agency and Public Comments section below.
In addition to the "scoping" process, an initial information workshop was held on March
22, 1990 to give residents of the project area an opportunity to comment on the project.
Approximately 85 persons, including residents, local officials, and staff attended the kick-
off meeting. The workshop was held in an informal, question and answer format with a
short presentation at the beginning to provide participants with an overview of the project.
A number of comments were received in writing from persons attending the workshop
voicing their viewpoints on preliminary corridors and alternative alignments. These
comments were taken into account in the planning and preparation of preliminary design
alternatives.
A second information workshop was held on October 16, 1990 to show the public
' preliminary design alternatives and present recommendations. A mailing list was
developed from participants at the initial information workshop and special notices were
sent to over 130 persons and officials to inform them of the workshop. Approximately 50
persons were in attendance. Verbal and written comments were received. Generally, the
comments were favorable.
A design public hearing will be held in the Fall of 1991 to furnish residents with the
recommended alternative and associated impacts and to give property owners, residents and
other interested citizens an opportunity to express their views on the social, economic and
environmental effects the project will have on the community and on them personally. Data
' will be presented to acquaint the public with specific design features, describe the
alternatives considered and review mayor impacts. Notification of the design public hearing
will be provided. Maps, exhibits and other graphic material will be available for inspection
to facilitate understanding of the proposed improvements.
5.1 Agency and Public Comments
The following federal, state and local agencies were consulted during the preparation of this
environmental assessment (an asterisk denotes the agencies that submitted comments):
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
* Albemarle City Schools
Centralina Council of Governments
* City of Albemarle Mayor and City Council
* NC Department of Administration, State Clearinghouse
* NC Department of Cultural Resources, Division of Archives and History
NC Department of Human Resources, Division of Health Services
NC Department of Natural Resources and Community Development,
* Division of Forest Resources
Division of Land Resources
(47)

1

1

1

t

n

'
NC Department of Environment, Health & Natural Resources,
* Planning and Environmental Assessment Section
NC Department of Transportation
' * Division of Aviation
Hydrographics Unit

* Landscape Unit
Geotechnical Unit
* Location & Survey Unit
* Right of Way Branch
Traffic Engineering Branch
' * Statewide Planning
Bicycle Coordinator
Division Engineer, Division Ten
* NC Wildlife Resources Commission
Stanly County Board of Commissioners, Chairman
* Stanly County Board of Education
* Soil Conservation Service
* US Army Corps of Engineers
US Department of Housing and Urban Development
US Environmental Protection Agency
* US Fish and Wildlife Service
US Geological Survey
' Key comments from these agencies are included in Appendix C. In addition to the written
requests for input from appropriate agencies and governmental bodies, alternative designs
for the Albemarle Northeast Connector improvements have been reviewed by other
NCDOT units as well as the Division Ten Engineer's office in Albemarle. The project has
been closely coordinated with local officials and property owners in the area. No major
problems or objections to the proposed connector have been received.
1

1 (48)
I
I

I
I
I
I
I

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
11

r

H

1

7
n
1

APPENDIX A
Typical Sections, Preferred Alignment
and Profiles

n

L

1

F

t
i
201-08 a VAR.
ADDITIONAL R/W REOUIRED M 16'-0' 8 VAR. '
12'1
6:1 wi
181-00 101-0"
ORIGINAL
GROUND-7
ORIGINAL
GROUND-,
L& VAR.
VAR.
1'-6'
81-00
y1-00
G1-6n
48:1
1
101-0°
_
,12:1
1'-6n
21..Gr
12'-0r 121-00
21-0r 21-011
GRACE 6 MAR.
48:1 6 YARD 48:1 8 YARy
EXISTING ROADWAY
(TO BE REMOVED AND REPLACED)
TYPICAL SECTION I
EXISTING LOCATION
"SR ISM CENTERVIEW CHURCN ROAD
SR 1841 TALBERT ROAD
R/W REQUIRED
w
6
g

t
I
121-0' 121-00 121-08
.Gr 21 -On GRADE
POINT
48:4 1 5 VAR_ 48:1 3 YID 12;?
PROPOSED ROADWAY
AGGREGATE OR BITUMINOUS BASE
TYPICAL SECTION II
NEW LOCATION
t
48:0 & VAR
EXISTING
FUTURE MULTILANING
AGGREGATE OR BITUMINOUS BASE
CONC. CURB 8 GUTTER (BOTH SIDES)
SIDEWALK (AS REQUIRED)
TYPICAL SECTION III
FUTURE MU.TILANING
21-0¦
0'-60
48:1 8 Y,? . ?8?1
VAR
GRGROUND
r ORIGINAL
FIGURE NO. A-1
4Y+d 7caStrnIMM5111IR29TW.11aH

1

1

1'-5" 401-011
8'-0° 121-0" % 121-011
GRADE CONC. BRIDGE RAIL (7YP.)
I l w? .. ,,.e POINT
ee.4 a v.e
U U u u
6 f 7'-6" C.C.
TYPICAL SECTION
TWO-LANE BRIDGE
641-0"
40-0" 12'-0" 121-00 12'
I]DEWAL
GRADE
POINT
48:1 5 VAR. 48`1
u 1 u
10 N 71-7" C.C.
TYPICAL SECTION
MULTILANE BRIDGE
ELEVATION
TWO-LANE OR MULTILANE BRIDGE
5'-3.
12'-0" Io1_nu
SY54 ZF82:[064012111B26TSO2

E

1

11
11

O MUCH R. STILL CURVE DATA
20 CHARM P. 6 CIMMYN K. CLARK
PI.4+46.43 PIa19+91.71 PIa33+68.02
O KENNETH W. & TAMARA C. TUCKER Aa230521090 Ax14046112¦ Aa430071220
Dc-3'00100' 001.00'000 Dc¦4.Op'OQ¦
4o JOE NELSON CALLAWAY La1•0' T•741.76' L+0150'
Li-i50' L.11476.32' 6.13.001000
FRANCIS EUGENE BOGER 6rs1a00 Ra5729.58' Ta.1641.26'
%e3000'000 SEaO.020 Lc=928.07'
V CITY OF ALBEIIARLE -FIRE STATION 83 TeP403.67' R¦1432.39'
Tn.1453.68' U.1100.01'
O CHUCK MOREHEAD MEMORIAL PARK Le-695.64 Y=50.01' /
Ra1909.96 SE.1O.O52 0 CAROL F. WELCH U¦100.01' ?t
Y•50.01'
REV. MAFLON L. FUR SE-0.046 PALESTINE ROAD TALBERT ROAD, C.
r
PI.11+89.22 PI¦7+26.63 ? Ax ?
1 MANL.ON L. 6 NELLIE H. FUR &•320121080 &•42.291040
¦ • , ¦ ¦• , ¦ 4 • r
HOYLE & BRENDA FESPERMAN T' - - - - - - - - - - T•143.821 T 234 441 r '
12 JAY G. DEMUTH PRELIMINARY i R¦498.22' R¦603.II
SUSAN GAYLE CHANDLER i AC - - - - - - i SE¦NC SE¦NC Ya / ,
S
t3
i4 MELVIN N. 8 MARIE C. RUSSELL ?¢
15 XANG 8 KIA MONA LY ec'. p 6 p
16 DONALD E. 8 ARHONIA HUNEYCUTT + 1{v' J'? P1'1 j
-. ?S?
t7 MRS. VILNA FESPERMAN A 51 \ W„ofAtS ? lg
18 MISS NELLIE TALBERT 11A'?t ' ?'? © I ' / 0
BEGIN PROJECT U-2400 \ Q 'o _ __ - ?'? ?A • 1\ ?/ / ?6 80
- r- 11 t /
POT STA 0+00 e
J
. /? YYC1y I '? 4,
? D $ I I `J 15,1 ? /' Y•\\ ? \\ D p G ?' - - f - ?ti(u
0. El
.0 H
10 .0
r
Q a ' L?
11 '1 II Q ea / 1 I ?
• / /" /
S II IQ , ' / /' / ? PROPOSED ROADWAY
00
X41 y • O+ /??? Q NORTH CAROLINA
qd' ` O i( I I ~ I [] ?' / j 1St DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
1 I I I? Q ` , ,? ' y? l RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA
1 ?? • /
10 10
.0 GRAPHIC SCALE ALBEMARLE N . E . CONNECTOR
Of
200' 400' STA 0+00 TO 58+00
BATE FIGURE NO. A-3
eyy, sym 2FB2: 106401211182aFMI

u

I
E
r
LJ

C

CII'

%
(II L7 1
a
r > ` ?? ?? t9 MANUEL CECIL WHITLEY
"
\\ ? ?? , ? ? 20 MELViN D. b MARSHA D. F{At 4'
? \((? ?( '" ?/ 2f CLAYTON R. b EVELYN K. MAULDIN
` I -Zz
!r `??? ?, S? \\\ O FRANCIS C. DENNIS
I+(, \\
1 \ 23 RUBY A. PLANT
I? ?? Y ?? \\ 24 JAKE JR. b PEGGY V. THREAT
25 BILLY J. b CARLA F. DENNIS
CURVE DATA 26 MELVYN D. b LINDA M. GARDNER r - - - - - - - - - - - O PROPOSED ROADWAY
MOSS SPRINGS 27 DUMPS GROVE BAPTIST CHURCH ; PRELIMINARY I NORTH CAROLINA
PI¦79+57.01 PIa113+63.75 RIDGE STREET LEE LYNN DRIVE REBEL ROAD ROAD 11 t SUBJECT TO CHANGE I DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
ANSI 019'19" A•23958256" 28 MARKHAM W. b CHRISTINE MARRY i I RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA
Dc.6.30100° D0360010011 P103+02.48 PI¦12+30.00 PI¦3+49.77 PI.12+78.32 -' -' - - -
La¦150' Lo¦150' A•4793211011 A¦17*25'49" A¦f+56145' Aw40450109" O EVERETT LENTZ HUNEYCUTT
Ow4052130' 9m2915'OOm D'6'30100' D'6'30100' D't*00100' DoSO301000
T6¦498.98' Ta•480.74' T•388.19' T035.12' 7¦97.30' T¦224.51' O BILL L. HARTSELL JR., ET AL
Lc 009.57' Lc•649.40' L•731.32' 0268.16' L•194.59' L¦429.85' GRAPHIC SCALE
ALBEMARLE N. E . CQNNECTOR
R¦881.47' R•190.86' R•881.47' R¦881.47' R•5729.58' R•83.11' O RUBY M. ALMOND
U2100.04' U0100.01 SE¦NC SE¦NC SE-NC SE¦NC 0' 200' 400' 640'
V•50.04' V•50.01 I 5TA 58+00 TO 121 +00
SEw0.060 SE¦O.045
DATE FIGURE NO.
A-4
srr, uorwuruizmnza?ws.?i

11

it
J

7
L

F

Q=
?. t? _ bpi 1
a
MRS. LOIS H. GIBSON
37 HOMER L. COTTON JR.
38 CARL F. WALLS
39 MR. OVEN B. BOONE
O JAMES THOMAS BOYSWORTH
41 MASNE B.S. ET AL DBA MFB INVES.
42 MRS. JAMES OLIVER CALLAWAY
O RACHEL H. LOWDER
0
O

Q/' END PROJECT U-2400
! 10/ C7 ? JI 0? POT STA 179+82.78
%
o m• 11 , -'- ? 1 ?,
l y? w A;
IV .
CURVE DATA
PI.128+62.94 PI.155+61.76 PI.174+69.30 MOSS SPRINGS
••38056'19" A-28-05'13" A130-181061' ROAD ?2 BADIN ROAD NC 740
Dc"5'00'00" Dc¦3-30'00" Dc¦4-OO'00" PI85+75.95 PI-10+31.77 P105+54.13
Lf"150' Ls"150' Ls,-150' A"50031'02' •"12.19'47' A"21.54'28'
6.3.45'00' 6.2.37'30- LWv0 D¦14'00'00" D"1'15'00" D"2'00'00"
Ts¦480.38' Ts-484.61' %1.4000'00" T•193.09' T¦495.101 T¦554.46'
Lc¦628.77' Lc-652.48' 6js"0' L•360.84' L-986.37' L¦1095.38'
R•1145.92' R-1637.02' Ts1- R0409.26' R-4583.66' R-2864.79'
U0100.02' U-100.01' Tse SE-NC SE-NC SE-NC
V050.02' V•50.01' Lc•657.54'
SE•0.056 SE¦O.048 R¦1432.39'
U•100.01'
V-50.01'
SE•0.052

/I Q
C
J ?
8

I ?? c
{?I
1{ it
X11{? ? cnl??, Il
\1 t
PROPOSED ROADWAY
00 ? ?
Q C7? NORTH CAROLINA
n DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
? RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA
r GRAPHIC SCALE
I PRELIMINARY 1 ALBEMARLE N.E.CONNECTOR
8JECT TO CHANGE i °' 200' 400' ?'
S0 STA 121+00 TO 179+82.78
I I
DATE I FIGURE NO. A-5
SY34 ZFB2; f0640121118260M. 11Pgt
\\\ CD
x\\
0,

11

n

1

11

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

.... .... .... ....
.... ....
.... ....
.... ....
.... ....
.... ....
....
....
::::

....

....

....

....

....

....

....

....

..:

...

::.

...

VPI:3. ;00:: ' ::
VP
1
3+49•

VP.I

51+00.

ELEY
2 .: : V. •386. - .:593.
.
180 .
VC 9001: VC ': YC:

....

....

....

....

....

....

.... ... ....
...
....

...
....

....
.

....

...

...

...

...

.

TO

:EL EV. 495,
::
93:
M i .

::. :
::::
. .. .. :: . : -1 6t
...:
... 550
550 ...

O ELEY: 94:28 :
i . .. YPF S
:
ELEV w 00:
:6b
200 VC .
1000,
VC:
.. • .
s. :: :::.
.
....
....
....
....
... 530
530 .... .... ... .. .... .
:. .. to ' :: •' :::: ..? '- : ?:
.
R :: ::? :.:.
. ESIV W
BG :G 0:
.. .... .. .... ::
i
.: :.
Wit ? :::.: ? - ?%? - - • • :_ .
. ... . .. ... ...
.... .
. .. . .... ....
::: .. ..
4S0
490

`I.
: . .
BEGF :RR4J CT: U 2400
:: .. Oro
4/D

NORTH CAROLINA
WRTI S
CA LE
GRAPHIC
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
01 20, 401 60' RALEIGH. NORTH CAROLINA
r ---------- ?
p?IZpry
PRELIMINARY ; GRAPHIC ScA E ALBEMARLE N. E . CONNECTOR
I SUBJECT TO CHANGE Of 200, 4001 600'
L ---------- ! PROFILE
STA 0+00 T060+00
DATE FILAIRE NO. A-6

'i

0
F",

7

0

I

E

F

0

11

0

....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
....

....
....
.... ....
....
.... ....
....
.... ....
....
.... ....
....
.... ....
....
.... ....
....
.... ....
....
.... ....
....
.... ....
....
.... ....
....
.... ....
....
.... ....
....
.... ....
....
.... ....
....
.... ....
....
.... ....
....
.... ....
....
.... ....
....
.... ....
....
.... ....
....
.... ....
....
.... ....
....
.... ....
....
.... ....
....
.... ....
....
.... ....
....
.... ....
....
.... ....
.:..
.... ....
....
....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....

....
....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
....
.... ....
....
....
....
....
....
79+ .. . .. . .... .... .

.
..
..

E .

: 564

93

:

:
.... .... . .. .. .. ...
48+90:. ... .... :.
'

97
:. :. P VOPOSED MADE. J12460. 00
1 yt .. E .- 559.7 1
.... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .::: :

- .
00! VC
5
90
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
...
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
5R7

::
...
....
.... .
....
510 510

550 550
.. . . .. .... .
. EicIS JW 4m

....
....
....
.... : : ..
.
..:

....

....

.:: :::
530 .... .... .... .... :1, :: .... 530

. .
?
p?o
.

510 .

....

....

....

....

..

..

....

....

.... ...

.... ....

.... ....

.... ...

.... ....

.... .
...
....
. .
....
.

10

NORTH CAROLINA
AL
GRAPHIC S
C
E
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Of 20, 40' 60' RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA
r ----------- ,

;
PRELIMINARY H
A
c APHIC 9c
LE ALBEMARLE N . E . CONNECTOR

SUwBJEcT ECT TO TO CHNM ANGE ?
?
I of
i ----------- 200, 60oi
PROFILE
STA 60+00 TO 120+00
DATE FIGURE N0. A-7
SY34 2FB2;10640121116260YO5.IiP;1

?I
0

F

1

n
J

1

1

F

0
1

.... .... .... .... ....
....
....
....
....
..

E P. R

ND: .. JEC.
:T
U=240
:

..

...

....

...

.... ::.

.

....

...

....

. .
:.
....

..

....

...
:::

...

..

...
....

..
....

...

...

..

.:

....

...
....
....

...
....
....

...
....
....

..
....

..

.

. P )T: ST :1:
79

62:.78

::

.

.
sro ... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .
•
VPI 1 .1 3490,00
EUV: 96.42:
:.
: .

590
....
....
....
....
....
....
....
.... :.

....

... 400

.... VC .:

....

...

...

...
...
... : VPI: 1 50r50
.... .... ,:YC::
.

70
....
....
....
....

....
....
....

....

....

.
..

...

...

:::

...

:.i.

.

.,.. `.

..

...

...
:::

.... .

.:::
::

70
: :0:30:

550
:
r^: - :?::
.. ...
550

SB 19 .. ..
:
530 530

510 ... :. ... .. 510

490 ::. .

:. ... 410
470 ..

?

AHIC I CAL NORTH CAROLINA
GRA ALE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
0' 20' 40' 60' RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA
r ----------i
PRELIMINARY GRAORNIC SCALE ALBEMARLE N-E.CONNECTOR
SUBJECT TO CHANGE 0' 200, 400' 600'
-------- ! PROFILE
!
--
STA 120+00 TO 179+82.78
DATE FIGURE ND. A-8 vv;l
7-AUG-91 99:09,44 WALER
1

t

1
1

I

[l

r

APPENDIX B
Wetland Assessment Data Forms, On-Site Review Locations and Photo Log

1

1
r__l
7

F1
1

e
11

1

7
11
1

r
r
A
t
t
r
fl

1
1
1

Wetland On-Site
Determination and Photo Log
Legend
Albemarle City Limits
Proposed Connector
® Photo Log Location & Number
0 Project Limits
Albemarle Northeast Connector
From US 52 To NC 740
Stanly County, North Carolina
Figure B-1
t
1
1
r
t
1
9
l
LS
1

r
Fl
1
I
1

1
1
1
1?7

11
1
r

la
Station 16 + 15
Centerview Church Road
Crossing at Little Long Creek
lb
Station 16 + 15
Centerview Church Road
Crossing at Little Long Creek
Photo Log of Wetlands and Drainageways Figure B-2
Albemarle Northeast Connector
From US 52 To NC 740
t
Stanly County, North Carolina j`f'r OF TPA+"?!

I
1
1

E

1
a
1
1
1
11
1
1
1
r
1

1
J
jCA-t-?'Cpn i tv -r 7. cc)

DATA FORM
ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHODt
Field Investigator(s): _D * Date: 354 1-7 1,q 6
Project/Site: 't't'?t" l?• E eon vtv. '`v° County: S4-6vtil?4 Go
We==E We==E Applicant/Owner Plant Community #/Name: W-'/ 'ZiAlle_ ,4- e, Pee
Note: If a more detailed site description is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook.
---------------------------------------------------
Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? c??ac(nw?evC?" .
Yes No _ CX (If no, explain on back)
Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been signfficantly disturbed?
Yes _ CX No (If yes, explain on back)
---------------------------------------------------
VEGETATION
Indicator Indicator
Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum
1, Ulywy-, acwecica_Ina -r- 11.
2. Vit, AL AQ G a r yl c?-1e? is 12.
3. Smalix Irtiart? 1?, r_ 13.
4. 6''3 i _tCk 14.
5. 42he s r- 1qNC-y-'k -f 15.
6. A-IALNG gr?rt?l0.-?c-_ ^ 16.
7. r'lLre? rt t7sJ ?nrt? t?A %Y tnr. 17.
10. 20.
Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC 50' 4v r7Q % tee loco"- CV1
Is the hydro Qhytic vegetation criterion met? Yes_ No pl?
Rationale: r_ -1=E? ri,n_ vg=>C90 c? '4 en wt oR-
rw i
SOILS
Series/phase: Subgroup:2 St t+ lDa V Vl -?rta evL'? ?k -lamed
Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes No _ Undetermined
Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No _ Hisbc epipedon present? Yes No
Is the soil: Mottled? Yes No Gleyed? Yes No X
c Matrix Color: Mo Is Colors:
Other hydric soil indicators: t.J
Is the hydric soil criterion met?
i Yes No avid Lv_ swv.l,-s
i
;
'
_ Lo4u_L?--- -f to Plaj.4.,-
Aat
?na?s: ; v??e w,? rt x
r
2,r
EE: r
wkr?f}lr - moist V1.
Is the ground surface inundated? Yes No X Surface water depth: Sh r r-ka KyLed z b -10 inckeS-
Is the soil saturated? Yes X No
Depth to free-standing water in400d0p abl-011111116: [12Q 2+s61d aA'tj 9.19r? Its lP t r 5 dam .
List her fiell eviden of surface inundation or soil saturation -J \
vl, OY? d i tyt?lni ?1 100 ?ltQ_" (OL?p aulMftc wta??? 1
Is the wetland hydrolody criterion met? Yes No
Rationale: ylsyal ol?ervi:av?s soil ?a?yca?,'crn , ,,srcl?'v?.n,nk dQ,odsrs
e3v\d 1~ i? MP- wnanr?? ?
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE
Is the plant community a wetland? Yes No
Rationale for•iurisdictional decision: hv?lul-4,`c_ vee;, ?c_tn C.Y 4eetc V-1 .
- ?' ? v P d S l G.
1 This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant ommunity
Assessment Procedure.
2 Classification according to 'Soil Taxonomy."
$-2 T'_U?t?-e?:' °ottt'C?? Sba?nl?( La??-} ?iJ 5
Sot 1 CbV?Ser>Ao?q? Sory,e
? ilblt?? ?4'zb ??k ,
_J • 1 . .? _ _ _.t- 4n _J o.n i•,,.tn _
1
It

1
r
c
1
1
1
I
1

1
1
0
0
Station 35 + 75
Between Centerview Church Road
and Winston Salem Southbound
Railway Tracks
L'
11
1
1
r

Photo Log of Wetlands and Drainageways Figure B-2
444 a ??, ???
Albemarle Northeast Connector
From US 52 To NC 740
Stanly County, North Carolina J*fl of ?v4?e
1
J

It

9
1
1
11

5-t-Q;f,o?1 --35" -r 75
?rtrl? a1' llyivyivVt. -5z'd1f tM. '?5 Rai Lvva-y
DATA FORM
ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHODI
Field Investigator(s): Date:
Project/Site: State:° County: SA-!? V\. L
Applicant/Owner: Plant Community #/Name: # Z,. Rai I D ico" ?yycx d oL,
Note: If a more detailed site description Is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook.
---------------------------------------------------
Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? U.5 41A 1' V t aA,- j
yes No __X_ (11 no, explain on back) ??°°ri'G r&4Ljv.?
Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed?Q, i o 4o 1S
-f o?'? t? ic?? ?t ?''i
Yes ?_ No (If yes, explain on back) o f vv,+?a vice %/r-8e'?ro-1-I O ? i cL? ?} U --
-----------------------------------------------t^
VEGETATION
Indicator Indicator
Dominant Plant S ecies Status Stratum Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum
1. t VV? ?C? 11.
2. N ? A426 S4re- 12.
3, ?? 1 nA ytL e fk<, <Vre, 13.
4• 14.
5. 15.
6. 16.
. 17.
8. 18.
9. 19.
10. 20.
Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC ?o o`2a
Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion res?ret? Yes No
Rationale: Mcrf +00- ? °Jo 4 c) X xi te-Z-F pIrL,ti? -pnc t is . are-
00L, rl,%&4 _o__lC
SOILS
Sedestphase: - IGD LAGAICY> Subgroup:2 _ cc`( c-V" oe r`f st 1+ Im m
Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes No X Undetermined
Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No ( Histic epipedon present? Yes No
Is the soil: Mottled? , Yes No _ X Gleyed? Yes No k
Matrix Color. O ?- ?I:& Mottle Colors'
• noto .
Other hydric coil indicators: sa?'4-? ?a CCYXA t+iov-%
Is the hydric soil criterion met? , Yes No
Rationale: i?u d u.G ?S ck k ¢? at gi??d 4o bL 12reSeAft v.'1144A K4d= -
HYDROLOGY
Is the ground surface inundated? Yes No Surface water depth: 3 t MR A01! ?1 t ?? S ??
b the soil saturated? Yes f No #et -d ;;+ d iiT-VA
Depth to free-standing water in pit/soil probe hole:
List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation.
Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes._I(_ No ,
Rationale: 012?iwea 5a'4Ut b-4.erk ZEk ?s alovvA edres aC=
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE
Is the plant community a wetland? Yes No 74- Rationale for'jurisdictionai deci$ion: eLv%
t This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community
Assessment Procedure.
2 Classification according to "Soil Taxonomy."
B-2 U t?l "t'o?? S kl+l?.1?%??? tlab??zt ??.o,?) 1,i"iL cbLLt ?? Is s? rv .
1
i
1
t
i
1
11
1

1

11
O
Station 68 + 50
Intersection of Talbert Road
and Rosebud Lane
1
1
1
1
1
1

1
1

Photo Log of Wetlands and Drainageways Figure B-2
Albemarle Northeast Connector
From US 52 To NC 740
Stanly County, North Carolina j`y. O It%'?•?"

A
r

T?-1 bcr-r gcl ? ?? Lv1 .
DATA FORM
ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHODI
Field Investigator s • AIV ES Date: 1 I d
Project/Ske: State:- County:
ApplicantlOwner Plant Community #/Name: vie- M
.
Note. If a more detailed she description Is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook. Cy.WccLed
----------------------------------------------
Do norma *,No conditions exist at the plant community?
Yes ? No (If no, explain on back)
Has the vegetation,oils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed?
Yes No ? (If yes, explain on back)
Dominant Plant S ecis$ -
1, _
2. Sa (??IlLyn"glor
3
???M ILDt'2?! Oic?! i reVts
VEGETATION
Indicator
Status Stratum Dominant Plant Species
-1 21e le. i r-02S s?e.
7. LTUoc S

!!ahlro
Indicator
Status Stratum
1??zV ?Fo?b

Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC 70 6)
Is the hydroph is vegetation criterion m pt? Yes _A- No
Rationale: lorEW Q41;10, 000 C"Ard
o
SOILS
Series/phase: 1 ?t Subgroup:2 St 14- ICMKIL,
Is the soil on the hydric soils I t? Yes No ? Undetermined
Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No 7Histic spipedon present? Yes No
Is the soil: Mon ? , Yes ? No Gleyed? Yes No
vet Matrix Color: illottle Colors• 5 b
ynieq !e Other hydric Soil Indicators: d
Is the hydric it criterion met? , Yes No V
Rationale: V irk(- /n A-0 , Gtr w?c1 -4o tic Taresc vr*
HYDROLOGY
Is the ground surface inundated? Yes vlll? No Surface water depth: - (O 3(o t-S
Is the soil saturated? Yes _ /V No PA- ed s_o-? ypov"a • tA? J-5 tc'4-k
Depth to free-standing water in pk/soil probe hole:
List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation.
-f2MWJ r 0 _ I0 -40 30 1 v-r " C
Is the well
Rationale:
Yes ? No
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE
Is the plant community a wetland? Yes ? No
Ra, n& fortrim I?Ional decision: T4EZa Dk?c t b0" 0-Y
t
1
11
t This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community
Assessment Procedure.
2 Classification according to "Soil Taxonomy.'
B-2 -tit TiD I[ tea c r R At*OA

1
A
1
1

t
r
11
4a
Station 88 + 00
North of Rebel Road
Approximate Location of Roadway
Crossing
4b
Station 88 + 00
North of Rebel Road
Typical Drainage Vegetation
Photo Log of Wetlands and Drainageways Figure B-2
Albemarle Northeast Connector
From US 52 To NC 740
Stanly County, North Carolina l`a'y, O ,a,.••
1
1
1

1
1

?a t
DATA FORM
ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHODI
Field Investigator s • N- r,
Date: I d
Project/SRs: State: _ County:
Applicant/Owner: Plant Community #/Name: a?. f/C(d?
Note: If a more detailed site description Is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook.
---------------------------------------------------
Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? VrP%* V%a -P to %6 ko k-I-k i to
Yes ? No (ff no, explain on back) CLLr? =fit e
Has the vegetation, soils. and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? tom- --14VXS rpo-k-- w, ??z47'ov) ,
Yes No ? (11 yes, explain on back) of Lzia,G sk?i "
------------------------------ RP - _ °` Yc?-Eo.?-ycan .
VEGETATION ff6? ^('?
Indicator Indicator
Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum
1. a 11.
2. alas 12.
3. ??.'frtG 13.
4. V12+2 r2 PCv? Ir 14.
5.
r '41 161-1
/CG 15.
6. 18.
7, 'eeW%
v',r r 17.
9. - 19.
10. 20.
Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/lr FAC
Is the hydroph b tatbn criterf at? Ye V No
Rationale: Pk?
att. / ot) -
SOILS Series/phase: 1 tY Subgroup:2
Is the soil on the hydric soils list Yes No Undetermined
Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No ? Histic epipedon present? Yes No ?
Is the soil: Mottled? Yes ? No -? Qleyed? Yes No ?-
Matrix Color: Mottle Colors: 5
Other hydric !Loll Indicators: r-k)04 V1 r k ? 1 c,?-•
Is the hydric it c terjon met?. Yes No hcyld i ??c,,, c ac ?•}Y
Ratio.n5le. ,-I-4 C, t S GY ?v-???_U,? I
1-
t L) HYDROLOGY
Is the ground surface inundated? Yes ? No Surface water depth: Z d t ?01`? ?' di
Is the soil saturated? Yes ?' No - prow v d !mull depress"
Depth to frbe-standing water in pit/soll probe hole: --
List they fie d evidence of su, faeinundatio or soil s uration. Gt-?ti1
Is the wetland by ro y criterion met? Yes No
Rationale: So k a l
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND R TIONALE
Is the plant community a wetland? Yes ? No
Rationale forlurisdictionat decision: EA. kk?c„ct?,xs?M?N AV?A s}avsd? vaa*rr"
?b?tryt?t. o?\ !.tit,
1 This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community
Assessment Procedure.
2 Classification according to "Soil Taxonomy."
B-2ND
Tl ,?• ??f-av?.l ca
• 1&1i 6 4abii-d- :5j V-4
" riev?-t' 1a
I
r
1

P
r

1
5a
Station 115 + 00
At the Intersection of Rebel
Road and Moss Springs Road
5b
Station 115 + 00
At the Intersection of Rebel
Road and Moss Springs Road
Photo Log of Wetlands and Drainageways Figure B-2
Albemarle Northeast Connector
From US 52 To NC 740
Stanly County, North Carolina

1

DATA FORM
ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHODi
Flia
PG(.
Field investigators • Date: 511-7 b
ProJscVShs: State: County:
Applk;ant/?)wnsr: Plant Community #/Name- 41:
Nofe: If a more detailed she description Is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook.
----------------------------------------
Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Z. - f Cam - w ta-e_ clv'a",xac?_
Yes _X_ No (if no, explain oq back) tom- eS(• t4o NoY71
Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydro4gg' been significantly disturbed? Vj t v,\ S wQLG ?om
Yes No _X_ (if yes, explain on 6;0 0
CL+C
- - - - - t,- - - r r1 - - - ? de,errss ?0??5
Dominant Plant Species
1 V21 rl? I[;;
2.
LAM 05, - /I t' , ra M&
3. _f??9P?` _I1?_ dh 1
4.
5.
8.
7.
8.
9.
10.
VEGETATION
Indicator Indicator
Stgt" Stfiftm Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum
1 12.
??fad 13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC
Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes No
Rationale:
1

SOILS
Series/phase: Subgroup:2 ;A R- too, iM
Is the soil on the hydros ils list? Yes No ? Undetermined
Is the Boll a Histosol? Yes No ? Histic epipedon present? Yes No Is the soil: Mottled? Yes _ /? No Oleyed? Yes No '-
Matrix Color: Mo le Color. 2. 5
Other hydric toil indicators: ?^a 16 j r a
is the hydric soil criterion at? Yes ? o ? 1-nldtv?q,, ?c.Pac %-4
Rationale: r?1cd oya ?oV-'% o ru•-rl cum ?70.yam vvn ?T
h4dri U
c. SSl`X wk e cl -k?) HYDROLOGY Tn svnal l
Is the ground surface Inundated? Yes No Surface water depthAa"'_'i0V*.: 2 1 vac s'
Is the soil saturated? Yes ? No
Depth to free-standing water In pit/soil probe hole:
List her Ile d done of Wface Inundation or soil satyration.
?ro?? ? ' obscrvr[? ?-
le the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes No
Rationale:
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE
Is the plant community a wetland? Yes `._? No
Rationale forlurisdictlonal decision- Sw?vK?iJ?n L,-- n A i,- f, -A+ .-lr,
1 This data form can be used for the Hydro Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community
Assessment Procedure.
2 Classification according to "Soli Taxonomy:
B-2 I-7LAW-rloW • ? ??rr?. ??n ?? C.o ui1
• W4 (4e- N&L, 4

1

1
I

1

t
1

1

1
t
i
11
A
6
Station 121 + 00
Moss Springs Road
Photo Log of Wetlands and Drainageways Figure B-2
Albemarle Northeast Connector
From US 52 To NC 740
*f*r
Stanly County, North Carolina

i
r
1

1

© V-) l 2 -t--oo
DATA FORM l' bo d rby??1 ?'c,,?y? r ?, ?u?yw,
ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHODI
Field Investigators • /?c'f ?S Date: ( O
Project/Ske: State: =_ County:
Applicant/Owner: WAXT Plant Community #/Name:
Note. If a more detailed she description is necessary, use the back of data form or -a field notebook.
---------------------------------------------
a-L normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? V'1pU.44- t.k? tS u..- C,C..tf2
Yes No _X_ (If no, explain on back) =ie?c1. CR?&"L4 41 vC94+U01A
Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed?
?'?
Yss -7%- No - - - (N yes, explain on back) wc1 av?Q- a n o?. c ?b c[,act-? .
-- ------------------------------------
Dominant Plant Species

1
1. O bL- • t'AC?v?1 'C-o? if.
2. ," C DRS. - 12.
3. Leo vi LakrtLA I VAS sll r0 .13.
Se?ne r y i evLS 14.
S. 15.
6. 16.
7. 17.
6. 16.
9. 19.
10. 20.
Percent of dominant species that are OBL. FACW, an r FAC ?C9 ?0
Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion mqL? Yes_ V No
v SOILS
Series/phase: Subgroup-2 si 1+ IyG?V?? re4?ul'?l?( -(`locxxeq
Is the soil on the hydro soils list? Yes No X Undetermined l
Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No X Histie spipedon present? Yes No
Is the soil: Mottled? Yes No X_ Qleyed? Yes -_&_ No - obs? ?x i v 4 CaU 4 eoi-' i vL .
*Matrbc Color: Y F Mottle Colors: 4- Other hydric coil Indicators: _:5 i is, ..?hscrut
Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes . A . No r t
HYDROLOGY
Is the ground surface Inundated? Yes No __..X ' Surface water depth:
Is the soil saturated? Yes ?_ No
Depth to free-standing water In ph/soil probe hoie: - i?o bseruej 4a be So?
List other field evidence of surface lnyndation or soil saturation. J
tj-nthiy%- a- Lo -ic, 20 ?i? a"ct skal[CLO W
Is the wetland hydrology crh rion met? Yes - No
RatlOrtale: t I So?•?urat-icw II?Gi.-F Ir' tnn= mr- -?&NAt
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE
Is the plant community a wetland? Yes No
Rationale for jurisdictional decision: ro rJi??,k r y'«? a?'cnn:? k d ? S011 S, k,9 t+V\ Scc?-v?a(tiuj
most C vro? o yl
t This dais form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community
Assessment Procedure.
2 Classification according to *Soil Taxonomy.'
B-2t?T?oN? So ck rr?
edcCU tAkt Vt+- vVtg 1/'2(. 1 IS ?Ur\
VEGETATION
Indicator Indicator
Status Stratum Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum

11
1

etr1L__+110 V-1
DATA FORM h ? SPn?' fi.- nca.rYYlt??cv?o I i 0. s
U
ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHODI
Field Investigator a • ?c Date: I b
Project/Sks: State: T_ County:
Applicant/Owner: Plant Community #/Name: ?
Note: K a more detailed site description Is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook.
---------------------------------------------------
Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community?
Yes No (11 no, explain on back)
Has the vegetation. soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed?
Yes No (If yes, explain on back)
---------------------- VEGETATION ---------------------
Indicator Indicator
Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum
?. 1. s?1 11.
2. 12.
3.
13.
4. 14.
5. 15.
6. 16.
7. 17.
8. 18.
9. 19.
10. 20.
Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC
Is the hydrophylk: vegetation criterion met? Yes No
Rationale:
SOILS
Sodas/phase: Da k fro Subgroup:2 k ?«
Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes No X Undetermined
Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No THistk: epipedon present? Yes No X
Is the soil: Mottled? Yes No X Gleyed? Yes _ CX No f ;
*Matrfx Color: IQ ?? ?• 12 Mottle Colors: - ?vid;?ccfor•s
=? J( Other hydrle $oll Indicators:
Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes No
Rationale:
l
HYDROLOGY
Is the ground surface inundated? Yes No Surface water depth: OVIA
Is the soil saturated? Yea No
Depth to Ir"-standing water In pR/soll probe hole:
List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation.
Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes _.X No
Rationale'
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE
Is the plant community a wetland? Yes No
Rationale for,jurisdictional decision:
t This data form can be used for the Hydrk: Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community
Assessment Procedure.
2 Classification according to *Soil Taxonomy."
B-2 ?'l?Ns?Tl
oT? • ? ?urr?:
(I v?-E-k'??? i is m
!50 Rtc reat o,n
<.
Y

1

1

APPENDIX C
Scoping Letter and Responses and Other Correspondence

t

e

t

1
1

il;

1

1

t
11
a Z
??RRsC?
JAMES G. MARTIN
GOVERNOR
THOMAS J. HARRELSON
SECRETARY
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P.O. BOX 25201
RALEIGH 27611-5201
April 18, 1990
_,jVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GEORGE E. WELLS, P.E.
STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR
(ins,title)
ins,agency?
ins,address?
cin„ ins,address2 ,C ins,city_STATE _ZIP1
Dear (ins,salutation):
1
1
1
Subject: Federal Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Albemarle Northeast
Connector, From US 52 to NC 740, Stanly County, TIP No. U-2400
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), Division of
Highways, has retained the firm of CRS Sirrene, Inc., Raleigh, North Carolina,
to conduct environmental and design studies and prepare a Federal Environmental
Assessment for the proposed northeast connector from US 52 at Centerview Church
Road to NC 740 in the City of Albemarle. As an integral part of this study, we
are soliciting input from agencies and individuals concerning the potential
impact of the proposed project on any structure or feature within the project
limits and the impacts this project may have upon social, economic, cultural,
physical or biological conditions in the area.
The proposed improvement is included in the 1990-1996 Transportation
Improvement Program (TIP). State TIP Project U-2400 provides for a new two-lane
facility on four-lane right-of-way partially on new location. The length of the
project is approximately 3.2 miles. Right-of-way acquisition is scheduled to
begin in Fiscal Year 1996 with construction scheduled in the post year.

t

n
The scope of the proposed project consists generally of constructing a
two-lane rural section roadway within right-of-way for an ultimate multi-lane
facility. The project begins at US 52 and Centerview Church Road and proceeds
along Centerview Church Road where it departs from the existing roadway and
follows new location to a point where the roadway ties back into existing
Talbert and Rebel Roads or Laton Road and eventually ties into NC 740 where the
project ends.
An Eaual Oooortunity/Affirmative Action Fmnlover

1

Page 2
April 18, 1990
Two major corridors have been defined from which roadway alternatives will
be developed for the project. Corridor 1 consists of portions of existing
Centerview Church Road, Talbert Road and Rebel Road and some new location.
Corridor 2 follows Centerview Church Road, new location and Laton Road. A map
is attached which shows the study area for both corridors.
It is anticipated that additional right-of-way and construction easements
will be required throughout the entire project. The anticipated right-of-way is
approximately 80 to 100 feet to accommodate an ultimate multi-lane curb and
gutter section. No access control is expected for the proposed project. There
are no traffic signals now within the limits of the two corridors. Intersections
along the project are stop sign controlled and will remain so unless future
traffic warrants installation of a signal.
It is anticipated that the project will have minimal effects on the natural
and human environment. The adjacent areas are a mixture of farmland, woodlands,
rural residential and small subdivision development. No neighborhoods will be
split or disrupted by the project. Alternatives associated with Corridor 1 may
affect a portion of the old Stanly County fairgrounds. Minimal relocations are
anticipated.
Three intermittent drainage crossings are expected with the proposed pro-
ject. These drainage areas are small tributaries associated with Clover Fork
Creek and Mountain Creek and impacts are anticipated to be minimal.
Field investigation and evaluations will be conducted to identify aquatic
and biotic communities in the project area and to assess the impact of the
proposed project on these communities. No federally-listed endangered species
of plants or animals are known at this time to be in the study area. The corri-
dor will be reviewed in the field for the presence of federally- or state-listed
threatened or endangered species.
Archaeological and historic resource studies will be conducted to determine
the presence of all significant or potentially significant cultural resources as
defined by the criteria for the National Register of Historic Places. An initial
field investigation yielded no evidence of documented archaeological or historic
architectural properties within one mile of the project area. The cultural
resource surveys will be conducted in compliance with state and federal regu-
lations.
A survey will be conducted of the project area to identify abandoned service
stations and other major potential sources of hazardous waste contamination. The
initial field investigation resulted in no evidence of such sites within the
project limits.
Please note that there will be no
this project. This letter, therefore,
comments related to this project.
formal interagency scoping meeting for
constitutes solicitation for scoping
11

Page 3
April 18, 1990
In order that we may fully evaluate the impacts of the proposed project, it
is requested that you respond in writing concerning any beneficial or adverse
impacts of the proposed project relating to the interest of your agency. For
our consultants to stay on schedule and for your input to be included in their
draft report, please respond in writing within 30 days.
If you have any questions concerning this project, please contact Mr. Ron
Elmore, Head of Consultant Coordination Unit, NCDOT, at [phone] or
Dr. Richard Kramer, Louis Berger & Associates, the department's General Manage-
ment Consultant, at [phone].
Sincerely,
L. J. Ward, P. E.
Manager, Planning and Research Branch
RE/plr
I Attachment

I

J

1

1
1

I
d `
7t,
o.,

•?Y QwM vd° ?/
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P.O. BOX 25201
RALEIGH 27611-5201
JAMES
TIN
. MA 1990 DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
A
ril 18
E
R p
,
THOMAS J. HARRELSON GEORGE E. WELLS, P.E.
SECRETARY STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR
ins,title+' '+first_name mi+' '+last_name)
ins-address)
cin,, ins,address2 ,C) cin „ ins,address3 C ins,city_state_zipi
Dear (ins,salutationl:
SUBJECT: Albemarle, Northeast Connector from US 52 to NC 740, Stanly County,
U-2400
This is to inform you that the Planning and Research Branch has begun
studying the proposed improvements for the Northeast Connector from US 52 to
NC 740 in Albemarle. The project is included in the 1990-1996 North Carolina
Transportation Improvement Program and is scheduled for right of way in fiscal
year 1996.
The scope of the proposed project consists generally of constructing a
two-lane rural section roadway within right-of-way for an ultimate multi-lane
facility. The project begins at US 52 and Centerview Church Road and proceeds
along Centerview Church Road where it departs from the existing roadway and
follows new location to a point where the roadway ties back into existing Talbert
and Rebel Roads or Laton Road and eventually ties into NC 740 where the project
ends (see attached map).
Federal, state and local agencies are being contacted for their comments
regarding this project. If you have any questions or comments concerning the
project, please contact Mr. Ron Elmore, Project Planning Engineer, of this Branch
at [phone].
Sincerely,
F - I
LJW/Plr
Attachment

L. J. Ward, P. E.
Manager of Planning and Research
An Equal Opportunity /Affirmative Action Employer

1

1

1
1

District Engineer
Army Corps of Engineers
Charleston District
P. 0. Box 919
Charleston, South Carolina 29402
Field Supervisor
Fish & Wildlife Service
Endangered Species Field Station
100 Otis Street, Room 224
1sheville, North Carolina 23801
#Mr. Bobbye J. Jones, State Conservationist
Soil Conservation Service
Federal Bldg.-Room 535
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601
a
IPr. Seddon Goode, Jr.
wo First Union Center
Suite 1980
Charlotte, North Carolina 28282
the Honorable Carlton B. Holt
Mayor of Albemarle
P. 0. Box 190
lbemarle, North Carolina 28002-0190
1
11

1

District Engineer
Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District
P. 0. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402
Field Supervisor
Fish & Wildlife Service
Fish & Wildlife Enhancement
P. 0. Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
Executive Director
Centralina Council of Governments
P. 0. Box 35008
Charlotte, North Carolina 28235
Mr. James E. Nance
P. 0. Box 669
Albemarle, North Carolina 28001
Mr. Ed Underwood
Chairman
Stanly County Commissioner
P. 0. Box 1173
Albemarle, North Carolina 28001
r
I

JAMES G. MARTIN
GOVERNOR
THOMAS J. HARRELSON
SECRETARY
?Yd•,a A/11Fo
• "r•o o*
? gw?,iae•
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P.O. BOX 25201
RALEIGH 27611-5201
April 18, 1990
MEMORANDUM TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:

r
t

1

is00l
L. J. Ward, P. E.
Manager, Planning and Research Branch
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GEORGE E. WELLS, P.E.
STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR
Federal Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Albemarle
Northeast Connector, From US 52 to NC 740, Stanly County,
TIP No. U-2400
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), Division of
Highways, has retained the firm of CRS Sirrene, Inc., Raleigh, North Carolina,
to conduct environmental and design studies and prepare a Federal Environmental
Assessment for the proposed northeast connector from US 52 at Centerview Church
Road to NC 740 in the City of Albemarle. As an integral part of this study, we
are soliciting input from agencies and individuals concerning the potential
impact of the proposed project on any structure or feature within the project
limits and the impacts this project may have upon social, economic, cultural,
physical or biological conditions in the area.
The proposed improvement is included in the 1990-1996 Transportation
Improvement Program (TIP). State TIP Project U-2400 provides for a new two-lane
facility on four-lane right-of-way partially on new location. The length of the
project is approximately 3.2 miles. Right-of-way acquisition is scheduled to
begin in Fiscal Year 1996 with construction scheduled in the post year.
The scope of the proposed project consists generally of constructing a
two-lane rural section roadway within right-of-way for an ultimate multi-lane
facility. The project begins at US 52 and Centerview Church Road and proceeds
along Centerview Church Road where it departs from the existing roadway and
follows new location to a point where the roadway ties back into existing
Talbert and Rebel Roads or Laton Road and eventually ties into NC 740 where the
project ends.
An Equal Opportunity /Affirmative Action Employer
Page 2
April 18, 1990
Two major corridors have been defined from which roadway alternatives will
be developed for the project. Corridor 1 consists of portions of existing
Centerview Church Road, Talbert Road and Rebel Road and some new location.
Corridor 2 follows Centerview Church Road, new location and Laton Road. A map
is attached which shows the study area for both corridors.
It is anticipated that additional right-of-way and construction easements
will be required throughout the entire project. The anticipated right-of-way is
approximately 80 to 100 feet to accommodate an ultimate multi-lane curb and
gutter section. No access control is expected for the proposed project. There
are no traffic signals now within the limits of the two corridors.. Intersections
along the project are stop sign controlled and will remain so unless future
traffic warrants installation of a signal.
It is anticipated that the project will have minimal effects on the natural
and human environment. The adjacent areas area mixture of farmland, woodlands,
rural residential and small subdivision development. No neighborhoods will be
split or disrupted by the project. Alternatives associated with Corridor 1 may
affect a portion of the old Stanly County fairgrounds. Minimal relocations are
anticipated.
Three intermittent drainage crossings are expected with the proposed pro-
ject. These drainage areas are small tributaries associated with Clover Fork
Creek and Mountain Creek and impacts are anticipated to be minimal.
Field investigation and evaluations will be conducted to identify aquatic
and biotic communities in the project area and to assess the impact of the
proposed project on these communities. No federally-listed endangered species
of plants or animals are known at this time to be in the study area. The corri-
dor will be reviewed in the field for the presence of federally- or state-listed
threatened or endangered species.
Archaeological and historic resource studies will be conducted to determine
the presence of all significant or potentially significant cultural resources as
defined by the criteria for the National Register of Historic Places. An initial
field investigation yielded no evidence of documented archaeological or historic
architectural properties within one mile of the project area. The cultural
resource surveys will be conducted in compliance with state and federal regu-
lations.
A survey will be conducted of the project area to identify abandoned service
stations and other major potential sources of hazardous waste contamination. The
initial field investigation resulted in no evidence of such sites within the
project limits.
Please note that there will be no formal interagency scoping meeting for
this project. This letter, therefore, constitutes solicitation for scoping
comments related to this project.

Pa6e 3
April 18, 1990
In order that we may fully evaluate the impacts of the proposed project, it
is requested that you respond in writing concerning any beneficial or adverse
impacts of the proposed project relating to the interest of your agency. For
our consultants to stay on schedule and for your input to be included in their
draft report, please respond in writing within 30 days.
If you have any questions concerning this project, please contact Mr. Ron
Elmore, Head of Consultant Coordination Unit, NCDOT, at [phone] or
Dr. Richard Kramer, Louis Berger-& Associates, the department's General Manage-
ment Consultant, at [phone].
RE/plr
¦ Attachment

1

t

r

LIST OF STATE AGENCIES

Mrs. Chrys Baggett, Director
State Clearinghouse
Dept. of Administration
Dr. William S. Price
Division of Archives and History
Dept. of Cultural Resources
Mr. Howard Ellis
Division of Health Services
Dept. of Human Resources
Dr. Charles H. Weaver
Division of School Planning
Dept. of Public Instruction
Ms. Melba McGee
Environmental. Assessment Section
Dept. of Environment, Health, & Natural Resources
Mr. A. L. Hankins, Jr., P. E.
Hydrographics Unit

Mr. W. D. Johnson
Landscape Unit
Mr. W. L. Moore, III
Geotechnical Unit
Mr. Horace Jernigan
Location & Survey Unit
Mr. A. D. Allison, II
Right of Way Branch
Mr. J. M. Lynch, P. E.
Traffic Engineering Branch
Dr. M. R. Poole. P. E.
Statewide Planning
Peden Steel Building
Mr. Curtis Yates
Bicycle Coordinator
Mr. W. G. Plentl
Director of Aeronautics
Mr. J. D. Goins
Division Engineer, Div. 10

NORTH CAROLINA STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
:4206 04/20/90 DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION
116 WEST JONES STREET
RALEIGH NORTH CAROLINA 27611
I
%CKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RECEIPT
MAILED TO FROM
V.C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION MS. JEANETTE TOMCZAK
L.J. WARD CLEARINGHOUSE STAFF
PL ANN IN G C RES. BRANCH
HIGHWAY BLDG./INTER-OFFICE
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
SCOPING FOR COMMENTS FOR PROPOSED ALBEMARLE NORTHEAST CONNECTOR
FROM US 52 TO NC 740 IN STANLY COUNTY T.I. P. U-2400
I TYPE - SCOPING
THE V.C. STATE CLEARINGHOUSE HAS RECEIVED THE ABOVE PROJECT FOR
INTERGOVER44ENTAL REVIEW. THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN ASSIGNED STATE
IAPPL,ICATIO4 NUMBER 90E42200841o PLEASE USE THIS NUMBER WITH ALL
INQUIRIES OR CORRESPONDENCE WITH THIS OFFICE.
IREVIEW OF THIS PROJECT SHOULD BE COMPLETED ON OR BEFORE 05/20/90.
I SHOULD YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS PLEASE CALL 19191 733-0499.

f

1
11

City of Albemarle
North Carolina
Office Of April 23, 1990
City Manager
[phone]

Mr. L. J. Ward
Manager of Planning and Research
North Carolina Department of Transportation
P. 0. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Re: Proposed Albemarle Northeast Connector
Dear Mr. Ward:
At its meeting of April 16, 1990, the Albemarle City Council
reviewed the proposed alternative corridors for the above-
referenced project. At this meeting the Council voted to affirm
its support for Corridor One. This corridor conforms to the map
of the City's Thoroughfare Plan previously approved by the City
and the Department of Transportation. In our opinion this
corridor provides the maximum benefit with the least disruption
of existing residential areas.
I encourage you to seriously consider this information in your
planning deliberations. We would also like to be kept informed
as much as possible concerning the progress of your work. If I
can provide any information or assistance, please advise.
Sincerely,
Raymond I. Allen
City Manager
RIA:pwt
cc: Mayor and City Council
Peter M. Strub, CRS Sirrine, Inc.

Mailing Address
P. O. Box /90
Albemarle. N. C.
28002-0190

1

E

1
t

1

f

E

f=• United States
P(te) Department of
Agriculture

1
Mr. L. J. Ward, P. E.
Manager, Planning and Research
N. C. Dept. of Transportation
P. 0. Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611-5201
14405 Bland Road, Suite 205
Raleigh, NC 27609
Telephone: [phone]
May 1, 1990
Re: Federal Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Albemarle Northeast
Connector, From US 52 to NC 740, Stanley County, TIP No. U-2400
Dear Mr. Ward:
This is in response to your request for Important Farmland Information for
the above project. Our findings indicate that this project will not affect
any farmland as defined by the Farmland Protection Policy Act, since it
essentially involves land already in or committed to urban development.
Sincerely,
o ye Jo
State servationist
cc: Franklin T. Hodges, DC

I
vO The Sod Conservation Service
• is agency of the
Department of Agriculture
Soil
Conservation
Service
o d?SfAT(o
r
J
o
kkgK • A
a117J ? ? ? • ,.,ry
'll>Yo
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
116 West Edenton Street • Education Building Bob Etheridge
Raleigh, NC 27603-1712 Superintendent
May 7, 1990

MEMORANDUM
TO: L. J. Ward, P.E.
Manager of Planning and Research
NC Division of Highways
Highway Building
FROM: Charles H.
Assistant Superintendent of Auxiliary Services
NC Departmen of Public Instruction
217 W. Jones St., Ed. Annex I
RE: Federal Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Albemarle Northeast
Connector, From US 52 to NC 740, Stanly County, TIP No. U-2400
Please find attached communication from Bryce Cummings, Superintendent of
Albemarle City Schools, relative to subject project.
mrl
Attachment
1

tin vraa! r^'virlunihvnffirmcttit kr ardnn - --- Vrnvr

Albemarle (Mg ?rllnnls
1503 WEST MAIN STREET
P.O BOX 220
Albemarle, Nnrt4 Lurnlina 288D I
17041 982.1148
' BOARD OF EDUCATION -waswrmrarwsrnRT/AFf
R RONALD SWANNER CHAIRMAN BRYCE CUMMINGS, SUPERINTENDENT
ROBERT T CLARK WALTER L SMITH, ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT

LAURIE
NR
C
AN ADMINISTRATIVE AND PERSONNEL SERVICES
MAB R
W
MARK
Y WANOA T BOYD ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT
NAPIER CVRRICUIUM AND
INSTRUCTIONAL SERVICES
VIVIAN PATE E

IVIAN
RICK RUSSELL
DAVID OUTTON FINANCE OFFICER
' STEVE SURRAtt
'
May 2, 1990
Dr. Charles H. Weaver
Assistant State Superintendent
Auxiliary Services
NC Department of Public Instruction
Raleigh, NC 27603-1712
Subject: Federal Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Albemarle
Northeast Connector, From US 52 to NC 740, Stanly County, TIP
No. U-2400
Dear Charles:
Thank you for your letter of 25 April 1990, in reference to the above project being referred to
as the Albemarle Northeast Connector.
I reviewed the proposal and determined to the best of my knowledge that the proposed
Albemarle Northeast Connector lies entirely outside of the Albemarle City School District. I have no
reason to believe that the proposed project will have any negative impact on any structure or feature within
our jurisdiction. I do feel, however, that it will offer a very positive economic contribution to our area and will
benefit the future growth of the Albemarle and Stanly County area.
If I can be of further service to you or your agency, please advise.
With kindest personal regards and best wishes, I remain -
Sincerely ,
14e Cummings
Superintendent
BC:bt
cc: R. Ronald Swanner, Board Chairman

JAMES G. MARTIN
GOVERNOR
' THOMAS J. HARRELSON
SECRETARY
1
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P.O. BOX 25201
RALEIGH 27611-5201
May 7, 1990
DIVISION OF AVIATION
AVIATION PARKWAY
RALEIGH-DURHAM AIRPORT
[phone]
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mr. Ron Elmore, Planning and Research Branch
r FROM: Bruce Matthews, Manager of Aviation Development ,J
SUBJECT: U-2400, Albemarle Northeast Connector
We have reviewed the potential aeronautical impacts of the referenced
project currently under study by the Division of Highways. We are not
aware of any airports or other aviation facilities which would be
impacted by highway construction along the corridor for this project.
If we can provide any further assistance on this project, please do not
hesitate to let us know.
BEM
[J
u

An Equal Opportunity /Affirmative Action Employer
' TA7Z
Y ? q...+.rolState of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Land Resources
512 North Salisbury Street - Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
' James G. Martin, Governor Stephen G. Conrad
William V" Cobey, Jr., Secretary Director
MEM1_)RAN-L,UM
Date : May 14 , 19 0
To: Melba McGee
Fa^om: Randy Cottenr'
Ti:1'L Gary 7. h mpson
.'ubI_ct: tanly _oun'ty, i=ro1'!o_,-'? Alt,enial' Nort-past,.
connec E _ r , rrom L'S' 5 -2 F' Nc, . U-i4? )Cj
We have rev' ewed the -above
that 7 geodetic p'urvey 7na``74'er= w, I ) be
inl'?
_ Tne N .C. -,-r:deti=-Su1JV vey s}-i; ult be co-.t_.act.e??`at ?.i_).
n.c-x i7E'"% Raleigh, N.C. /1 i i '-1 tDr 1-
?.
(JnSt1^u_*???rl. T...=rnl1! na.1 des LiuLt1V11 l!f r?:lrjCt_..
mlir'Lllren' is ct tJi--at__r. o-f N.C. C%°_l al `^`_-)?`= -`lJ--
1i ?-1 T / 8 J s
_ J _
1"
Joe l'Fe_:_i-? 7 r)(_)!
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone]
An Faual Oooortunirv Affirmarive Artion Fmnlaver

[I
' Griffiths Forestry Center
2411 Garner Road
Clayton, North Carolina 27520
May 15, 1990
I MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee
' Environmental Assessment Unit
FROM: Don H. Robbins
Staff Forester
SUBJECT: EA of the Proposed Albemarle Northwest Connector from US 52 to NC
740 in Stanly County, North Carolina
PROJECT X90-0841
DUE DATE 6-1-90
To better determine the impact, if any, to forestry in the area of the
proposed project, the Environmeutal Assessment should contain the following
information concerning the proposed alternative routes for the possible
right-of-way purchases for the project:
1. The number of total woodland acres that would be taken out of timber
production as a result of new right-of-way purchases.
2. The acres breakdown of this woodland concerning present conditions
such as clear-cut areas, young growing timber, and fully stocked
stands of very productive timber within the new right-of-way
purchases for disturbed and undisturbed portions.
3. The site indexes of the forest soils that would be involved within
the proposed right-of-way, so as to be able to determine the
productivity of these forest soils in the area.
' 4. The number of woodland acres that would affect any watersheds in the
area, if the woodland was removed.

1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Melba McGee
PROJECT 4190-0841
Page 2
5. If woodland is involved, it is hoped that the timber could be
merchandised and sold to lessen the need for piling and burning of
debris during right-of-way construction.
Provisions should be indicated in the EA that the contractor will
make all efforts to salvage any merchantable timber to permit
construction, once the contractor takes charge of the right-of-way.
6. The provisions that the contractor will take during the construction
phase to prevent erosion, sedimentation and construction damage to
the remaining standing trees outside of the right-of-way boundary
and construction limits.
We would hope that a route could be chosen, that would have the least
impact to forest and related resources in that area.
DHR:la
cc: Fred White
File

1

Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee, Planning and Assessment
Dept. of Environment, Health & Natural
FROM: W. Don Baker, Program Manager
Division of Boating and Inland Fisherie
DATE: May 15, 1990
p Lur-M21 Leo D
SUBJECT: Federal Environmental Assessment for the Proposed
Albemarle Northeast Connector, from US 52 to NC
740, Stanly County. (90-0841)

u

t

These comments are provided in response to your request
of April 25, 1990, for information for input relating to
fish and wildlife concerns for the proposed subject project.
Wildlife Resources Commission review of the environmental
document would be greatly facilitated if it contained:
1. A description of fishery and wildlife resources,
including habitats, existing within, or impacted
by the project.
2. The quantity of wetlands, streams, lakes, ponds
and other fish or wildlife habitats to be graded,
filled or otherwise disturbed.
3. Stream relocations, crossings or other proposed
construction activity that may impact them.
4. Acreage of upland habitat impacted by cover type.
5. Mitigation measures proposed to avoid, eliminate,
reduce, or compensate for fish and wildlife
habitat losses.
Thank you for the opportunity for input during the
pre-planning stage for this project. We will be happy to
assist in any manner feasible during all phases of the
project.
WDB/lp

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources Reviewing Office:
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW - PROJECT COMMENTS Project Number: Due Dale,:-
After review of this project has been determined that the EHNR permit(s) indicated must be obtained in order for this project to
' comply with forth Carolina -aw.
Questions regarding tnese :ermits should be addressed to the Regional Office indicated on the reverse of the form.
All applications, informatior and guidelines relative to these-plans and permits are available from the same
Regional Office.
Normal Process
Time
PERI.!ITS SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REQUIREMENTS (statutory time
limit)
Permit to construct & operate -aslewater treatment Application 90 days before begin construction or award of 30 days
facilities, sewer system extens =ns, & sewer construction contracts On-site inspection. Post-application
systems not discharging into s:ve surface waters. technical conference usual (90 days;
NPDES - permit to discharge ir:; surface water and/or
permit to operate and corstruc: •.vaslewater facilities Application 180 days before begin activity. On-site inspection.
Pre-application conference usual. Additionally, obtain permit to 90.120 days
discharging into state surface :-ters. 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
N/A 7 days
(15 days)
Application copy must be served on each riparian properly owner. 55 days
Dredge 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 A.ir Pollution Abatement 60 days
facilities and/or Emission Sourc:s N/A (90 days)
Any open burning associated with subject proposal
must be in com
li
ith 15 NCAC 2D
0520
p
ance w
.
.
Demolition or renovations of strictures containing
asbestos material must be in ccmpliance with k 2 I 60 days
NCAC 2D.0525 which requires notification and removal NIA
prior to demolition.
(90 days)
Complex Source Permit required under 15 NCAC 2D.0800. '' `?
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. Surely bond filed with EHNR as shown:
Any area mined greater than one acre must be permited.
AFFECTED LAND AREA AMOUNT OF BOND 30 days
Mining Permit Less than 5 acres $ 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 (N/A)
Special Ground Clearance Burning Permit - 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 da:'s
Oil Refining Facilities NIA (N/A)
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 (N/A)
404 permit from Corps of Engineers.
i
IN REPLY REFER TO
Planning Division
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
May 16, 1990
Mr. L. J. Ward, P.E., Manager
Planning and Research Branch
Division of Highways
North Carolina Department
of Transportation
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Ward:
We have reviewed your letter of April 18, 1990, requesting information
for "Federal Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Albemarle Northeast
Connector, From US 52 to NC 740, Stanly County, TIP No. U-2400" and offer
the following comments.
No flood plain problems are apparent. Any stream crossings should be
designed so as not to aggravate flood problems.
The location map is of such a scale that specific impacts could not be
' determined. However, 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. Department of the Army
permit requirements will depend on the final project design, area of waters
and/or wetlands filled, construction methods, etc. Under our mitigation
policy, impacts to wetlands should first be avoided or minimized. We will
then consider compensation or mitigation for unavoidable impacts. 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. Should you
have any questions, please contact Mr. Steve Lund, Regulatory Branch, 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.
S cerely, n
Lawrenc WJSaunders
Chief, flanping Division
L
` .,STATF o
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
' 116 West Edenton Street - Education Building
Raleigh, NC 27603-1712
' MEMORANDUM
Bob Etheridge
Superintendent
May 17, 1990
TO: L. J. Ward, P.E.
' Manager of Planning and Research
NC Division of Highways
' Highway Building
FROM: Charles H. W
e,
W
Assistan
t St ntendent of Auxiliary Services
NC Departmen c Instruction
217 W. Jones St., Ed. Annex I
RE: Federal Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Albemarle Northeast
' Connector, From US 52 to NC 740, Stanly County, TIP No. U-2400
'
Please find attached communication from Dick Koontz, Associate Superintendent
' of Stanly County Schools, relative to subject project.
mrl
' Attachment

STANLY COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION
May 14, 1990
Dr. Charles H. Weaver
Assistant State Superintendent
Auxiliary Services
SDPI
116 W. Edenton St.
Raleigh, NC 27603-1712
Dear Dr. Weaver:
We are pleased with the proposed TIP No. U-2400, planned for Stanly County. As
the plan is projected now, it does not impact upon any of our schools.
Please be assured that we support the TIP and look forward to the completion of an
improved transportation system that will add to the safety of school children.
Thank you for the opportunity of input to the system.
Sincerely,
/" 44e 41?
Dick Koontz
Associate Superintendent
DK/bf
1 223 South Second Street, Post Office Box 1399 / Albemarle, NC 28002-1399 / [phone]
1
e
0
1

1
1

t
1

t

1
r?,M N O! tyf'
i
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726

May 22, 1990
Mr. L. J. Ward, Manager --
Planning and Research Branch
Division of Highways
N.C. Department of Transportation
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Subject: Scoping Comments for the proposed Albemarle NortKeast
Connector, from US 52 to NC 740, in Stanly County; TIP No.
U-2400.
Dear Mr. Ward:
This responds to your letter of April 18, 1990, requesting comments on the
proposed project. These comments are provided in accordance with provisions
of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16
U.S.C. 661 et seq.).
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) is particularly concerned about
potential impacts of the proposed project upon stream ecosystems and
associated wetlands within the study corridor. At least three stream and/or
wetland crossings are present in the study corridor. Special care should be
exercised in the design and implementation of all stream crossing
structures.
The attached pages identify the Federally-listed endangered (E) and/or
threatened (T) and/or species proposed for listing as endangered (PE) or
threatened (PT) which may occur in the proposed project corridor.
The Service's review of any environmental document would be greatly
facilitated if it contained the following information:
1) A description of the fishery and wildlife resources within existing
and required additional right-of-way and any areas, such as borrow
areas, which may be affected directly or indirectly by the proposed
improvements.
2) Acreage of branches, creeks, streams, rivers or wetlands to be
filled. Wetlands affected by the proposed project should be mapped
in accordance with the Federal Manual for Identifying and
Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands.
3) Linear feet of any water courses relocated.
t

1
1

1

1

1

t
r
1
1
r
r
r

1
1
i
I
4) Acreage of upland habitats, by cover type, which would be
eliminated.
5) Techniques which will be employed for designing and constructing
any relocated stream channels or for creating replacement wetlands.
6) Mitigation measures which will be employed to avoid, eliminate,
reduce or compensate for habitat value losses associated with any
of the proposed improvements.
7) Assessments of the expected secondary and cumulative impacts of the
proposed project on fish and wildlife resources.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide these comments to you and encourage
your consideration of them. Please continue to advise us of the progress of
this project.
Sincerely yours,
L.K. Mike Gantt
Supervisor
Attachments
IJ

i1

1

u
w

r

1
1

REVISED APRIL 5, 1990
Stanly County
Bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) - E
Schweinitz' sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii) - PE
-4 There are species which although not now listed or officially proposed for
listing as endangered or threatened, are under status review by the Service.
"Status Review" (SR) species are not legally protected under the Act, and
are not subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7, until they
are formally proposed or listed as threatened or endangered. We are
providing the below list of status review species which may occur within the
project area for the purpose of giving you advance notification. These
species may be listed in the future, at which time they will be protected
under the Act. In the meantime, we would appreciate anything you might do
for them.
Nestronia (Nestronia umbellula) - SR
Heartleaf plantain (Plantago cordata) - SR

1
1
r

1

pit

1
w
1
1
1
T

1
Ri l 1990
Project N c a
Project Number
'9o - 004 1
j DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH, County
AND NATURAL RESOURCES
-?1 DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
7'. ir-Agency Project Review Response c V'
L'- L
-?? t?s sz
,?AE Ke c? ? ?e-7? Type of Project JUN 2
Several water lines are located in the path of and adjacent to t e
proposed project. Due to a possible rupture during construction, the
contractor should contact the appropriate water system officials to _
specify a work schedule.
This project will be classified as a non-community public water

? supply and must comply with state and federal drinking water moni-
toring requirements. For more information the applicant should con-
tact the Public Water Supply Section, [phone].
If this project is.constructed as proposed, we will recommend closure
of feet of adjacent waters to the harvest of shellfish. For
ir_formationregarding the shellfish sanitation program, the applicant
should contact the Shellfish Sanitation Branch at [phone].
The spoil disposal area(s) proposed for this project may produce a
mosquito breeding problem. For information concerning appropriate
mosquito control measures, the applicant should contact the Public
Health Pest Management Section at [phone].
The applicant should be advised that prior to the removal or demo-
lition of dilapidated structures, an extensive rodent control program

? may be necessary in order to prevent the migration of the rodents to
adjacent areas. For information concerning rodent control, contact
the local health department or the Public Health Pest Management
Section, [phone].
The applicant should be advised to contact the local health depart-
ment regarding their requirements for septic tank installations (as
? required under 10 NCAC 10A .1900 et. seg.). For information con-
cerning septic tank and other on-site waste disposal methods, contact
the On-Site Sewage Branch at [phone].
The applicant should be advised to contact the
F-1 County Health Department regarding the sanitary facilities required
for this project.
Reviewer Branch/Unit Dat
DEHNR 3198 (Revised 2/90)
Division of Envirca a tal Health
Review 2/91

1

v

1

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P. O. BOX 25201
RALEIGH 27611-5201
JAMES G. MARTIN THOMAS J. HARRELSON
GOVERNOR May 29, 1990 SECRETARY
MEMORANDUM TO: L. J. Ward, R E., Manager
Pla ' g and Research
FROM: C ates, Bicycle Coordinator
Bicycle Program
SUBJECT: Federal Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Albemarle
Northeast Connector, From US 52 to NC 740, Stanly County, TIP
No. U-2400.
In your memorandum of April 18, 1990 you requested our comments regarding the proposed
improvements to the above mentioned project.
One of our Bicycling Highways system routes, the "Piedmont Spur", passes through
Albemarle on SR 1274 and NC 740 (see attachment). Since the proposed Albemarle Connector
will run from US 52 to NC 740 in this same vicinity, we request that bicyclists' needs be
considered during the planning and design phases of this project. Specifically, we ask that no
new barriers be created to bicyclists currently traveling through Albemarle on the "Piedmont
Spur" bicycle route.
We appreciate the opportunity to comment on the above named project. Please feel free to
contact us again regarding this or any other bicycle related matter.
CBY/jc
11

fl
An Equal Opportunity/ Affirmative Action Employer

1

r

e

1
1
1
t
1

t

1
Gold Fever 3.4
I
Services
Several country stores provide needed services. Concord and
Albemarle provide full services, the latter offering a bike shop.
Camping is available at Morrow Mountain State Park.
generated gold fever and a gold rush to North Carolina was on.
Scores of gold-mining companies were organized and incor-
porated. European experts introduced such new technology as
steam engines, pumps. and ore crushing mills. A federal mint
was opened in Charlotte. Despite all the activity, however, most
of the ventures were relatively unprofitable and in 1848 the
discovery of far richer gold fields in California led to the decline
of the industry in this state. Sporadic attempts to revive the
industry in later years proved to be futile.
The Reed Gold Mine has been declared a national historic
landmark and is now being preserved as a state historic site.
Plans for development which is now underway. include a visitor
center and museum. a network of underground tunnels. recon-
structed mining machinery and buildings and a series of nature
trails
n3 Morrow Mountain State Park
Tms park is in the Uwharne Mountains and is bordered on two
sides by Lake Tillery. The park offers camping, swimming,
fishing, boating. and a refreshment stand. A natural history
museum, open daily throughout the summer season, offers
exhibits on the plant and animal life of this unusual geographic
area. A park naturalist is also on duty during this time. The Kron
House, a restoration of the home of a prominent physician of the
last century is located within the park.

eneral Description
Or the most part, the terrain in this segment has gently rolling
1115 with a few steep, short hills as you approach the Pee Dee
River in the easternmost portion.
pproximately 44 miles/71 kilometers.
oadway Condition
he roads in this Segment are generally well-maintained and in
good condition, although of a somewhat rough surface type.
Points of Interest
1O McCurdy Log House
This privately-owned house and other log structures on the
premises are part of a farm complex built during the revolu-
tionary period. This site is listed in the National Register of
Historic Places.
M Reed Gold Mine
While fishing in a stream on the family farm one Sunday in 1799,
twelve-year-old Conrad Reed was attracted to a yellow sub-
stance he Spotted on the bottom. He pulled up the heavy, wedge-
shaped rock and took it home. Not recognizing this substance as
gold. the family used the 17-pound nugget as a doorstep for the
next twelve years.
One day on a business trip to Fayetteville. John Reed, the boy's
father, took the rock to a jeweler who identified it as gold and
offered to buy it. The uneducated farmer accepted $3.50 for
53600 worth of gold. Later, when he discovered the true value, he
recovered an additional payment from the jeweler.
Back on the farm, the family began searching for moregold. With
three neighbors and several slaves. mining began in earnest. In
1803 a slave discovered a 28-pound nugget.
azardous Areas Mining continued there on a pan-time basis in the following
C 24/27173 into Albemarle is somewhat congested. 3 5 miles. years. By 1830 widespread discoveries in other parts of the state

C
w
1
1

1
1?

r v `a 5rn?°
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James G. Martin, Governor Division of Archives and History
Patric Dorsey, Secretary William S. Price, Jr., Director
May 31, 1990
MEMORANDUM
TO: L. J. Ward, P.E., Manager
Planning and Research Branch
Division of Highways
Department of Transportation
FROM: David Brook, Deputy State
?z
Historic Preservation Officer ?lld?
SUBJECT: Albemarle Northeast Connector, U-2400,
Stanly County, CH 90-E-4220-0841
Thank you for your memorandum of April 18, 1990, concerning the above
project.
We acknowledge your intent to conduct an archaeological survey for the
above project and look forward to reviewing the report of the investigation.
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 Ms. Renee Gledhill-Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
DB:slw
CC: State Clearinghouse

109 East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807

1
1

1

•? G?Vn, .Nw.
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James G. Martin, Governor Division of Archives and History
Patric Dorsey, Secretary William S. Price, Jr., Director
May 31, 1990
MEMORANDUM
1

TO: L. J. Ward, P.E., Manager
Planning and Research Branch
Division of Highways
Department of Transportation
FROM: David Brook, Deputy State A / IJ
Historic Preservation Officer
SUBJECT: Albemarle Northeast Connector, U-2400,
Stanly County, CH 90-E-4220-0841
Thank you for your memorandum of April 18, 1990, concerning the above
project.
We acknowledge your intent to conduct an archaeological survey for the
above project and look forward to reviewing the report of the investigation.
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 Ms. Renee Gledhill-Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
Ll
1
1

DB:slw
cc:,)State Clearinghouse
109 East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807

1

Ll
1
J
w

t
1
1
1
n?
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
MEMORANDUM
TO: Chrys Baggett
State Clearinghouse
FROM: Melba McGee d`?
Project Review Coordinator
RE: 90-0841 - EA - Proposed Albemarle
Northwest Connector from US 52 to NC 740
Stanly County
DATE: June 11, 1990
Douglas G. Lewis
Director
Planning and Assessment
The Department of Environment, Health, & Natural Resources
has reviewed the proposed scoping notice. The attached list and
description of information is necessary for a thorough review.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond.
MM: bb
Attachments
PO Box 27687. Poleigh. North Carolina 27611 7087 Telephone [phone]
I y.J
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
James G. Martin, Governor
Patric Dorsey, Secretary
October 11, 1990
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
L. J. Ward, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
Department of Transportation David Brook, Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer Historic Structures Survey Report, Albemarle
Northeast Connector, Stanly County, TIP U-2400,
GS 91-0026
zib-6k
Thank you for your letter of September 10, 1990, concerning the above
project. We have reviewed the Historic Structures Survey Report for the
Albemarle Northeast Connector in Stanly County and have the following
comments.
On page 8, should not line 1 read ". directly east of ." instead
of west?
On pages 50 and 51, figures 6 and 7, why is there a smaller boundary shown
around the house?
In accordance with the Appendix V Deliverables #l' and 4, we would like to
receive the survey site forms for the recorded structures and the photographs
and keyed map for all properties over 50 years old.
Finally, we concur with the findings of the report and the reasons for them.
We would like to note that the report was extremely well written and presented.

E

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 Ms.
Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 733-4763.
DB:slw
cc: Kay Simpson, Louis Berger & Associates
Historic Preservation Services, Charlotte
109 East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807

1
?7,

1

1

1

1

I
y r ?.
r
i
1 -
North Carolina Department of Cultural RespurcegnN 08
,
James G. Martin, Governor '
Division of,dr,?hives and History
Patric Dorsey, Secretary Wil fam ?f rice; Jr_; Director
January 3, 1991
MEMORANDUM
TO: L. J. Ward, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
Department of Transportation
FROM: David Brook, Deputy State
Historic Preservation Officer G??v?/ lt:? ?
SUBJECT: Final Historic Preservation Survey Report,
Albemarle Northeast Connector, Stanly County,
TIP No. U-2400, Work Order No. 9.8100163
Thank you for providing the corrections to the Historic Structures
Survey Report for the above project. We have incorporated the corrections
into our copies of the report and will enter the site forms into the
statewide inventory.
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 Ms.
Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 733-4763.
DB:slw
cc: Historic Preservation Services ,
Charlotte
109 EastJones Street 9 Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807

1

1

t

1
CC% do'a SI?ATEo(f
oo?,ff?` ?Minn n?
?? WuM ?•
p? E r
North Carolina Department of Cultural R rc rcp
James G. Martin, Governor _visi"Qn of AiEOhives angHl
Patric Dorsey, Secretary S. 9J e,
`', ViF am L
? .? Jr.
May 7, 1991
MWAPAWnUM
TO: L. J. Ward, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
Department of Transportation
FROM: David Brook, Deputy State
Historic Preservation Officer G
SUBJECT: Albemarle Northeast Connector, U-2400,
Stanly County, CH 90-E-4220-0841, GS 91-0049
Thank you for your letter of April 17, 1991, concerning the above project.
We have reviewed the revised copy of the archaeological survey report
prepared by Brockington and Associates, Inc., in connection with the
above project. In general, the report meets our office's guidelines and
those of the Secretary of the Interior. Of the four sites (31ST141-144)
identified, none were considered eligible for nomination to the National
Register of Historic Places. We concur with this evaluation and have no
further comments concerning this project.
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: Brockington and Associates
Louis Berger & Associates

109 East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
[phone]

1
C

1

I Office of
P n
[phone]

1
City of Albemarle
North Carolina
July 17, 1991
Ms. Leigh B. Cobb, Project Engineer
Planning and Environment Branch
NCDOT
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Mailing Address
P. O. Box 190
bemarle, N. C.
CC ? j P 02-0190
?. JUt
? 9 r?ql
/-JIG OP
Reference: Albemarle NE Connector, N.C. T.I.P. No. U-2400
State Project No. 9.8100163
Dear Ms. Cobb:
Thank you for your concise and informative letter of July 10
concerning the Section 6(f) conversion regulation of the LWCF
Act. The Regional Consultants in the Recreation Resources
Service have also kept us informed of our responsibilities
concerning the park lands purchased under LWCF. We have
understood that park land would be needed for right-of-way and
replaced with an amount of land from the project area equal in
value to the land taken from the park.
A.B. Stewart of CRS Sirrine Engineers has also been in touch
with me by telephone to explain the conversion and alert me that
you would be sending a letter asking for comment on the
replacement property.
The most desirable replacement property, especially noting
the small quantity under consideration, would be that located
east of the park entrance area and owned by Gay S.-Mullinix.
This choice is more acceptable than a portion of tracts which may
be found on the north and east sides of our current boundaries.
The City is willing to receive this as replacement property for
the required park land for the Connector.
Sincerely,
d .?
Lindsey Dunevant, Director
cc : Ray Allen, City Manager
11
1

1

t

11

1
" 1` 4
I '
11?
I I ?i
('? f
RJU
1

r?
REQUESTED-
REPLACEMENT
o
11 1' M
odw
?? II ?p J
!!
,
1! *a 11
-- 111 cr
1
I
f N ' ,
1 11 d
/ ! II a ,l P
ll
N
,,,111 ?,,? 1 1 ? r -1= _-
12
Ilj' 11 j ?
?1
1 11 1 J
1- i
CENTERVIEW BAPTI
?- ' - - --1 r ?? CHURCH

1

1
k

P

1
LJ

Ll

JAMES G. MARTIN
GOVF.RNOk
THOMAS J. HARRELSON
SECRETARY
MEMORANDUM TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P.O. BOX 25201
RALEIGH 27611-5201
July 34, 1991
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
WILLIAM G. MARLEY, JR., P.E.
STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR
Ron Elmore, P.E., Unit Head
Consultant Coordination unit
Janet L. Shipley, Environmental Biologist— Environmental Unit
FHWA Consultation for Federally-Protected
species in the study area of V-24.00,
Stanly County. ..
' Information received from the Us Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS) reports the federally Endangered schweinitz's
sunflower .(He_1 anthus schweinitzii) and Bald eagle
(Haleaeetus leucocephalus) as occurring in stanly County.
Suitable habitat for the above listed species was ascertained
from in-house review of taxonomic literature and aerial
photographic interpretation. A brief description of the
proposed project, species and a summary of findings is
discussed below.'
' The proposed project is the construction of a 3.4 mile
connector on the northeast side of Albemarle from us 52 at
Centerview Church Road (SR 1534) to NC 740. Sections of this
project are on new location. The total project length is 3.4
miles.
. Schweinitz's sunflower is endemic to the piedmont of the
Carolinas, where it is currently known from eight populations
in North Carolina. Growing to a height of one to two meters,
it in a rhizomatoub, VeL-c ulal herb growing from a cluster of
carrot-like tuberous roots. Narrowly lanceolate, opposite
leaves are scabrous above, resin-dottGt.1 a«J wltll.c-laity
beneath. Yellow flowers are borne on arching stems from
September until frost. The species occurs in clearings and
edges of upland woods on moist to dryish clays, clay-loamy or
sandy clay-loams often with a high gravel content. Suitable
habitat for Schweintz's sunflower was noted along the length
of Rebel and Talbert Roads and the Winston-Salem Southbound
Railway. A plant by plant search was conducted within the
appropriate impact zones in these areas. No individuals were

An Equal Opporlunity/Altirmativc Action Fmmoyor
u

1

t
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
found. Subject project will not impact this species.
The bald eagle is associated with coasts, rivers and
lakes, usually nesting near bodies of water where they feed.
The largest, living trees in an area are preferred. Open
expanses of water in combination with perching trees or snags
do not exist in the project area. No evidence of nests or
the bird was seen. The proposed action will have no impact
upon this species.
cc: V. Charles Bruton, Ph.D
M. Randall Turner, Environmental Supervisor-

F?
n

1

P
r
1

1

'J

t

1
APPENDIX D
Relocation Report

it

1
1.
'' R L_ O C A T I O tti R E R O R T North Carolina Department of Transportation
X E.I.S. CORRIDOR _ DESIGN RELOCATION ASSISTANCE
,PROJECT: 9.8100163 CO.NTY: STANLY Section I (Sta 0+00 to Sta. 37+00,
I.D. NO.: U-2400 F.A. PROJECT: N/A
,DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Albemarle Northeast Connector, From U.S. 52 to N.C. 740
ESTIMATED DISPLACEES INCOME LEVEL

iispIacee
Owners Tenants
Total
ities
0-15M
15-25M 25-35M i
35-50M 50 LP ?
Individuals 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
amilies 3 0 3 0 0 3 0 0 0
usinesses 1 0 1 0 VALLE OF DWELLING OSS DWELLINGS AVAILABLE
arms 0 ? 0 0 Owners Tenants For Sale For Rent
on-Profit 0 0 0 0 0-20M 0 $ 0-150 0 0-20M 0 $ 0-150 0
ANSWER ALL QLEST IONS 20-40M 0 150-250 0 20-40M 2 150-250 1
NO EXPLAIN ALL "YES" ANSWERS 40-70M 3 250-400 0 40-70M 10 250-400 4
X 1. Will special relocation
services be necessary 70-100 0 400-600 0 70-100 8 400-600 0
Y. 2. Will schools or churches be
affected by displacement 100 U' 0 600 UP 0 100 U' 8 600 UP 0
X 3. Will business services still
b
il TOTAL 3 0 28 5

Y. e ava
able after project
4. Will any business be dis-
12EMARKS (Respond by Number)
placed. If so, indicate size
type, estimated number of
employees, minorities, etc. 3. No disruption of business services.
X S. Will relocation cause a
h 4. a. Albemarle Chiropractic Center, Charles D. Cie

I ousing shortage
6. Source for available hous-
ins (list) approximately 2800 square feet, approximately
4 employees, no minority.
X 7. Will additional housing 6. Realtors, M.L.S., Newspapers

programs be needed
X 8. Should Last Resort Housing 8. Will be administered according to State Law.
be considered
X 9. Are there large, disabled,
ld
l
e
er
y, etc. families
ANSWER THESE ALSO FOR DESIGN.
10. Will public housing be
d
d f
nee
e
or project
11. Is public housing avail-
able
12. Is it felt there will be ad-
equate ODS housing available
during relocation period
13. Will there be a problem of
housing within financial
means
14. Are suitable business sites
bl
il
(li
ava
a
e
st source)
15. Number months estimated to
complete RELOCATION
XA 'Kl
location Agent.
orm 15.4 Revised 5/90

Date Approved Date
Original & 1 Copy: State Relocation Agena
2 Copy: Area Relocation File
0

J

I

f1
LJ

Rat O C A T 1 0" R E F= O R T North Carolina Department of Transportation
tX E.I.S. _ CORRIDOR _ DESIGN RELOCATION ASSISTANCE
JECT= 9.8100163 COUNTY: STANLY Section II (Sta 37+00 TO Sta. 76+00)
I.D. NO.: U-2400 F.A. PROJECT= N/A
11
IWXSCRIPTION OF PROJECT- Albemarle Northeast Connector, From U.S. 52 to N.C. 740
ESTIMATED DISPLACFES INCOME LEVEL -
c
ee
sPla Owners Tenants Total ities D-15M 15-25M 25-35M 3 5-50M 50 UP
'individuals 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
miIies 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0
Businesses 0 O 0 0 VALL.E OF DWELLING OSS DIJFILINGS AVAILABLE
rms 0 0 0 0 Owners Tenants For Sale For Rent
%n-Profit 0 0 0 0 0-20M 0 $ 0-150 0 0-20M 0 $ 0-150 0

1 ANSWER ALL GX.JESTIONS 20-40M 1 150-250 0 20-40M 2 150-250 1
N0 EXPLAIN ALL "YES" MSS 40-70M 0 250-400 0 40-70M 10 250-400 4
X I. Will special relocation 70-100 0 400-600 0 70-100 8 400-600 0
services be necessary
X 2. Will schools or churches be
ff 100 UP 0 600 U' 0 100 UP 8 600 UP 0
a
ected by displacement
X 3. Will business services still TOTAL 1 0 28 5
be available after project
X 4. Will any business be dis- REMARKS (Respond by Number)
placed. If so, indicate size
type, estimated number of 3. No disruption of business services.
employees, minorities, etc.
X 5. Will relocation cause a 6. Realtors, M.L.S. , Newspapers
h
ousing shortage
6. Source for available hous- 8. Wi ll be administered according to State Law.
ing (list)
X 7. Will additional housing
e
programs be ne
ded
8. Should Last Resort Housing
be considered
X 9. Are there large, disabled,
elderly, etc. families
ANSWER THESE ALSO FOR DESIGN
10. Will public housing be
d
d f
nee
e
or project
11. Is public housing avail-
able
12. Is it felt there will be ad-
equate DDS housing available
during relocation period
13. Will there be a problem of
Housing within financial
17 means
14. Are suitable business sites
il
bl
(li
ava
a
e
st source)
0.5. Number months estimated to
complete RELOCATION
Relocation Agent
orm 15.4 Revised 5/90
(?_ '? 2- 2
Date = Approved Date
Original S 1 Copy: State Relocation Agent
2 Copy: Area Relocation File

fl

0

H
11

U---..
Rai L 0 C A T I O N R E R O R T North Carolina Department of Transportati

X E.I.S. _ CORRIDOR
DESIGN on
_ RELOCATION ASSISTANCE
JECT: 9.810016,E COUNTY: STANLY Section V (Sta 37+00 TO Sta. 85+50)
I
O
NO
:
.
.
:
U-2400 F.A. PROJECT: N/A
IMMIPTION OF PROJECT: Albemarle Northeast. Connector, From U.S. 52 to N.C. 74?
ESTIMATED DISPLACEES
y INCOME LEVEL
o
1
acee Owners
I spl
Tenants
Total Minor-
ities
0-ISM
15-25M
25-35M 35-5

Individuals 0
0 0M 50 LE
0 0 0
0 0
?

milies 1
?
1
?
1 0

'Businesses 0

0

0

0 0 0 0
?
VALUE OF DWELLING OSS DWELLINGS AVAILABLE
ms 0
t 0 0 0 Owner Tenants For Sale For Rent
n
- Prntit 0
0 0 0 0-20M 0-20M 0 0-150 0
ANSWER ALL (?STIONS 20-40M -40
M 2 150-250

NO
EXPLAIN ALL "'YES" AN'SW RS
40-7UM J N
40-70M 10 250-400 4
X I
Will
.
special relocation
services be neces 70-100 70-100 8 4DO-600 0

X sary
2. W i l l school s or churches be
affected by displacement
100 U'
100 Lip 8 600 UP 0
X 3. Will business services still TOTAL 1 0

X
be available after project
4
Will 28
5
.
any business be dis- REMARKS (Respond by Number)
placed. If so, indicate size
type, estimated number of
emplayees, minoritie 3. No disruption of business services.

X s, etc.
5. Will relocation cause a
housi
h
6. Realtors, M.L.S., Newspapers
ng s
ortage
6. Source for available hous-
ing (list) B. Wil l be administered according to State Law.
X 7. Will additional-Housing
programs be needed
8. Should Last Resort Housing
be considered
X 9. Are there large, disabled,
elderly, etc. families
ANSWER T1-F-SE AL,90 FOR DESIGN
10. Will public housing be
needed for project
11. Is public housing avail-
able
12. Is it felt there will be ad-
equate DDS housing available
during relocation period
13. Will there be a problem of
housing within financial
means
14. Are suitable business sites
available (list source)
' 1.5. Number months estimated to
complete RELOCATION

Relocation Agent - 2
-
?
Date
rm 15.4 Revised 5/90 Approved -?-
-
Date
Original & 1 Copy: State Relocation Agent
2 Copy: Area Relocation File

ii
n

0
1

R F-ti O C A T 1 0 N R E R O R T North Carolina Department of Transportation
X E.I.S. _ CORRIDOR - DESIGN RELOCATION ASSISTANCE
PROJECT: 9.8100163 COLtm: STANLY Section
III (Sta 76+00 TO Sta. 179+00)
I.O. NO.: U-2400 F.A. PROJECT: N/A
ION OF PROJECT: Albemarle Northeast Conner_tor, From U.S. 52 to N.C. 740
ESTIMATED OISPLACFES INCOME LEVEL
isplacee Owners Tenants Total hies 0-15M 15-25M
Individuals 0 0 0 0 0 0
milies 0 0 0 0 0 0
usinesses 0 0 ? 0

s 0 0
0
0 VALUE OF
Owners DWELLING
Tenants
Profit 0 ? 0 0 0-20-M 0 $ 0-150
MR" _ ALL Q ESTIONS 20-40M 0 150-250
NO EXPLAIN ALL "YES" ANSWERS 40-70M 0 250-400
X X 1. Will special relocation 70-100 0 400-600,-
x
X
X
services be necessary
2. Will schools or churches be 100 UP 0 600 Up
affected by displacement
3. Will business services still TOTAL.., 0
If be available after project
25-35M 35-SOM S? Up
0 0 0
? 0 0
OSS DWELLINGS AVAILABLE
For Sale For Rent
0 0-20M ? T[)-15o 0
0 20-40M 2 150-250 1
0 40-70M 10 250-400 4
0 70-100 8 400-600 0
0 1100 UPI 8 1600 UP ! (I
0 1 1 28
. Will any business be dis- REMARKS (Respond by Number)
placed. If sop indicate size
type, estimated number of
employees) minoritiesi etc.
X 5. Will relocation cause a
housing shortage
6. Source for available hous-
ing (list)
X 7. Will additional housing
programs be needed
X 8. Should Last Resort Housing
be considered
X 9. Are there larger disabled,
elderlys etc. families
10. Will public housing be
needed for project
11. Is public housing avail-
able
12. Is it felt there will be ad-
equate OOS housing available
during relocation period
13. Will there be a problem of
housing within financial
means
14. Are suitable business sites
available (list source)
15. Number months estimated to
complete RELOCATION
Relocation Agent
arm 15.4 Revised 5/90
5
/-/R- g
Date pprove
Date
Original & 1 Copy: State Relocation Agent
2 Copy: Area Relocation File
h
H

1

R ;•= L- O C A T I O N R E R O R T North Carolina Department of Transportation
X E.I.S. _ CORRIDOR -. DESIGN RELOCATION ASSISTANCE
PROJECT: 9.8100163 COMITY: STAN _Y Section IV (Sta 76+00 TO Sta. 176f00)
I.O. NO.: U-2400 F.A. PROJECT: N/A
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT= Albemarle Northeast Connector) From U.S. 52 to N.C. 740
ESTIMATED OISPLACEES INCOME LEVEL
ype of
isplacee
Owners
Tenants
Total. Minor-
ities
0-15M
15-25M
Individuals 0 0 0 0 0 0
amilies 0 0 0 0 0 0
usinesses 0 0 0 0 VALUE OF DWELLING
-arms 0 0 0 0 Owners Tenants
n-Profit 0 0 0 0 0-20M 0 0-150
ANSWER ALL CLESTIONS 20-40M 0 150-250
i
X
X
X
X
EXPLAIN ALL 'YES" /hS 40-70M 0 250-400

1. Will special relocation
services be necessary 70-100 0 400-600
2. Will schools or churches be
affected by displacement loo UP 0

F 600 UP
3. Will business services still
be available after project
4 TOTAL 0

5-35M 35-SOM SO UP
0 0 0
0 0 .. 0

OSS DWELLINGS AVAILABLE
For Sale For Rent

0 0-ZOM 0 $ 0-150 ?

0
0 20-40M]
40-70M _-2
10 150-250 1
250-400 4 !
0 70-100 8 400-boa 0 i
0 1100 UP' 8 160D UP 1 ?
a 1 1 28
Will any business be dis- REMARKS (Respond by Number)
placed. If SOY indicate size
type, estimated number of
employeesy minorities) etc.
X S. Will relocation cause a
housing shortage
6. Source for available hous-
ing (list)
X 7. Will additional housing
programs be needed
X 8. Should Last Resort Housing
be considered
x 9. Are there large, disabled,
elderly, etc. families
10. Will public housing be
needed for project
11. Is public housing avail-
able
12. Is it felt there will be ad-
equate DOS housing available
during relocation period
13. Will there be a problem of
housing within financial
means
14. Are suitable business sites
available (list source)
1S. Number months estimated to
complete RELOCATION
5
elocation Agent Date Approved Date
orm 15.4 Revised 5/90 Original & 1 Copy: State Relocation Agent
2 Copy: Area Relocation File

11

t
1

Il

L7

r

C

1

?n
J

7

1

11
.tea..??
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, 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.E.
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary August 8, 1992 Acting Director
MEMORANDUM
To: Melba McGee
Through: John Dorne9
9
Eric Galamb
From: Monica Swihart
Subject: FONSI for Albermarle Northeast Connector From US 52 to NC 740
Stanley County
State Project No. 9.8100163, TIP No. U-2400
EHNR # 93-0074, DEM # 6432
The Water Quality Section of the Division of Environmental Management requests that
the following topics be discussed:
A. There is confusion regarding the total wetland impacts. In the EA there are
1.15 acres of wetland impact. However, the FONSI now states that there are
0.95 acres of wetland impact. What has caused the discrepancy in the
acreage? On page 7, DOT does not have a discrepancy.
B. On page 3, "Wetland topsoils from the affected wetlands may be stripped and
placed along these swales to facilitate growth of sedges and rushes." DEM
requests that a more definite statement be made about the topsoil.
C. DOT should consider mitigation for wetland impacts at a 2:1 (replace ment:loss)
ratio. Mitigation should be on-site rather than offsite. Restoration,
enhancement, creation and banking (in order) are the preferred mitigation
actions.
D. Please ensure that sediment and erosion control measures are not placed in
wetlands.
E. DEM praises DOT for the coordination with the COE to assure that the removal
of borrow material or disposal of excavated spoil maaerial will not impact
jurisdictional wetlands.
REGIONAL OFFICES
Asheville Fayetteville Mooresville Raleigh Washington Wilmington Winston-Salem
704/251-6208 919/486-1541 704/663-1699 919/571-4700 919/946-6481 919/395-3900 919/896-7007
Pollution Prevention Pays
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

Written concurrence of 401 Water Quality Certification may be required for this project.
Please be aware that 401 Certification may be denied if wetland impacts have not
been avoided and minimized to the maximum extent practicable.
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
? Project located in 7th floor library
Division of Planning and Assessment
Project Review Form
Project Number. County: Date: Date Response Du (firm dea ine):
4e-?e
This project Is being reviewed as indicated below:
Regional Office/Phone Regional Office Area In-House Review
? Asheville ? All RIO Areas ? Soil and Water ? Marine Fisheries
? Fayetteville ? Air ? Coastal Management ? Water Planning

? Mooresville ? Water ? Water Resources ? Environmental Health
? Groundwater ildiife ? Solid Waste Management
? Raleigh ? Land Quality Engineer toresi
Resources ? Radiation Protection
? Washington ? Recreat)onal Consultant ? Land Resources ? David Foster

El Wilmin
ton El Coastal Management Consultant El Parks and Recreation El Other (specify)
g C= ^ N. ;:
rn T leEnvironmental Management
F] Winston-Salem I
ra C
N s ;>
<2 ::xp ?, jx
JUL 'V"' 19;2
Manager Sign-Off/Region: ' Q a
SECTION Date: In-House Reviewer/Agency:
Response (check all applicable)
Regional Office response to be compiled and completed by Regional Manager
? No objection to project as proposed
? No Comment
? Insufficient information to complete review
? Approve
? Permit(s) needed (permit files have been checked)
? Recommended for further development with recommendations for
strengthening (comments attached)
? Recommended for further development if specific & substantive
changes incorporated by funding agency (comments
attached/authority(ies) cited)
In-House Reviewer complete individual response.
? Not recommended for further development for reasons
stated in attached comments (authority(ies) cited)
? Applicant has been contacted
? Applicant has not been contacted
? Project Controversial (comments attached)
? Consistency Statement needed (comments attached)
? Consistency Statement not needed
? Full EIS must be required under the provisions of
NEPA and SEPA
? Other (specify and attach comments)
RETURN TO:
Melba McGee
P$ IN
Division of Planning and Assessment by Due Date shown.
*I a"
ALBEMARLE
NORTHEAST CONNECTOR
FROM US 52 TO NC 740
STANLY COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
STATE PROJECT NO. 9.8100163
T.I.P. NO. U-2400
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE
NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL BRANCH
OF THE DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
For Further Information, Contact:
Mr. L. J. Ward, P.E.
Manager, Planning and Environmental Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611
Phone: [phone]
APPROVED:
s a
ate
. -
f ,?.XWard, P.M
Manager, planning and Environmental Branch
E f ?
ALBEMARLE
NORTHEAST CONNECTOR
FROM US 52 TO NC 740
STANLY COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
STATE PROJECT NO. 9.8100163
T.I.P. NO. U-2400
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
May 1992
Documentation Prepared B
CRS SIRRINE ENGINEERS, INC.
.•`4?? CAR01
141
q
?.•'?rSE?AL
S
eer M. Strub, P.E. Project Manager 64 NEtl x.11
FOR NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
. Ron Mmom P.E., Unit Head
Consultant Engineering Unit
gh Cobb
Project ager
; '
Finding of No Significant Impact
Prepared by the
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
North Carolina Department of Transportation
L Tyne of Action
This is a North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) Administrative Action, Finding
of No Significant Impact (FONSI).
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 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 takes full responsibility for the
accuracy, scope, and content of the Environmental Assessment.
II. Descriptions of Action
The North Carolina Department of Transportation, Division of Highways, proposes to construct a
connector on the northeast side of Albemarle in Stanly County from US 52 at Centerview Church
Road (SR 1534) to NC 740. The distance of the project is approximately 3.4 miles.
The recommended improvement is a two-lane facility on right-of-way approximately 100 feet wide
which would allow for future expansion to a multi-lane section. The total cost of the project
including right-of-way and construction is estimated to be $7,186,000. The estimated cost in the
1992-1998 Transportation Improvement Program (T.I.P.) is $5,155,000.
III. Recommended Alternative
The recommended alternative begins at the intersection of US 52 and Centerview Church Road
(SR 1534) in the north sector of the City of Albemarle and terminates at NC 740 in the southeast
sector of Albemarle (see Figures 1 and 2). The project follows eastward along existing Centerview
Church Road for a distance of approximately 2,850 feet. From this point it departs on new
alignment in a southeasterly direction, crossing the Winston Salem Southbound Railway on a
structure and connecting with existing Talbert Road (SR 1541) roughly 1,800 feet northwest of
Ridge Street (SR 1542). At Ridge Street, the proposed connector turns southward and departs
existing alignment for a distance of approximately 1,400 feet where it connects with Rebel Road.
The new roadway follows Rebel Road south, departs existing alignment for 1500 feet and ties into
existing Moss Springs Road. The connector then follows Moss Springs Road for a distance of
700 feet, then follows new alignment to the south across Badin Highway to its southern terminus
at NC 740.
O?
OQ
ROWAN COUNTY
OP
9Y 2 49
52
49 Richfield .?
Pop. 373
New London
Pop. 454
/
A. /
J
0 4 TO CONCORD 73 740. Badin
Pop. 1,514
J / 73 1
Q / ?-
?? j Albemarle
Q j Pop 15,110
o
fro >-
27 24
w
Lo9 . ?o 2
° zoo 24 O
Locust 0
Pop. 1,590 O
To 0
l o7re 24
Stanfield 138 52 Norwood
% Pop. 463 Oakboro. Pop. 14818
Pop. 587
1
•?.,; ? ? ,.... - Tom
o 90 l_ ..;
R • '`? ` ,
6 Y'
UNION COUNTY = ANSON COUNTY
t
Scale ® Project Limits
1 0 1 2 3 4 Proposed Corridor
t i r 1 r ?
?. City Limits
J
Project Location Map Figure I
Albemarle Northeast Connector
From US 52 To NO 740 °
Stanly County, North Carolina ?f`r
. r 7•
Project Corridor Map
Legend
Proposed Corridor
Albemarle City Limits
Albemarle Northeast Connector
From US 52 To NC 740
Stanly County, North Carolina
Figure 2
A bridge crossing over the Winston Salem Southbound Railway is located on Mountain Creek
Road between Centerview Church Road and Talbert Road. A new bridge structure will be
required to cross the railway at a point east of the existing crossing.
Two typical sections will be utilized: one for improvements on existing roadways and another for
the new location sections. Typical Section I consists of improving the existing two-lane roadway
and acquiring new right-of-way for future multi-laning. There will be a 12-foot lane in each
direction. A two-foot paved shoulder will be constructed along the outside edges of pavement in
both directions. Total pavement width of the improved roadway will be 28 feet. Improvements to
the existing roadways along Centerview Church Road (SR 1534), Talbert Road (SR 1541), and
Rebel Road (SR 1576) will generally occur symmetrically on each side of the roadway.
Approximately 20 feet of new right-of-way will be acquired on each side of the roadways.
Typical Section 11 on new location will also consist of two 12-foot lanes and a two-foot paved
shoulder along the outside edges of pavement. Total right-of-way to be acquired on new location
is 100 feet or 50 feet on either side of the centerline.
Typical Section III will entail future widening of the connector to a multi lane urban section. Total
right-of-way will remain 100 feet. A two-foot, six-inch concrete curb and gutter will be provided
Provisions are included in the typical section to accommodate a five-foot sidewalk on each side of
the roadway.
IV. Wetlands Finding
The North Carolina Department of Transportation has a policy to avoid, to the extent possible,
adverse impacts on wetlands wherever there is a practical alternative. The recommended alternative
will tsult in wetland encroachments at seven:different drainageways, including one"crossing of
Little=l"* Creek. Approximately 0.95 acres of wetlands will?e permanently displaced by the
construction of the recommended alternative.
In keeping with the 404(b) (1) guidelines of the Clean Water Act of 1977, the US Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA)/Corps of Engineers (COE) Memorandum of Agreement (MOA),
effective February 1990 and aspects of Executive Order 11990, projects should be designed to
avoid wetland encroachment wherever possible; to minimize wetland impacts when avoidance is
not possible; and to mitigate wetland losses when necessary.
It is anticipated that the effects to the identified wetlands will be appropriate to most conditions set
forth in U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' (USACOUs) Nationwide Permit 26. The wetland
associated with the crossing of Little Long Crock was`determined`to be below the headwaters
location; I efore, it is anticipated"that authorization through bridge general and box culvert
consuucdoit permit SAWC082,N-084.0031 will be appropriate:
The nature of the project, which involves widening existing roadways and the construction along
new location in some areas, and the topography in the project corridor, prohibits the shifting of the
alignment to completely avoid the wetlands areas along the projetx. Safety considerations.-in the
design of the roadway also prohibit complete avoidance of wetland impacts. In the absence of
feasible alternatives which would avoid the wetland areas, all practical measures to minimize harm
to the wetlands will be used where feasible, including erosion control during and after
construction, use of 2:1- side slopes to reduce horizontal encroachments, and other stringent
applications of "best management practices".
Bridging over Little Long Greek at Centerview Church Road instead of extending the existing box
culvert was considered; however, the cost of constructing a bridge in this area is prohibitive and
was not considered a practicable alternative, particularly in light of the fact that there would be no
net savings in habitat by bridging the creek.
(2)
Inamany areas where roadway widening will fill in existulg,wetlands~ within roadsidedraindge
swales, new-swales will be designed to;accommodate new wetlan'conditions. The bottom of the
Swale will be,graded slightly deeper,and withYa=moregentle slope,-turaflow:runoff to pond and
saturate the soils. ' Wetlarpd topsoils from- the`affected-wetldnda`Minay be supped and placed along
these gwales to facilitate growth of sedges and rushes. 5) o i w ku..- z.
All wetland areas that are not to be affected by the project will be protected from unnecessary
encroachment. NQ staging of construction oclnrpment,, or storage of construction supplies wil).:be:,
allowed in a, wetland or near any water?i=elatid- area. These wetland areas to be protected will be
flagged by a qualified NCDOT representative and if necessary, will be temporarily fenced.
Standard erosion control measures will be observed and included in the design plans to the
contractor. All bare fill or cut slopes adjacent to streams or intermittent drainages will be stabilized
as soon as possible. No fertilizer, hydrofertilization, or hydromuiching will be allowed within the
proximity of any stirmn, intermittent drainage, and/or wetland.
Based on the.alcove considerationst4ris determined that there is no practicable alternative to, the
sed i construction in wetlands and that the proposed action includes all practicable
P
measures to minimize harm to wedands.which may result from such use.
V. Floodplain Finding
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), in cooperation with Federal, State and local
governments, has conducted a preliminary flood study for Little Long Creek and its tributaries.
Stanly County is a participant in the regular phase of the National Flood Insurance Program and is
required to enforce FEMA Flood Hazard Area Construction Standards. Construction in floodplain
areas is permitted provided proper procedures and detailed studies are conducted to insure no
adverse impacts result.
The proposed project involves one minor transverse encroachment at Little Long Creek along
Centerview Church Road. The existing culvert at this location will either be extended or replaced;
however, there will be no significant adverse impacts on natural and beneficial floodplain values.
There will be no significant change in flood risk, and there will not be a significant change m the
potential for interruption or termination of emergency service or emergency evacuation routes.
Therefore, it has been determined that this encroachment is not significant as defined by 23 CFR
650.105(q).
VI. Coordination and Comments
A. Circulation of Environmental Assessment
The Environmental Assessment was approved by the Division of Highways on September 16,
1991. The Environmental Assessment was circulated by the State Clearinghouse to State, regional
and local agencies for review and comment. Copies were also distributed to appropriate Federal
agencies for their review and comments. All comments received are attached in the Appendix.
(3).
B. Comments Received on the Environmental Assessment
Written comments on the Environmental Assessment were received from a number of agencies.
The substantive comments and responses are listed below.
"Our primary interest is the loss of wetlands.... EHNR supports every effort by the
Department of Transportation to minimize wetland conversion and to mitigate for conversions
where feasible."
Response:
Please refer to the section entitled IV. WETLAND FINDINGS included earlier in the
FONSI which addresses wetland impacts and proposed mitigation.
Doa_ment of the Army Wilming= District, Coros o Engineers
Comment:
"The roadway and structures within the flood plains should be designed so as not to cause
a significant increase in the upstream flooding or cause greater than a 1.0-foot floodway surcharge.
Any changes made to the floodway or profiles should be coordinated with the local community for
possible revisions to their flood insurance maps and reports. Proper consideration should be given
to the modifications to the drainage structures on the streams without mapped floodplains."
ResMnse
The proposed improvements will be designed to minimize the effects on the floodplain
through the implementation of appropriate erosion control measures. The roadway and the
extension of the corrogated metal pipe culverts at the crossing of Little Long Creek along
Centerview Church Road will be designed to minimize any increase in the upstream flooding nor
cause greater than a 1.0-foot surcharge. No changes will be made to the floodway.
"... 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."
Held investigations as part of the wetland delineations for the proposed improvements were
conducted in mid-May 1990. Routine wetland determinations, based on the Federal Manual for
Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands, were made at Little Long Creek and the
crossings of six intermittent streams. Wetlands were also reviewed at six other locations where
alternate roadway alignments were under consideration.
Wetlands impacts will be reviewed by appropriate staff of the NCDOT to verify findings
prior to construction of the project.
(4)
"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. Under our mitigation policy, impacts to
wetlands should first be avoided or minimized. We will then consider compensation or mitigation
for unavoidable impacts. 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 the Department of Army
permit requirements."

Please refer to the section entitled TV. WETLAND FINDINGS included earlier in the
FONSI which addresses wetland impacts and proposed mitigation. The NCDOT will employ the
use of "best management practices" (i.e. reducing side slopes, no staging in lowland sites,
minimize wetland canopy removal, limited fill replacement, etc.) in an effort to minimize additional
impacts to affected water resources and to reduce the severity of impacts that do occur.
North Carolina Department of Environment Health and Natural Resources Division of
Land Resources Geodetic Survey
mm n :
"This project will impact 4 geodetic survey markers. N.C. Geodetic Survey should be
contacted prior to construction ...
Response
The NCDOT will coordinate with the N.C. Geodetic Survey during construction to ensure
that geodetic markers within the project limits will be protected and/or relocated.
"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 far 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."
No portion of the project is located within a High Quality Water Zone (HQW); therefore,
there will be no effects to an HQW.zone. The general regwrements concerning erosion control and
siltation are covered in Article 107-13 of the Standard Specifications which is entitled "Control of
Erosion, Siltation and Pollution". The North Carolina Division of Highways has also developed
(5)
an Erosion and Sedimentation Control Program which has been approved by the North Carolina
Sedimentation Control Commission. This program consists of the rigorous requirements to
minimize erosion and sedimentation contained in the North Carolina Highway Standard
Specifications for Roads and Structures together with policies of the Division of Highways
concerning control of accelerated erosion and sedimentation on work performed by State Forces.
As commented above, the NCDOT will employ the use of "best management practices"
(i.e. reducing side slopes, no staging in lowland sites, minimize wetland canopy removal, limited
fill replacement, etc.) in an effort to minimize additional impacts to affected water resources and to
reduce the severity of impacts that do occur. The contractor will be required to implement an
effective erosion and sedimentation control program, approved by NCDOT, in order to control
runoff, and to minimize water quality degradation at the points of impact and to other downstream
receptors.
Comment:
"It has been our experience that facilities of this nature engender relocations of commercial
establishments, e.g. 'strip shopping centers'. The impacts of relocations to the bypass both on the
downtown area and on the project objective of facilitating traffic movement should be considered
during further planning. If your investigations show that this commercialization will degrade level
of service more rapidly than NCDOT considers acceptable, you may wish to multi-lane this facility
now rather than in the near future."
Response:
The Connector is intended not as a bypass around the City of Albemarle but,as a connector
for traffic from the northwest side of Albemarle to travel more easily to the southeast and vice
versa. The project will service primarily local traffic. Currently, this area of Albemarle is zoned
for residential uses. Land uses within the study area are expected to remain fairly stable. The
relocation of commercial establishments to the area and resultant generation of associated traffic are
not anticipated

"Since the National Park Service must authorize the Section 6(f) involvement required for
the acquisition of right-of-way from park property, we feel that this approval constitutes a federal
undertaking for this project. Thus, we feel that the project is subject to compliance with Section
106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the National Rego-eligible Moss-Coble Farm
needs to be taken into consideration under the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800."
The park property located along Centerview Church Road which will be acquired for the
project is being taken to avoid impacts to residences on the south side of Centerview Church Road.
Because the park property was purchased with Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) monies,
this taking constitutes a Section 6(f) conversion requirement. The National Park Service, on behalf
of the Secretary of the Interior, will approve a conversion to a non-recreational use only if the
converted land is replaced with land of equivalent value, usefulness, and location.
(6)
To fulfill the requirements of the LWCF Act, an amount of land from a parcel(s) in the
project area, equal in value to the park land needed for the road right-of-way and accompanying
easement, will be purchased by the NCDOT and donated to the park. The land exchange will be
contingent on approval of the National Park Service. In conjunction with this requirement,
coordination was carried out with the park owner, the City of Albemarle. The City has identified a
desirable replacement property (see letter dated July 17, 1991 from City of Albemarle Parks and
Recreation Office to NCDOT included in attached Appendix).
No historic properties are located within the park area. Therefore, the Moss-Coble Farm,
located in a different area of the project from the park area, does not fall under the provisions of the
Section 6(f) conversion regulation.
Comment:
"Prior to the approval of any borrow source or disposal area developed for use on this
project, the contractor shall obtain confirmation from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers that the
removal of borrow material or the disposal of excavated spoil material will not impact jurisdictional
wetlands."

With regard to mitigation of wetland impacts, refer to the discussion in the section entitled
IV. WETLAND FINDINGS included earlier in the FONSL NCDOT wil1coor linate with'the
Corps ofEngineers to assure that the removal of borrow'material or the disposal of=excavated spoil
material will not impact jurisdictional wetlands.
Comment--,
"The total wetland impact for this project is 1.15 acres including the 0.2 acres of wetland
impact associated with Little Long Creek. Mitigation for unavoidable impacts should involve the
restoration of the degraded wetlands associated with the intermittent stream crossings."
With regard to mitigation of wetland impacts, refer to the discussion in the section entitled
IV. WETLAND FINDINGS included earlier in the FONSL
"The management practices outlined in Section 4.9.1.3 of the EA should become
conditions in the construction contract."
RcMse
NC DOT will adhere to all standard practices to avoid and minimize impacts to wedands.
(7)
Comment-
"Although the EA states that bridging over Little Long Creek was considered there is no
data provided to support the conclusion that the cost of the bridge was prohibitive. Also, the
statement that construction of the bridge would not result in net savings in habitat is not
substantiated Please provide documentation to support these statements."
The construction of a bridge over Little Long Creek during the initial construction phase for
a two-lane roadway would cost approximately $200,000+ compared to a cost of roughly $18,000
($38,000 including headwalls) for extending the existing culverts. For the future multi-lane
section, a new bridge would cost roughly $360,000 as compared to roughly $36,000 ($56,000
including headwalls) for extending the existing culverts. By removing the existing culverts and
constructing bridge foundations and surfaces, including approaches, more of the existing habitat
within the culvert area would have the potential for disturbance. Also, additional vegetative cover
in the impact area would be affected Aside from the cost and habitat issues, bridging this area
over Little Long Creek is not recommended in terms of roadway design.
mm n
"As stated above, a 401 Water Quality Certification will be required for this project."
Respgnse:
NCDOT will meet all requirements to obtain certifications and permits necessary for
construction of the project.
S
"Endorsement of the EA by DEM does not preclude the denial of the 401 Certification upon
application if wetland impacts have not been avoided and minimized to the maximum extent
practicable."
Please refer to the discussion in the section entitled IV. WETLAND FINDINGS
included earlier in the FONSL
" no detailed plan for compensatory mitigation for wetland losses was found. On page
33 of the Environmental Assessment, compensatory design features were mentioned but no
specific sites or acreages were given. We will withhold final approval of the document until an
a=ptable plan is submitted for mitigation of unavoidable wetland losses."
NCDOT will adhere to all standard practices to avoid and minimize impacts to wetlands.
Please refer to the discussion in the section entitled IV. WETLAND FINDINGS included
earlier in the FONSL
(8)
"Our primary interest is the direct impacts to wetlands and the fact that a detailed mitigation
plan has not been developed. Details of mitigation will have to be worked out to the satisfaction of
all the involved regulatory agencies before the department grants final project approval."
As commented above, NCDOT will adhere to all standard practices to avoid and minimize
impacts to wetlands.
C. Public Involvement Following the Environmental Assessment
Following agency and department circulation of the Environmental Assessment, a combined
location and design public hearing was held on Tuesday, January 21, 1992 in the gymtorium of
East Albemarle Elementary School. Approximately 85 persons attended the hearing. About 15
persons spoke during the hearing and 17 written comments were received as well as a petition
opposing the project. Most speakers had questions about the effects on their property or had
general questions on the timing and specific configuration of the improvements. There were a
number of questions regarding the general location of the connector. In addition, one or two
speakers spoke against the construction of the project.
Citizen questions were satisfactorily answered during the hearing. Other citizen comments were
sent in writing to NCDOT. The key substantive comments and questions.receivedt-om the public.
during and following the hearing are addressed below.
A couple of speakers from the Church of Jesus (gist of Latter Day Saints expressed concern over
the proximity of the connector to the church. The speakers were also concerned about the
development the roadway would generate. In response to these comments, it should be noted that
the construction easements for the connector are located approximately 200 feet from the church.
The noise level did not warrant any abatement measures. Also, this area of Albemarle is zoned for
agricultmWresidential uses. Future development is anticipated to remain residen&L
A gentleman with the Albemarle Bicycle Club requested a bike lane or some type of provision for
cyclists. The typical section for the project includes a two-foot paved shoulder which can be
utilized for bicycle travel. Future multi latung will consider striping for bike traffic.
One citizen expressed concern over the safety of the connector and the congestion at US 52. The
Level of Service (LAS) is projected to be LOS "B" at this intersection. Based on the traffic
??on. With signalization, the intersection can
anade?qu?au'ly arc mmodatie eth traffic volumes.
The Mayor of Albemarle and another citizen asked that the southern section of the project be
changed to pass through the Laton Road area. Initial studies for the project considered an alternate
which crossed in the Laton Road area. This alternative involved more residential impacts as well
as impacts to the fire department. Due to public opposition and relocation impacts, this alternative
was not considered feasible.
(9)
A property owner expressed opposition to the project. The owner felt the roadway would create
more congestion than currently existed. Furthermore, the owner noted the project crossed her
property which has historic merit. She noted that there is an Indian burial site at Palestine Road.
In response to this citizen's concerns, it should be noted that a historic al/architectural survey and an
archaeological investigation were completed for the project. These surveys did not identify any
historic or archaeological features on this property owner's land. The State Department of Cultural
Resources, Division of Archives and History, has concurred with the surveys. Also, there is no
evidence of an Indian Burial site within the project's construction limits.
In response to the congestion question by a number of citizens, including Ms. Morton, it is
emphasized that the connector will provide a direct connection for cross town movements.
Motorists will no longer be forced to use local, residential streets to cross town. The motorists'
safety is enhanced because the connector will have wider travel lanes, wider shoulders and a higher
design speed than the local roads.
Letters which were received following the hearing included four letters from citizens favoring the
project. A property owner expressed disagreement with the design of the project from station
105+00 to 138+00. The alignment from Station 105+00 to 138+00 will be reexamined during the
design phase of the project. The alignment has already been evaluated to minimize impacts to the
Moss-Coble Farm; however, further refinements in the alignment will be considered during final
design to result in the fewest impacts possible through this area.
A petition with thirteen names was submitted opposing the project. A separate petition opposing
the project including 174 names was submitted by the Centerview Baptist Church. The project
involves widening the existing roadway on the opposite side of the roadway from the church.
Therefore, impacts to the church property will be minimal.
There were four letters received from property owners who opposed the project. They felt there
would be more congestion at US 52 and NC 740. Also, one of the property owners felt the
connector should be moved away from the park. In response to these comments, it should be
noted that the Level of Service at NC 740 for the year 2010 without signalization is projected to be
"F". The intersection was analyzed as an unsignalized intersection because current traffic
projections did not warrant traffic signal installation. However, as noted above, the unsignalized
intersection would not function properly under design year traffic conditions. The design year
_
traffic satisfies the peak hour volume warrant and a traffic signal is recommended at this. location.
A traffic signal will improve the operation of the intersection to LOS "B".
With regard to the park comment, it should be noted that the Albemarle Parks and Recreation
Department concurs with the plans for the connector. Since the active uses associated with the
park are set well away from the roadway, it was felt that the roadway would not create a safety
problem for park users and others traveling in this area. Symmetrical widening of Centerview
Church Road in the park area would result in residential relocations on the opposite side of the
roadway from the park.
The City Council and Mayor of Albemarle expressed their support of the project. They felt the
construction-of this route would alleviate the current problem of cross town traffic which now uses
neighborhood streets.
A property owner wrote that NC 24/27 should be four-laved. In response to this comment, NC
24/27 is scheduled in the 11ansportation Improvement Program (TIP) to be widened The Project
identification number for this ,project is R-2530.
(10)
One citizen's recommendations for changing the route were sketched and submitted These
recommendations involved constructing the connector along Talbert Road. With this route, the
existing roadway would have to be upgraded and more relocations would result.
The above discussion covers the comments received at the public hearing and in writing following
the public hearing.
VII. Revisions to the Environmental Assessment
The Environmental Assessment states that "... no traffic signals are proposed along the project
except at US 52." Following the public hearing, some additional analysis was performed for the
intersection of the proposed connector with NC 740 at the southern project terminus. As described
in C. Public Involvement Following the Environmental Assessment above, the
intersection was initially analyzed as an unsignalized intersection because current traffic projections
did not warrant traffic signal installation. Further analysis revealed that as traffic volumes increase
towards the approach of the design year (2010), the level of service deteriorates to Level of Service
(LOS) "F". A traffic signal is warranted due to peak hour volumes. A traffic signal will improve
the operation of the intersection to LOS "B".
VIII. Basis For Finding of No Significant Impact
Based upon a study of the proposed project as documented in the Environmental Assessment, and
upon comments received from Federal. State and local agencies, it is the finding of the North
Carolina Department of Transportation that the project will not have a significant impact upon the
human or natural environment. The project is consistent with plans and goals that have been
adopted by the appropriate. local governments and the State of North Carolina. Therefore, a state
environmental impact statement or further environmental analysis will not be required.
In particular, the following have been determined-
• The project is not controversial on environmental grounds.
• No adverse impacts on natural, ecological, cultural or scenic resources of national, state
or local importance are expected.
• A minimum number of businesses and residences will be relocated.
• No significant detrimental impact on air or water quality for adjoining areas is expected.
There will be some increases in noise levels for some areas adjacent to the project. The
use of noise abatement measures is not judged feasible or reasonable for this project.
• The project is consistent with local plans and will not divide or disrupt a community or
neighborhood The project is locally supported.
• Temporary increases in sedimentation will occur during construction.
In view of the above, it has been determined that a Finding of No Significant Impact is applicable
for this project.
(11)
IX. List of Environmental Commitments
1. Obtain a bridge general and box culvert construction permit (SAWC082-N-084-0031) from
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in conjunction with the proposed improvements at Little
Long Creek.
2. Measures will be taken to control dust during construction when necessary for the
protection and comfort of area motorists and residents.
3. Utilize "best management practices" during construction to minimize and avoid damages to
wetlands, vegetation and wildlife, including attention to sedimentation and erosion control
measures.
4. Have the contractor develop an erosion control schedule prior to the start of work and
adhere to the provisions of FHPM 7-7-3.
5. Use temporary erosion control measures (berms, dikes, silt basins, etc.) as needed during
construction.
6. Have the contractor adhere to local ordinances governing pollution control.
7. Embankment side slopes will be designed for the maximum grade to avoid fill in the
wetlands. Culverts will be sized and located to maintain or enhance the existing surface
water conditions of each wetland.
8. The Division of Highways will hold a pre-construction conference between representatives
of the NCDOT, the contractor, representatives of the involved utility companies, and
pertinent local officials. Methods to coordinate utility adjustments and to minimize damage
or rupture of existing service will be discussed at this conference.
9. Waste or debris shall be disposed of in areas that are 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 responsible engineer.
10. Any burning will be done in accordance with applicable local laws and ordinances, along
with regulations of the North Carolina Plan for Implementing National Ambient Air Quality
Standards. Burning will only be done on the right-of-way, under constant supervision, .
with good atmospheric conditions, as remote from existing dwellings as possible.
11. Borrow pits and all ditches will be drained insofar as possible to alleviate breeding areas for
mosquitoes. In addition, care will be taken not to block drainage ditches. An extensive
rodent control program will be established where structures are to be removed or
demolished to prevent the migration of rodents into surrounding areas.
12. Coordination will be initiated with the N .C. Geodetic Survey to ensure that geodetic
markers located along the project corridor will be protected and/or relocated
13. Based on the findings of the environmental screening survey conducted for the project, any
underground storage tanks which fall within the limits of construction will be removed in
accordance with state requirements and regulations.
(12)
? NT OF TyFy „?? ?
p -?ln?
_ United States Department of the Interior fNl App ENW—
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE w?ra
?4RCN 3 Raleigh Field Office
Pout Office Box 33726
10: Mr. L. J. Ward, Manage1h, North Carolina 27636-3726
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
N.C. Department of Transportation
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
INSTANT REPLY
Please excuse this form. We thought you would prefer a speedy reply to a
formal letter. This form serves to provide U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
recommendations pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, as
amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543).
Res State Env. Assessment, Albemarle NE Connector Stanly Co U-2400
Project Name
November 19, 1991
Date of Incoming Letter
Based on our records, there are no Federally-listed endangered.or
threatened species which may occur within the project impact area.
The attached page(s) list(s) the Federally-listed species-vhich
may occur within the project impact area.
If the proposed project will be removing pines greater than or equal
to 30 years of age in pine or pine/hardwood habitat, surveys should
be conducted for active red-cockaded woodpecker cavity trees in
.appropriate habitat within a 1/2 mile radius of project boundaries.
If red-cockaded woodpeckers are observed within the project area or
active cavity trees found, the project has the potential to adversely
affect the red-cockaded-woodpecker, and you should contact this
office for further information.
XX Concur - Is not likely to adversely affect Federally-listed
endangered or threateded species.
Staffing limitations prevent us from conducting a field inspection
of the project site. Therefore, we are unable to provide you
with site specific recommendations at this time.
Ouestions regarding this form letter may be directed to the biologist who is
handling this project. %
Mologist ` ?t'4e
CONCURS C (L
Endangered Species to
Coordinator
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON. NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
W REPLY REFER TO
Planning Division
December 5, 1991
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:
We have reviewed the "State Environmental Assessment for Albemarle,
Northeast Connector from US 52 to NC 740, Stanly County, X-2400" and
offer the following comments.
Both the city of Albemarle and Stanly County participate in the National
Flood Insurance Program and has had a detailed flood insurance study
performed. One of the streams in the project area has the 100-year flood
profiles and regulatory floodways computed. The roadway and structures
within the flood plains should be designed so as not to cause a signifi-
cant increase in the upstream flooding or cause greater than a 1.0-foot
floodway surcharge. Any changes made to the floodway or profiles should
be coordinated with the local community for possible revisions to their
flood insurance maps and reports. Proper consideration should be given to
the modifications to the drainage structures on the streams without mapped
flood plains.
'Since our letter of May 16, 1990, there has been a change in the
procedure for delineation of wetlands. On August 17, 1991,.the 1992
Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act became law ahd invalidated
jurisdictional determinations made pursuant to the January 1989 "Federal
Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands." 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.
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. Under our mitigation policy,
I
-2-
impacts to wetlands should first be avoided or minimized. We will then
consider compensation or mitigation for unavoidable impacts. 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. Should you
have any questions, please contact Mr. Steve Lund of our Regulatory Branch,
Asheville, North Carolina, at [phone].
We appreciate the opportunity to comment on this project. If we can
be of further assistance to you, please do riot hesitate to contact us.

Chief, *lan4ing Division
A
s
?T a U
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Land Resources
James G. Martin. Governor PROJECT REVIEW COMMENTS Charles H. Gardner
Wiliam W. Cobey, Jr.. Secretary Director
Project Number: Cia _ 03(o County: `
Project Name: i ?-?C, a?.V?.e o T 4 -
t_ rk,ojec} t lo. 9. 8lo oit03 `Tl p 44_dqoo
Geodetic Survey
This project will impact geodetic survey markers. H.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: Y
other (comments attached)
For more information contact the Geodetic Survey office at [phone].
Reviety(gE Date
Erosion and Sedimentation Control
No comment
This project will require approval of an erosion and sedimentation
control plan prior to beginning any land-disturbing activity if more
than one (1) afire will be disturbed.
If an environmental document is required to satisfy Environmental
Policy Act (SEPA) requirements, the document must be submitted as part
of the 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 contact the Land Quality Section"at [phone].
Af, ? I r.. _.. &Ar__/_-_
Revi .er
-401
Date
P.O. Box 27687 • Raleigh. N.C. 27611-7687 • Telephone [phone]
An Fnm ul OnnOftLflltV ARrnUdVe ACtion r"Pioyer
M L 96M
•' ?.3 .2 c' SP13K
POP. 285 Junction
1528_ ?; 1561
14ai 1519 •? ?? 7 1584
'5 " ?.% 1518 ST
1214 Q 1.0 r? 1545 R
. ? ? 1523 2.?
- ;
1436
"'• c 1549 BADI I
:a
o ?AZ MK 2 ''O(UNINC.)
POP.
,
1,626: -.
Q ALBEPO T
PA ESTINE ry ??
® K 96(P S7
?. Palestine .S 1548 1547 .
y?
YSLIJOW & WATER STN -3 STN
J-96 7 X ? C
SUNSETS ?? If,
OPLI?1 }{py/ARD ?,SP? COGGINA - t QEEP.
CUR( ?`'?? : ?-.Lc • : 1721
HERR K•M'tEY W
D 1725 ?o
':KgERT I 1543 .5
P?w WOLF } c ?WA Y CM(D) n '`? 1798
?` STaLL S A u?TOR
S?c PETC?7ILG
1 rA01 ARIE {a 173 1
AM
t1K
'+k .. N 1730
? • .E MCDONAL? WD
r OF F w®ALBEMARLE V 6A. RRINGER
0
HOC ?t. t4OTEC a t1.12GAI?PIJ?Nt 2LARRY '
t, CHICKEN 5>pC?N'9? / M&R? ?2?7? ?
F _ V711RNOFF • PORT .? v. AFOLEY
WAIL IKOUS /? 1799
WDL 50® • e' '''•'• .v `..
%1
HANDI RADy 3
Q?d. G f , ? ?'?UJ'• -Albemarle TOM
<
?j' lNTERNAt10NAL m A;rnort
?? vAhDEN PORTERS 8 ILLSO?
PALMER ? 'L•
.y 1901 lp.`•tAr'CL,A
Y J EY*3 G;9 p STONY GA 1720
N BYRD? - .l
.4 *9 2003 .1907 17:
.a
?\4 •?? . . ? ? t)INK
1961
r Z
?`?/J UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
`ilil/?
vgolly REGION IV
345 COURTLAND STREET. N.E.
ATLANTA. GEORGIA 30365
DEC 1 1 1991
Mr. L. J. Ward, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
N.C. Department of Transportation
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611
Subject: Environmental Assessment (EA) and Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI) for the Construction of the
Albemarle, Northeast Connector from US 52 to NC 740,
Stanly County NC
Dear Mr. Ward:
Pursuant to Section 309 of the Clean Air Act, EPA, Region IV
has reviewed the subject EA which describes performing two-lane
improvements for a bypass around the downtown area of Albemarle
along a 3.3 mile segment of NC 209. The roadway design will be
such that future expansion to a multi-lane configuration will
be facilitated. Specific modifications include changes in
roadway alignment, a right turn lane, and one bridge
replacement. The majority of the consequences of this.action
were adequately discussed with one possible exception. It has
been our experience that facilities of this nature engender
relocations of commercial establishments, e.g. "strip shopping
centers". The impacts of relocations to the bypass both on the
downtown area and on the project objective of facilitating
traffic movement should be considered during further planning.
If your investigations show that this commercialization will..
degrade level of service more rapidly than NCDOT considers
acceptable, you may wish to multi-lane this facility now rather
than in the near future.
On the basis of our review we concur with your proposed FONSI,
i.e., the overall environmental consequences of this action do
not appear to require evaluation in the more rigorous context
of an environmental impact statement. On a procedural matter
we wish to complement your staff on its preparation of the
"Photo Log of Wetlands and Drainageways" for this project.
These pictures and. the accompanying information gave a much
better perspective of these biologically sensitive areas than
would have been possible from even the most detailed text
discussion.
Printed on Recycled Paper
Z R
Thank you for the opportunity
further assistance, Dr. Gerald
on
as initial point of contact o
Pelej (404-347-2126) should
necessary Sction 404 permits.
Sincerely,

to comment. If we can be of
Miller (404-347-3776) will serve
NEPA matters whereas Mr. Lee
be contacted regarding any
Heinz J. Mueller, Chief
Environmental Policy Section
Federal Activities Branch

City of Albemarle
North Carolina
December 12, 1991
Office of
City Manager
(7041982-0131
Ms. Hilda Threatt
Centralina Council of Governments
P. 0. Box 35008
Charlotte, North Carolina 28235
Re: Intergovernmental Review Process - State #92-0363
Dear Ms. Threatt:
Malting Address
P. O. BOX 190
Albemarle. N. C.
28002-0190
We are in receipt of your request for comments from the City of Albemarle
regarding the proposed construction of a northeast connector street by the
North Carolina Department of Transportation.
This matter was reviewed by the City Council at its meeting on December 10, at
which time the Council voted unanimously to endorse the project as proposed.
It is the City's position that this route will help to alleviate-the current
problem of crosstown traffic using neighborhood streets not designed for that
purpose.
Thank you for your assistance.in forwarding these favorable comments to the
appropriate authorities. If I can provide any additional information, please
let me know.
Sincerely,
Raymond I. Allen
City Manager
RIA:pwt
Attachment
T a? STAI4
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James G. Martin, Governor
Patric Dorsey, Secretary
Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
December 18., 1991
MEMORANDUM
TO: L. J. Ward, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
Department of M ansportation
FROM: David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
SUBJECT: Albemarle Northeast Connector from US 52 to
NC 740, Stanly County, U-2400, CH 92-E-4220-0363,
9.8100163
We have reviewed the Environmental Assessment from the State
Clearinghouse and would like to comment.
Since the National Park Service must authorize the Section 6(f)
involvement required for the acquisition of right-of-way from
park property, we feel that this approval constitutes.a federal
undertaking for this project. Thus, we feel that the project is
subject to compliance with Section 106 of the'Nationa'1 Historic
Preservation Act and that the National Register-eligible Moss-
Coble Farm needs to be taken into consideration under the
Advisory council on Historic Preservation's regulations.
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
questions concerning the above
Gledhill-Earley, environmental
4763.
and consideration. If you have
comment, please contact Renee
review coordinator, at 919/733-
DB:slw
cc: State Clearinghouse
Barbara Church
IU9 East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807

C
City of 'Albemarle
North Carolina
Ober 4
Afailin Addrew
-.P. U. Box I SK)
ben,ar/r. N.
?? ? ? ? J? 2-(llWl
Parks and Recreation
(7041 982-0131
July 17, 1991
JUL -9
liz Vi
Ms. Leigh B. Cobb, Project Engineer 4 HIGII?R SF
Planning and Environment Branch
NCDOT RFN
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Reference: Albemarle NE Connector, N.C. T.I.P. No. U-2400
State Project No. 9.8100163
Dear Ms. Cobb:
Thank you for your concise and informative letter of July 10
concerning the Section 6(f) conversion regulation of the LWCF
Act. The Regional Consultants in the Recreation Resources
Service have also kept us informed of our responsibilities
concerning the park lands purchased under LWCF. We have
understood that-park land would be needed for right-of-way and
replaced with an amount of land from the project area equal in
.value to the land taken from the park.
A.B. Stewart of CRS Sirrine Engineers has also been in touch
with me by'telephone.to explain the conversion and alert me that
you would be sending a letter asking for comment on the
replacement property.
The most desirable replacement property, especially noting
the small quantity under consideration, would be that located
east of the park entrance area and owned by Gay S.-Mullinix.
This choice is more acceptable than a portion of tracts which may
be found on the north and east sides of our current boundaries.
The City is willing to receive this as replacement property for
the required park land for the Connector.
Sincerely,
Lindsey Dunevant, Director
cc : Ray Allen, City Manager

REQ"p
p-P "-7
U
M
Q
lI?
/A
-o
6 O
8
tt
111 IT
REQUESTED.
REPLACEMENT
10 GAY S. \
N
MULLINIX?
fl 12 ! 1 + I
..
ot.
'CENTERVIEW 6APTI
CHURCH
t
I11V \ •.
j? / / ?arf
.oe
Aff
ll?w
I,?

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
James G. Martin, Govemor
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary
Regional Offices
Asheville MEMORANDUM
704/2516208
N=`'"°e TO: Melba McGee
919/486.1541
Al-
Moom wAk Through : Alan Clark
704/6634699
Raleigh From: Ron Ferrell
919/733-2314
Subject: EA for Albemarle
Washington
919J94&6481 State Project No.
Stanly County
Wilmington
919/393-3900
December 18, 1991
George T. Everett, Ph.D.
Director
NE Connector from US 52 to NC 740
9.8100163, TIP #U-2400
Winston-salem The subject document has been reviewed by this-office. The
919/896.7007 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 EA prepared for this project which will impact 1.15 acres
of wetlands..
1. Prior to the, approval of any borrow source or disposal
area developed for use on this project, the contractor
shall obtain confirmation from the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers that the removal of borrow material or the
disposal of excavated spoil material will not impact
jurisdictional wetlands.
2. The total wetland impact for this project is 1.15 acres
including the 0.2 acres of wetland impact associated with
Little Long Creek. Mitigation for unavoidable impacts
should involve the restoration of the degraded wetlands
associated with the intermittent stream crossings.
3. The management practices outlined in Section 4.9.1.3 of
the EA should become conditions in the construction
contract.
P.O. &,x 24535. Ralekk Mxth t aroliaa 27,6264635 Tek &xta 919-733-7015 1 1kAmin (Omvm«,n Pas.
? V
4. Although the EA states that bridging over Little Long
Creek was considered there is no data provided to support
the conclusion that the cost of the bridge was
prohibitive. Also, the statement that constructiion of the
bridge would not result in net savings in habitat is not
substantiated. Please provide documentation to support
these statements.
4. As stated above, a 401 Water Quality Certification
will be required for this project.
5. Endorsement of the EA by DEM does not preclude the
denial of the 401 Certification upon application if
wetland impacts have not been avoided and minimized to
the maximum extent practicable.
Questions regarding the 401 Certification should be directed
to Ron Ferrell in DEM's Water Quality Planning Branch.
ALBUS52.EA/REF1
cc: Ron Ferrell
. V
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188,919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee, Division of Planning and Assessment
Dept. of Environment, Health & Natural Resources n
FROM: Dennis L. Stewart, Manager AzlT wm
Habitat Conservation.Program
DATE: December 20, 1991
SUBJECT: State Environmental Assessment for Albemarle Northeast
Connector from US 52 to NC 740, Stanly County, NC.
State Project No. 9.8100163; T.I.P. No. U-2400.
The subject document has been reviewed by professional
biologists on the Wildlife Resources Commission staff. A field
investigation was conducted on 12 December 1991. Our comments
are provided in accordance with certain provisions of the N.C.
Environmental Policy Act (G.S. 113A-1 through 113A-10; 1 NCAC
25).
The N.C. Department of Transportation proposes to build a
3.4 mile long 'connector. road from US 52 N at Centerview Church
Road to NC 740 just north of NC 24/27/73. This new.connector
will follow existing roads, on a wider right-of-way, for
approximately one-third of its length. The remainder of the
project will be built on a new location, mostly on undeveloped
land within the Albemarle city limits. Wetlands at 7 sites,
totalling 0.95 acres will be impacted by the proposed project.
The Environmental Assessment is relatively complete in its
treatment of wildlife and wetlands and expected impacts from the
proposed project. However, no detailed plan for compensatory'
mitigation for wetland losses was found. On page 33 of the
Environmental Assessment, compensatory design features were
mentioned but no specific sites or acreages were given. We will
withhold final approval of the document until an acceptable plan
is submitted for mitigation of unavoidable wetland losses.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on and review this
document. If we may provide further assistance please advise.
DLS/lp
cc: Ken Knight, District 6 Wildlife Biologist
Stephen Pozzanghera, Habitat Conservation Biologist
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
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
RE:
DATE:
Chrys Baggett
State Clearinghouse
Melba McGee Nrw
Douglas G. Lrwvis
Director
Planning and Assessment
92-0363 - EA for Albemarle NE Connector, Stanly County
December 23, 1991
The referenced project has been reviewed by the Department
of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. Comments have
been attached.
Our primary interest is the direct impacts to wetlands and
the fact that a detailed mitigation plan has not been developed.
Details of mitigation will have to be worked out to the
satisfaction of all the involved regulatory agencies before this
department grants final project approval.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond.
attachments
P.U. Box 27687. Raldgh. Noah (:artAina 27611.7tA., Trkrlxwx 4)19.73316376
isur[
North Carolina
Department of Administration
James G. Martin, Governor
December 31, 1991
Mr. Calvin Leggett
N.C. Department of Transportation
Program Development Branch
Highway Building
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Dear Mr. Leggett:
JAN 6.
James S. Lofton, Secretary
RE: SCH File #92-E-4220-0363; Environmental Assessment for the
Proposed Albemarle Northeast Connector from US 52 to NC 740
in Stanly County (TIP# U-2400)
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 attached comments should be taken
into consideration in project development.
Best regards.
Sincerely,
ames S. Lofton
JSL:jt
Attachment
cc: Region F.
116 West Jones Street - Raleigh, North Carolina 27603.8003 - Telephone [phone]
State Courier 51-01.00
An Equal opportunity I Afflrmadi a Action Employer