19940289 Ver 1_Complete File_19940327

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources ??.
Division of Environmental Management -?I
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary E H N F=1
A. Preston Howard, Jr., RE., Director
April 4, 1994
Mr. Barney O'Quinn
Planning and Environmental Branch
N.C. DOT
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, N.C. 27611-5201
Dear Mr. O'Quinn:
Subject: Proposed fill in Wetlands or Waters
Road improvement, widening US 21 Business...
Surry County DEM Project #94289
We have reviewed your request for 401 Water Quality Certification to
place fill material in waters which are tributary to Elkin Creek for road
widening located at US 21 Bypass from SR 1138 to US 21 Bypass in Surry County
as described in your submittal dated 15 March 1994. Based on this review, we
have determined that the proposed fill is covered by General Water Quality
Certification No. 2732. A copy of the General Certification is attached.
This Certification is necessary for coverage under Corps of Engineers'
Nationwide Permit No. 14. This action completes DEM's review under Section
401 of the Clean Water Act.
If this Certification is unacceptable to you, you have the right to an
adjudicatory hearing upon written request within thirty (30) days following
receipt of this Certification. This request must be in the form of a written
petition conforming to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes and
filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings, P.O. Box 27447, Raleigh,
N.C. 27611-7447. Unless such demands are made, this Certification shall be
final and binding.
If you have any questions, please contact John Dorney at 919-733-1786.
Sincerely,
sto Howard, J P.E.
94289.1tr
Attachment
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Raleigh Field Office
Winston-Salem DEM Regional Office
Mr. John Dorney
Central Files

P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
w?
I
4®1 1csUED
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ZAANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT, JR
GOVERNOR
,,.. STATE o
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
March 15, 1994
District Engineer
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
P. O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402
ATTENTION: Regulatory Branch
Dear Sir:
ay??9
R. SAMUEL HUNT III
SECRETARY
r
L "I 2 ? 1994.
SUBJECT: Surry County, Widening of US 21 Business from SR
1138 to US 21 Bypass in Elkin, State Project No.
6.741017, TIP project No. R-2521.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation proposes
to widen US 21 Business in Elkin, from a two and three lane
facility to a five lane curb and gutter facility. This
project will extend 1.2 miles, from SR 1138 to US 21 Bypass.
The proposed activity will cross two unnamed tributaries
of Elkin Creek. The proposed construction will retain and
extend the two existing pipes (52" and 24" in diameter)
through which the two tributaries flow. There are no other
existing bridges or culverts in the proposed section. The
project will not impact jurisdictional wetlands but will
involve jurisdictional surface-waters (classified as WS-II
CA). Although located in a trout county, this project does
not cross, nor is it associated with water resources
designated as trout waters.
It is anticipated that this construction activity
qualifies for Federal authorization pursuant to the pre-
discharge notification provisions set forth in Nationwide
Permit 33 CFR 330.5(a)(14). Application is hereby made for
Department of Army permits as required for such activities-.
Enclosed please find a pre-discharge notification form, site
location map and permit drawings for this project. By copy
of this letter, we are also requesting a 401 Water Quality
Certification from the Division of Environmental Management.
By copy of this letter we are also requesting comments
from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine
Fisheries Service regarding the presence of any federally

it

listed or proposed threatened or endangered species or
critical habitat, and from the State Historic Preservation
Office regarding the presence of any historic properties in
the area.
Under the provisions of the nationwide permit
regulations, a letter of concurrence from the North Carolina
Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) must be obtained prior
to the initiation of construction of any project within the
designated trout counties. By copy of this letter, it is
requested that NCWRC provide comments to the proposed
project.
If you have any questions, or if we may provide any
further information, please contact Ms. Robin M. Little of
NCDOT's Environmental Unit at [phone].
Sincerely,
B. u' n, P. E.
Assistant Branch Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
cc: Mr.
Mr.
Ms.
Sta
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
John Dorney, DEHNR, DEM
John Thomas, COE-Raleigh
L. K. Gantt, USFWS
to Historic Preservation Officer
David Cox, NCWRC
A. L. Hankins, P.E., Hydraulics
Jim Lee, P.E., Bridge Maintenance Unit
W. E. Hoke, P.E., Division 11 Engineer
NOTIFICATION FORM
INFORMATION SHEET
Nationwide permits that require notification to the Corps of Engineers
Nationwide permits that require application for Section 401 certification
A. NOTIFICATION TO THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS DISTRICT ENGINEER. (REFER TO
ITEM B. BELOW FOR DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT APPLICATION RE-
QUIREMENTS AND SPECIFICALLY NOTE NWP 26 DIFFERENCE.)
Certain nationwide permits require notification to the Corps of Engineers before work can proceed. They are as follows:
NWP 5 (only for discharges of 10 to 25 cubic yards)
NWP 7
NWP 13 (only for stabilization activities in excess of 500 feet in length or greater than an average of one cubic yard
per running foot)
NWP 14 (only for fills in special aquatic sites, including wetlands, and must include a delineation of affected special
aquatic sites)
NWP 17
NWP 18 (required when discharge exceeds 10 cubic yards or the discharge is in a special aquatic site and must include
a delineation of the affected special aquatic site, including wetlands)
NWP 21 (must include a delineation of affected special aquatic sites, including wetlands)
NWP 26 (only for greater than 1 acre total impacts and must include a delineation of affected special aquatic sites,
including wetlands)
NWP 33 (must include a restoration plan of reasonable measures to avoid and minimize impacts to aquatic resources)
NWP 37
NWP 38 (must include a delineation of affected special aquatic sites, including wetlands)
For activities that may be authorized by the above listed nationwide permits that require notification, the
applicant shall not begin work
a. Until notified that the work may proceed under the nationwide permit with any special conditions imposed by
the District Engineer, or
b. If notified that an individual permit may be required, or
c. Unless 30 days (calendar) have passed from the time a complete notification is received by the District Engineer
and no notice has been received from the District Engineer, and required state approvals have been obtained.
Required state approvals include: 1) a Section 401 water quality certification if authorization is requested for a
discharge of dredged or fill material, and 2) an approved coastal zone management consistency determination if
the activity will affect the coastal area.
Use of NWP 12 also requires notification to the District Engineer, but work may not begin until written
concurrence is received from the District Engineer. The time periods described above do not apply.
Furthermore, requirements to notify the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS), and the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), as indicated below and on the
notification form, do not apply.
B. APPLICATION TO DEM FOR NATIONWIDE PERNUT SECTION 401 CERTIFICATION.
Certain nationwide permits require an application to DEM in order to obtain Section 401 water quality certification.
They are NWP 6, NWP 12, NWP 15, NWP 16, NWP 17, NWT 21, NWP 33, NWP 34, NWP 38, and NWP 40.
Certain nationwide permits were issued general certifications and require no application. They are NWP 3, NWP 4,
NWP 5, NWP 7, NWP 20, NWP 22, NWP 23 (requires notification to DEM), NWP 25, NWP 27, NWP 32, NWP 36,
and NWP 37.
The following nationwide permits were issued general certifications for only limited activities: NWP 13 (for projects
less than 500 feet in length), NWP 14 (for projects that impact waters only), NWP 18 (for projects with less than 10
cubic yards of fill in waters only), and NWP 26 (for projects with less than or equal to one-third acre fill of waters or
wetlands). Projects that do not meet these criteria require application for Section 401 water quality certifications.
f .
C. NOTIFICATION/APPLICATION PROCEDURES.
The attached form should be used to obtain approval from the Corps of Engineers and/or the N.C. Division of
Environmental Management as specified above. The permittee should make sure that all necessary information is
provided in order to avoid delays. One copy of the completed form is required by the Corps of Engineers and seven
copies are required by DEM. Plans and maps must be on 8 1/2 x 11 inch paper.
Endangered species requirement: For Corps of Engineers notifications only, applicants must notify the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service and/or the National Marine Fisheries Service regarding the presence of endangered species that may
be affected by the proposed project.
U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
RALEIGH FIELD OFFICE
P.O. Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
Telephone [phone]
NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE
HABITAT CONSERVATION DIVISION
Pivers Island
Beaufort, NC 28516
Telephone [phone]
Historic resources requirement: For Corps of Engineers notifications only, applicants must notify the State Historic
Preservation Office regarding the presence of historic properties that may be affected by the proposed project.
STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE
N.C. DIVISION OF ARCHIVES AND HISTORY
109 East Jones Street
Raleigh, NC 27601
Telephone [phone]
Information obtained from these agencies should be forwarded to the Corps.

)EM ID: ACTION ID:
lationwide Permit Requested (Provide Nationwide Permit #):
JOINT FORM FOR
Nationwide permits that require notification to the Corps of Engineers
Nationwide permits that require application for Section 401 certification
WILMINGTON DISTRICT ENGINEER WATER QUALITY PLANNING
CORPS OF ENGINEERS DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY NC DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH,
P.O. Box 1890 AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890 P.O. Boy 29535
ATTN: CESAW-CO-E Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
Telephone [phone] ATTN: MR. jOHN DORNEY
Telephone [phone]
)NE (1) COPY OF THIS COMPLETED APPLICATION SHOULD BE SENT TO THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS.
;EVEN (7) COPIES SHOULD BE SENT TO THE N.C. DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT.
'LEASE PRINT.
i. Owners Name: North Carolina Department of Transportation
Owners Address: P. 0. Box 25201, Raleigh, NC 27611
;. Owners Phone Number (Home): --- (Work): [phone]
1. If Applicable: Agent's name or responsible corporate official, address, phone number:
B. J. O'Quinn, P.E.
Assistant Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
i. Location of work (MUST ATTACH MAP). County: Surry f
nearest Town or City: Elkin
{
Specific Location (Include road numbers, landmarks, etc.): US 21 Business from SR 1138 to US 21 ;
Bypass in Elkin.
5. Name of Closest Stream/River. Elkin Creek
1. River Basin: Yadkin
g. Is this project located in a watershed classified as Trout, SA, QW RW, WS I, or S II? YES D( I NO [ ]
9. Have any Section 404 permits been previously requested for use on this property? YES [ ] NO '[X r
If yes, explain. -
1_0. Estimated total number of acres of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, located on project site:Less than 0.01 acre [ ;
1. Number of acres of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, impacted by the proposed project:
Filled:
i
Drained:
I
Flooded:
Excavated:
Total Impacted: None
12. Description of proposed work (Attach PLANS-8 1/2" X 11" drawings only): Retain and extend two
existing concrete pipes (52" and 24" diameter) in order to widen US 21 Business over
two unnamed tributaries.
13. Purpose of proposed work: To relieve traffic congestion by increasing handling capacity
and improving safety considerations. -
14. State reasons why the applicant believes that this activity must be carried out in wetlands. Also, note measures
taken to minimize wetland impacts.
N/A
15. You are required to contact the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and/or National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS) regarding the presence or any Federally listed orproposed for listing endangered or threatened species or critical
habitat in the permit area that may be affected by the proposed project. Have you done so? YES [ X ] NO [ ]
RESPONSES FROM THE USFWS AND/OR NMFS SHOULD BE FORWARDED TO CORPS By copy of attached
letter.
16. You are required to contact the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) regarding the presence of historic
properties in the permit area which may be affected by the proposed project? Have you done so? YES [X ] NO [ ]
RESPONSE FROM THE SHPO SHOULD BE FORWARDED TO CORPS. By copy of attached
letter.
17. Additional information required by DEM:
A. Wetland delineation map showing all wetlands, streams, and lakes on the property.
B. If available, representative photograph of wetlands to be impacted by project.
C. If delineation was performed by a consultant, include all data sheets relevant to the placement of the
delineation line.
D. If a stormwater management plan is required for this project, attach copy.
E. What is land use of surrounding property?
F. If applicable, what is proposed method of sewage disposal?
G
Owner's S' a to
i
I'
4.

F E>3-1?-' y=! l UE 14:55 I D: HCDOT - HYDRHUL I CS TEL 1,10:9192-504108 911- F`i13
'ON
-"ONE C
6 it
N : ?-'? .?? • ..;?r. -- ~~ i .? _,?..-: i } C?_I?-_:`--? t . f'+ J Itit ,..?. 111, ..,
it \ \ `\ - _?_ ?' `' •. rvC;
V\ It c,
I\\
ILI
ZONE A
1
4
,
`'? 1 ' ` •,
`End1Proj?ect _?d-i.?
y`\ 1157 _-?i:\\ ) ya? 11 C?'eIne-~ fill Church
,per: F-'?
... • LKIN1- ?. 11 a I
? y1 \?\\ it ti''.*`?r??s.'?fi;?'t'iiYa???ii3dt'!t?i??y' .. ,. ? y?
Stote 4 \+1 1153 _? ?? 1 II ??-°' `ZONE A
Corler lid. Ftdf?=r' - _ - =
co 1z"i
r ELKIN •S
VALLEY::
O
j .Begin Project /^a ?? ,? ~-`` e, l°?,; '?? ",
ZONE C
_ \ \..
11
NOICI'H CAROLINA DEPARTMENT
TRANSPORTATION
s`f r ) \ ?? ?? ? \ DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
WIDENING OF US 21 BUSINESS
E1k1n ® FROM SR 1138 TO US 21 BYPASS
FtescrVol SURRY COUNTY
T. 1. P. NO. R - 2521
'?-70NE A
+ L• J / \ `.`_ p _ ' ?PAntET•CnrinRh
rill, 6
i300
_ s?..Cedarbrook • °' ?'-'1 ` \ -
- - J/ - if -Country Club l •Cem , -
017
00 e?Grxasy eke D i 1 ---- I\. 1133 \ ?• Y
- _ -- , 1161 p /7<
/
co 17
7-30" W
. 1110• / .
loot 10161 - - f-?, j _ 1067 00
End Project - N
?\/ - - U\ \ ' I North Elkin /e nt n; , G Ebeneze[ Ch qll?v
e •1157
``-
10-
1119 "t 04"?
/" ?.1107
?_- _-- ? _ 11 ?\j 1 ???11 j/ ( f.:? .-
4015
>
/i /1e
1136
o0o 4:v'
/00
\ i -_ f% _ ``J' - ?? ?t?•. i' `l kin` '' ii<St•- '`? I a`'1 \ O } 77-
A5
_
14
q Project'
??-
1?` ,`
F NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMH:N'I' Oi. - _ ?'?` •?u. \. ?„' t 1,.\? na ^,
?.-
'2000D TRANSPORTATION 77-
FEET DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS?•'
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL. -•? - ?\ l? ? ' %i ?r\ / - \i-
BRANCH
WIDENING OF U ?• ;. •A
S 21 BUSINESS ,' _ _ ,1.. \•?1 ti`'1•_. t %.? .. • \,
FROM SR 1136 '? _ •`
Hi TO US 21 BYPASS
SURR sY, , l:• ,`.' - ^?.•. 1``'_I _ t-.^•`' ;,a?? ' :rte". t -
Y COUNTY ' ;I ' f,? • ` '•' _?';?.•- •?.
T. I. P. NO. R-2521 :?• ((per-'_ ,j j_% . - ;`l: -?- Not'Ih EIk1ng
U,, •,`\, .:?_ :- ` - ?-:. ', Quad Map?
_-
8/93 FIG. 1
4012. 1 t I t I! n _ I? • 1 . r? r / /.• ?' / .•
rol.

I
I
1I
i
i
i
\ I
\ I
\ I
1 ? I
1 •. I
1 I
1
\ I
\ I
_ =F
---------•- - -- \ !
----- 463.LU' .------ I \\ \ ?z
I \ \ nl?.
I \ \ Glu
I \ \\ II
I \ \ I
I \\ \ I
StD 10. I? \ \ ?
I
1 \ \ N.G. H1CdWAY CON.K1!SSION 1 \
\ \ \ H!GHWAf PATROL S(ATWN
O6 226 PG 61E 1 1 I \ `\' ! I
\ \ cnas5\ l ! ( \ \\ i
\ \ \ PAiE0 \\
\ \ \ z-xAT 1 , i;/ ! I YADKIN VALLEY REALTt\ Q \? I
\ \ \ \ RADIO ANT. 1 ;1
OB US PG 557 \ ? ?\I
\\ba. \\? \\ \? rvAG?L == 2.51 [UR660uv!E?
G •^. . 1 ?' colic ?r? •\? I I \ [,5 S% c
5
W.
GAS
pY \
` \ \? \ STO PUMPS II Q I In.
\ ?z ,\ BIn?0. I I •` ! ? Q'1'Cjq, \ 1a° 's°o'y ? I \
Ea • IS BRK BUS f= I I r44OS $?
\= 9\ ??
LAC
` ``1 \\ ?c nc\ '??AS POLE Q ! i I Q G' ?^?'IF:P \ cALLOx
1 1 (• L. TANK
1 1 .\ \ \ I 1 -_ \ Qi \ j I \\
i r ?Cf Sv' T I ? ? ? ? .,- i•, - \ I .xcr. LwA IS Lnst.:
,? Jr\\a,\\ © 0U'lX3Ve' GRAsS __-- -- ?..T?.- -7----`•.J= -'\ '• --1
24' C-P
\. 1S%i.UN?NONN nn?? I i II o•p? =a
f3 w... (?MJ. Fomfb.I. Fv .1•F??o Foa?f ? A
\I `i
----F-,?-?_.--------- .\ 01

`\ pl 1
11111
W
l
1 JlWEL
•`` ;,plj
Q \
` ---
I ----•- a

-r
7- 1
RGEH
?
`I \ WORTH WINEBA
i rl
0
UB 360 PG 95
I I1
? ? , 11iAG? I r. e - 13 . r
J
.o I N I I yr•\V

0x
\\2?4 a
\T ?? fnu
I I _ •

?\1 o ?
Q
TRAC?L?E-

U5 364 PG 136 06 414 PO 13204_ \ y°•%/?

10,

LL
Q,I•? ??
Q`i'?,J1?,IIQ.I
B N ? 9?
-
T
tP.ACt LWE -? 4 ? WE /

/N

--CG PC
i«ACT II /M
/
i/

ER6ER I P. LNAM.- +„• \
O6 299 PG 248 X17•'
x n 1.S' cNL
.? GFTE
_ 11
? Poo
PUS
GAS?tANKS1I conc
. i I
f
-_T it
I?JIC'JNC. I
CRMfI
S7EP5' SLAB iPA?EU DR.I

I MET. I
I
pyc
?
E=I! I
I 1
II PUMP
`
`-J
11 S7Al10N
!
2.S
I IS MET Bus
L1? fr .
Q
Q
SrOR.
BUILD.
a C.? 0
fl0
4.24' PEE `Aii12' CONC
1?°_1P ----(Tune-Fa
K Q II 01, 2e5 PG 12.
11
r . II
II x4:•^s
G
w( 4%
I `
I
I
!
xl?
I
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
TRANSMITTAL SLIP DATE
8 -26 -- ?3
TO: M r rr.; G p'p m
(r REF. NO. OR ROOM, BLDG.
Vern- 06:f-I NR
FROM: REF. NO. OR ROOM, BLDG.
ACTION
? NOTE AND FILE ? PER OUR CONVERSATION
? NOTE AND RETURN TO ME ? PER YOUR REQUEST
? RETURN. WITH MORE DETAILS ? FOR YOUR APPROVAL
? NOTE AND SEE ME ABOUT THIS ? FOR YOUR INFORMATION
? PLEASE ANSWER ? FOR YOUR COMMENTS
? PREPARE REPLY FOR MY SIGNATURE ? SIGNATURE
? TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION ? INVESTIGATE AND REPORT
COMMENTS:
T

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA L
DEPARTMENT OF 1PANSPORTATION
q? 3 0 1993
JAMES B. HUNT, JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS R. SAMUEL HUNT III
GovERNOR P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201 SECRETARY
August 20, 1993
MEMORANDUM TO: Mr. Eric Galamb
DEM - DEHNR, 6th Floor
FROM: L. J. Ward, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
SUBJECT: Elkin, Widening of US 21 Business from US 21 Bypass to
SR 1138 (CC Camp Road), Surry County, State Project
6.741017, TIP No. R-2521
The Planning and Environmental Branch of the Division of Highways has
begun studying the proposed improvements to widen US 21 Business from US 21
Bypass to SR 1138 (CC Camp Road). The project is included in the 1994-2000
North Carolina Transportation Improvement Program and is scheduled for right
of way in fiscal year 1994 and construction in fiscal year 1994.
The proposed project is to improve the traffic carrying capacity of the
portion of US 21 Business from US 21 Bypass to CC Camp Road (SR 1138) by
widening it to a five lane, 64-foot curb and gutter facility.
We would appreciate any information you might have that would be helpful
in evaluating potential environmental impacts of the project. If applicable,
please identify any permits or approvals which may be required by your
agency. Your comments will be used in the preparation of a state funded
Environmental Assessment. This document will be prepared in accordance with
the State Environmental Policy Act. It is desirable that your agency respond
by October 8, 1993 so that your comments can be used in the preparation of
this document.
If you have any questions concerning the project, please contact Ron
Lucas, Project Planning Engineer, of this Branch at [phone].
LJW/plr
Attachment

4
3-4 i
t"
S"
??? • Low Gap
89

ry Lane S U
1
I

NORTING LINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANTION
DIVISHIGHWAYS
PLANND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANW IDENING OF US 21 BUSINESS
FROM SR 1138 TO US 21 BYPASS
SURRY COUNTY
T. 1. P. NO. R - 2521
8/93
FIG. 1
p rings
Ch `` If
If
186
N!- .. i'" •--\_• 1
T - - u.- Ced"brook •Cem .
- / - o Country Club
/ - _ ?, _ -- ; - ,• it - ? '? ??\\ - ?- ??; ? ?
"i7 x
°p %Gra9sy k O _ - \ 1133 \ 1
--1/20
Ch e- \ ----- =
`1101
- - -=/ -
00
OBI . ? ?? - ???. ???. ' / ?. ) \ ? ?--? ? „" ? ? .- _
416!x- _ X11
/too - _ :\ 11 .CC /?I / 1. - - •` _. _.
North Elkin IlIe *I Ebenezer Ch .
use i _'.
M?
^.I ^' I l o? 10,0 -=-
r. y -4L_
'015 128
0a' Grav
e,
-Armory - boo - - - _
IC
v I. kin
1138
4014 11
- I
EET 2,
td.
77
_ _ J o•
bou
Pi nt'? Derr ?J? Ji:' a O 1 G \• ,?` \ -1 \\
Hitt=? - o'' `/,?? •'' =? _ ?N , ,,.; - •=?\ j - >-•, -r-- ? _ .,?\ ?i? ?` •?
??` ; ,. '>I? - •?• ( .;i• • = - Nor- h Eikin?•? /
{`: /ors'-_ I -
j
%
Quad Map
spitali?
1
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
A ILFWA
r41
ID F1
September 20, 1993
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee, Planning
FROM: Monica Swihart, 'Kater
and Assessment
Quality Planning
SUBJECT: Project Review #94-0153; Scoping Comments - NC DOT
Proposed Improvements to US 21 Business From US 21 Bypass
to SR 1138, Surry County, TIP.#R-2521
The Water. Quality Section of the Division of Environmental
Management requests that the following topics be discussed in the
environmental documents prepared on the subject project:
A. Identify the streams potentially impacted by the project. The
stream classifications should be current. From the
preliminary information provided, it appears that the proposed
improvements would occur within the Elkin Creek Water Supply
Watershed which is classified as WS-II by the State of North
Carolina.
B. Identify the linear feet of stream channelizations/.
relocations. If the original stream banks were vegetated, it
is requested that the channelized/relocated stream banks be
revegetated.
C. Number of stream crossings.
D. Will permanent spill catch basins be utilized? DEM requests
that these catch basins be placed at all water supply stream
crossings. Identify the responsible party for maintenance.
E. Identify the stormwater controls (permanent and temporary) to
be employed.
F. Please ensure that sediment and erosion and control measures
are not placed in wetlands.
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
40,14

z
"Y9,d?•• rt arc
AR
Melba McGee
September 20, 1993
Page 2
G. Wetland Impacts
1) Identify the federal manual used for identifying and
delineating jurisdictional wetlands.
2) Have wetlands been avoided as much as possible?
3) Have wetland impacts been minimized?
4) Discuss wetland impacts by plant communities affected.
5) Discuss the quality of wetlands impacted:
6) Summarize the total wetland impacts.
7) List the 401 General Certification numbers requested from
DEM.
H. Will borrow locations be in wetlands? Borrow/waste areas
should avoid wetlands to the maximum extent practicable.
Prior to approval of any borrow/waste site in a wetland, the
contractor shall obtain a 401 Certification from DEM.
I. Did NCDOT utilize the existing road alignments as much as
possible? Why not (if applicable)?
J. Pleas provide a detail discussion for mass-tT__aasit as an
0 on.
K. To what extent can traffic congestion management techniques
alleviate the traffic problems in the study area?
L. Please provide a conceptual mitigation plan to help the
environmental review. The mitigation plan may state the
following:
1. Compensatory mitigation will be considered only after
wetland impacts have been avoided and minimized to the
maximum extent possible.
2. On-site, in-kind mitigation is the preferred method of
mitigation. In-kind mitigation within the same watershed
is preferred over out-of-kind mitigation.
3. Mitigation should be in the following order:
restoration, creation, enhancement, and-lastly banking.
Written concurrence of 401 Water Quality Certification may be
required for this project. Applications requesting coverage under
our General Certification 14 or General Permit 31 will require
written concurrence. Please be aware that 401 Certification may be
denied if wetland impacts have not been avoided and minimized to
the maximum extent practicable.
10359e .mem
cc: ric Galamb
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

TRANSMITTAL SLIP DATE
_/ `G 2
TO: _
L-n'c OR ROOM, BLDG.

e
bZ'
FROM:
Y boo d REF. NO. OR ROOM, BLD .
ACTION
? NOTE AND FILE ? PER OUR CONVERSATION
? NOTE AND RETURN TO ME ? PER YOUR REQUEST
? RETURN ViLITH MORE DETAILS ?
FOR YOUR APPROVAL
-,/
? NOTE AND SEE ME ABOUT THIS gFOR YOUR INFORMATION
? PLEASE ANSWER ? FOR YOUR COMMENTS
? PREPARE REPLY FOR MY SIGNATURE ? SIGNATURE
? TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION ? INVESTIGATE AND REPORT
COMMENTS:
p

..31993
NOV
WET? U?91 Y SECTION
?'' WATER
NSUlEv
?O rp aen
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT) R. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GOVERNOR RO. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
November 1, 1993
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mr. Sam Hunt
Secretary
FROM: C. B. Goode, Jr., P.E.
Public Hearing Officer
Citizens Participation Unit
R. SAMUEL HUNT III `
SECRETARY
RE: Notice of a Public Meeting on Proposed Improvements to
US 21 Business from US 21 Bypass to SR 1138, S. C. Camp
Road in Elkin
The following Public Meeting Notice is furnished for
your information:
Project R-2521: Under this project, it is proposed to
widen US 21 Business from the existing
two and three-lane roadway to a five-lane
curb and gutter facility.
CBGjr:cdh
Attachment
cc: Mr. Fred Eidson, Member of Board of Transportation
Mr. Fred Aikens, Chief Deputy Director
Mr. Garland Garrett, Jr., Deputy Director
Mr. Larry R. Goode, P.E., Ph.D.
Mr. J. D. Goins, P.E.
Mr. B. G. Jenkins, Jr., P.E.
Mr. J. T. Peacock, Jr., P.E.
Mr. J. B. Williamson, Jr.
Mr. D. R. Morton, P.E.
Mr. C. W. Leggett, P.E.
Mr. D. E. Burwell, Jr., P.E.
Mr. H. F. Vick, P.E
Mr. G. T. Shearin, P.E.
Mr. W. R. Brown, P.E.
Mr. J. M. Lynch, P.E.
Mr. Robert Mathes
Mr. David Robinson
Ms. Pauline Wright
Mr. Everett Ward
iWO
NOTICE OF A PUBLIC MEETING
ON PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS TO US 21 BUSINESS
FROM US 21 BYPASS TO SR 1138, C. C. CAMP ROAD IN ELKIN
Project 6.741017 R-2521 Surry County
The North Carolina Department of Transportation will hold the above
public meeting on November 29, 1993 between the hours of 4:00 pm
and 7:00 pm at the National Guard Armory, N. Bridge Street in
Elkin. Interested individuals may attend this informal drop in
meeting at their convenience between the above stated hours.
Division of Highways personnel will be available to provide
information, answer questions, and take comments regarding this
project.
Under this project, it is proposed to widen US 21 Business from the
existing two and three lane roadway to a five lane curb and gutter
facility.
Anyone desiring additional information may contact Mr. Carl McCann
at P. O. Box 250, N. Wilkesboro, NC 28659 or phone [phone].
NCDOT will provide reasonable accommodations, auxiliary aids and
services for any qualified disabled person interested in attending
the meeting. To request the above you may call Mr. McCann at the
above number no later than seven days prior to the date of the
meeting.
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
April 22, 1994
MEMORANDUM
To: Melba McGee
Through: John Dorne?
Monica Swihart
From: Eric GalambG''`7
00"% 00"% asom
ID EHNR
Subject: EA/FONSI for US 21 Business from SR 1138 to US 21 Bypass
Surry County
State Project DOT No. 6.741017, TIP #R-2521
EHNR # 94-0764, DEM WQ # 10595
The subject document has been reviewed by this office. The Division of
Environmental Management is responsible for the issuance of the Section 401 Water
Quality Certification for activities which impact of waters of the state including
wetlands. The subject project will impact waters but not wetlands.
The subject will impact two unnamed tributaries of Elkin Creek. Elkin Creek is
classified as WS II CA. DEM recommends that curb and gutter not be installed
because it would quickly convey a spill or pollutants to the stream possibly tainting a
water supply. In addition, DEM continues to request that hazardous spill catch basins
be installed to protect the water supply. Our initial request was included in our
September 20, 1993 Scoping letter. Even though the DOT will construct a safer
facility, the need to protect the water supply with the catch basins is still warranted..
DEM requests that DOT use the most stringent sediment and erosion control
measures to protect the water supply. DOT is reminded that the 401 Certification
could be denied unless water quality concerns are satisfied.
Endorsement of the FONSI by DEM does not preclude the denial of a 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 Eric Galamb in DEM's
Water Quality Planning Branch.
us21 bus.fon
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
US 21 Business
From SR 1138 to US 21 Bypass
Elkin, Surry County
State Project 6.741017
TIP Project R-2521
I
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
State Environmental Assessment/ Finding of No Significant
Impact
N. C. Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
In Compliance with the North Carolina Environmental Policy Act
For further information contact:
Mr. H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
N. C. Department of Transportation
P. 0. Box 25201
r Raleigh, North Carolina, 27611
A. _
4
Approved:
Z - 28-98 ?
Date H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
,4q,'- Planning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT
US 21 Business
From SR 1138 to US 21 Bypass
Elkin, Surry County
TIP Project R-2521
State Project 6.741017
it

State Environmental Assessment/Finding of No Significant Impact

K
Documentation Prepared in Planning and Environmental Branch By:
G? G?; tea, dc. .
Ronald G. Lucas, Jr.
Project Planning Engineer
Ro ert P. Hanson, P.E.
Project Planning Unit Head
CA O-
??•nFESBiri.`:??9
SEAL
17282
?? Y L
Lubin V. Prevatt, P.E., Assistant Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Summary

I. General Description ........................................ 1
II. Need for Project
A. General.. ............................ 1
B. ............
Proposed Design ....................................... 1
C. Thoroughfare Plan ..................................... 1
D. Traffic/Truck Volumes ........................ 1
E. .........
Level of Service ...................................... 1
F. Accident History ...................................... 2
G. School Buses ......................................... 2
III. Existing Facility Inventory
A. Length of Section Studied ............................. 2
B. Existing Typical Section .............................. 2
C. Right of Way .......................................... 2
D. Structures............................................ 3
E. Intersecting Streets and Type of Control .............. 3
F. Speed Limits .......................................... 3
G. Access Control ........................................ 3
H. Utilities ............................................. 3
IV. Proposed Improvements
A. Design Speed/Speed Limit .............................. 3
B. Typical Section ....................................... 3
C. Alignment .......................................... 4
D. ...
Right of Way .................................. 4
E. ........
Access Control ........................................ 4
F.
G Bicycles ..............................................
Str
ct 4
.
H. u
ures ............................................
Cost Estimate ............................. 4
4
...........
V. Ecological Impacts of the Proposed Project
A. Study Area ............................................ 4
B. Methodology.... . ................................ 4
C. Physiography and Soils ................................ 5
D. Biotic Resources ...................................... 5
E. Water Resources.. . ............................. 9
F. Waters of the United States ......................... 10
G Protected Species 11
. .....................................
VI. Other Impacts of the Proposed Project
A. Historic Properties ................................... 12
B. Relocation Impacts .................................... 12
C. Social Impacts ........................................ 12
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
y I.
VII. Co
Land Use .............................................. 13
Noise Impacts ......................................... 14
Air Impacts ........................................... 21
Groundwater... ..................................... 23
Floodplain Involvement ................................ 23
Hazardous Sites ....................................... 23
mments, Coordination, and Public Involvement ............. 24
VIII. Finding of No Significant Impact ........................... 24
Figures

Appendix
ti
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 - Project Location Map
Figure 2 - USGS Quad Map
Figure 3 - Aerial Photograph
Figure 4a - Projected 1994 Traffic Volumes
Figure 4b - Projected 2014 Traffic Volumes
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 1 - Surry County Soils 5
Table 2 - Anticipated Impacts to Terrestrial Communities 8
Table 3 - Water Resources Classifications and Dimensions 9
Table 4 - Federally Protected Species for Surry County 11
Table 5 - Comparisons of Typical Sounds 15
Table 6 - Noise Abatement Criteria 16
Table 7 - FHWA Noise Abatement Criteria 18
Table 8 - Traffic Noise Level Increase Summary 19

US 21 Business
From SR 1138 to US 21 Bypass
Elkin, Surry County
State Project 6.741017
TIP Project R-2521
Prepared by the Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
North Carolina Department of Transportation
SUMMARY
1. Description of Action - The North Carolina Department of
Transportation proposes to widen US 21 Business in Elkin, North
Carolina. The 1.2 mile project will symmetrically widen the existing
two and three lane facility to a five lane curb and gutter facility
from SR 1138 to US 21 Bypass. Sufficient right of way for this
project already exists at a width of 150 feet, symmetrical to the
existing roadway centerline. Some realignment of the SR 1157/SR 1001
intersection with US 21 Business will also be required, and removal
of the northbound ramp onto US 21 Bypass. The estimated cost of this
project is $ 1,600,000.
2. Environmental and Social Impacts - The proposed project will have a
positive impact by improving the safety and traffic handling capacity
of US 21 Business. No relocation of residences or businesses will be
required. No significant impacts to natural resources will result
from the project. There will be no impact to any architectural,
historical, or archaeological resources listed in the National
Register of Historic Places. There will be no significant impact to
air quality and traffic noise increases are expected to be minimal.
3. Environmental Commitments and Permits - A 401 water quality permit
will be required for this project. In addition, it is anticipated
that a Nationwide 404 permit will be needed for this project.
4. Coordination - Several federal, state, and local agencies were
consulted during preparation of this document. Written comments were
received from the following agencies:
U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service
N. C. State Clearinghouse
N. C. Department of Env. Health and Natural Resources
N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission
N. C. Department of Cultural Resources
5. Additional Information - Additional information concerning the
proposal and assessment can be obtained by contacting the following:
H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
N.C. Department of Transportation
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
[phone]
US 21 Business
From SR 1138 to US 21 Bypass
Elkin, Surry County
TIP Project R-2521
State Project 6.741017
I. GENERAL DESCRIPTION
The North Carolina Department of Transportation proposes to widen
US 21 Business from a two and three lane facility to a five lane curb and
gutter facility, from SR 1138 to US 21 Bypass. Some realignment of
SR 1001/1157 at the intersection will be required with US 21 Business.
The 1.2 mile project is included in the 1994-2000 Transportation
Improvement. Program with construction scheduled to begin in Federal Fiscal
Year 1994. The project will be entirely state funded. The T.I.P. cost for
this project is $1,250,000. Currently, the total estimated cost of the
project is $1,600,000. Construction is estimated at $ 1,575,000.00; right
of way costs are estimated at $25,000.
II. NEED FOR PROJECT
A. General
The proposed project will relieve congestion by increasing the safety
and handling capacity of this section of US 21 Business. Traffic volumes
on this facility are projected to increase beyond the handling capacity of
the existing facility by the year 1998.
B. Thoroughfare Plan
US 21 Business is designated as a major thoroughfare in the adopted
Elkin Thoroughfare Plan. The five-lane proposed cross-section for US 21
is in conformance with the thoroughfare plan.
D. Traffic/Truck Volumes
Projected volumes for average daily traffic (ADT) are as follows:
1994 2014
Low High Low High
7000 12200 10800 22400
Truck traffic is projected to be A. of the total ADT. See figure 4
for additional traffic data including turning movements.
E. Levels of Service
The concept of levels of service is defined as a qualitative measure
describing operational conditions within a traffic stream, and their
perception by motorists and passengers. Operating conditions are based on
such factors as speed, travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic
2
interruptions, comfort, convenience, and safety. Six levels of service
are defined and designated with letters from A to F. Level A represents
the best operating conditions with free flow and virtually no delay at
signalized intersections. Level F represents the worst operating
conditions and occurs when traffic volumes exceed the capacity of the
facility. At level of service F, long queues of traffic tend to form and
delay at signalized intersections tends to exceed 60 seconds.
A capacity analysis of the subject roadway yielded the following
results:
1. US 21 is currently operating at level of service D.
2. If no improvements are made to the subject section of US 21, the
level of Service will deteriorate to level of.serwfee F'`within
five years.
3. Widening US 21 to five lanes will improve operating conditions
-to-==LOS B initially and maintain operating conditions at LOS C or
better through the design year (2014).
F. Accident History
The accident rate for this section for US 21 Business over a recent
three year period (July 1, 1990-June 30, 1993) was 901.64 accidents/100
million vehicle miles (acc/100 mvm). This greatly exceeds the statewide
average of 253.0 acc/100 mvm for similar routes over that same time
period. There were no fatalities along this section of US 21 Business
during the three year study period. Rear-end accidents were the
predominant type of accidents. The proposed improvements will improve the
facility's operating conditions and should reduce the accident rate.
G. School Buses
A total of 2 school buses use the studied section of US 21 Business
daily during the school year.
III. EXISTING FACILITY INVENTORY
A. Length of Section Studied
The length of this project is 1.2 miles.
B. Existing Typical Section
Currently, this section of US 21 is primarily a two lane facility
with 10 foot travel lanes and grassed shoulders approximately 4 to 10 feet
wide.
C. Right of Way
Currently, US 21 Business has a basic existing right of way width of
150'. Additional right of way exists in the vicinity of the US 21
Business and US 21 Bypass merger.
3
Existing right of way widths along intersecting streets are as
follows:
SR 1146 - 32 feet SR 1192 - 60 feet
SR 1153 - 40 feet SR 1157 - 60 feet
D. Structures
There are no bridges or box culverts in the proposed section.
` However, one 52" pipe and one 24" pipe crosses the proposed section. The
pipes are to be retained and extended.
E. Intersecting Streets and Type of Control
The following streets and highways intersect this section of US 21
Business:
1. SR 1138 (C.C. Camp Rd): signal controlled
2. SR 1153 (Carter Mill Rd.): stop sign controlled
3. SR 1192 (Glendale Rd): stop sign controlled
4. SR 1146 (North Elkin Dr): stop sign controlled
5. SR 1157/SR 1101: stop sign controlled
6. US 21 Bypass: US 21 northbound intersects US 21 Bypass
southbound with a stop sign controlling US 21 Business, US 21
Business merges with the left northbound lane of US 21 Bypass,
US 21 Business southbound originates as a ramp from southbound
US 21 Bypass
F. Speed Limits
The existing speed limit along the entire project is 35 mph.
G. Access Control
There is no control of access along the project.
H. Utilities
Overhead powerlines parallel the project on both sides. Setbacks
range from 30 to 45 feet from the roadway centerline.
Underground utilities along the project include a sanitary sewer
line, a water line, and telephone lines.
IV. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS

A. Design Speed/Speed Limit
The recommended design speed is 50 mph. The posted speed will be
35 mph.
B. Typical Section
The project cross section will consist of a five lane curb and gutter
facility. Pavement width will be 64 feet from face to face of curbs.
4
C. Alignment
US 21 Business will be widened symmetrically about the existing
roadway centerline.
D. Right of Way
The existing 150' wide right of way, symmetrical to the existing
roadway centerline, should be sufficient to accommodate the proposed
roadway. Some temporary construction easements will be required where
slopes extend beyond existing right of way. Some additional right of way
will be acquired at the intersection of US 21 Business and Carter Mill
Road (SR 1153).
E. Access Control
There will be no control of access along this project.
F. Bicycle Accommodations
No special bicycle accommodations are recommended for this project.
The City of Elkin did not propose sidewalks for this project.
G. Structures
The 52" and 24" crosspipes will be retained and extended.
H. Cost Estimate
The proposed cost for improvements are estimated at $1,600,000.
V. ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS OF PROPOSED ACTION
A. Study Area
The proposed project study area lies in Surry County (Figure 1) in
the northwestern part of North Carolina. Surry County lies within two
physiographic regions. The northern part of the county is in the Blue
Ridge region, and the southern part is in the Southern Piedmont region.
Surry County is a mix of remote wooded mountains and open piedmont
farmland with Mount Airy the largest urban-industrial area. Major economic
resources for the County include agriculture, forestry, and recreational
activities.
B. Methodology
Information sources include; U.S. Geodetic Survey (USGS) quadrangle
map of North Elkin, NCDOT aerial photographs of project area (1:2400),
Soil Conservation Service (SCS) soil maps, Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)
list of protected and candidate species, and N.C. Natural Heritage Program
(NHP) database of uncommon and protected species and unique habitats.
Research using these resources was conducted prior to field investi-
gations.
5
General field surveys were conducted along the proposed project
alignment by a NCDOT biologist on December 2, 1993. Plant Communities and
their associated wildlife were identified and recorded. Wildlife was
identified using a variety of observation techniques: active searching and
capture, visual observations, and identifying characteristic signs of
wildlife (scat, sounds, tracks, and burrows).
C. Phvsiouraohv and Soils
Wide extremes in elevation are encountered in Surry County.
Elevation in the subject project area ranges from 1000 ft to 1200 ft.
Topography in the study area ranges from gently sloping to steeply
sloping.
The subject project alignment crosses 6 specific soil map units
(Table 1). No hydric soils are crossed by the project.
Table 1. Surry County Soils
Percent
Symbol Soil Series Slope
5 Udorthents, loamy fill -
6 Urban land -
22B Masada fine sandy loam 2-8
30C Pacolet sandy clay loam 8-15
33B Pacolet-Bethlehem-Urban 2-8
33C Pacolet-Bethlehem-Urban 8-15
D. Biotic Resources
Living systems described in the following sections include
communities of associated plants and animals. These descriptions refer to
the dominant vegetation and fauna in each community and how these biotic
components relate to one another. Vertebrate species observed during
field surveys are denoted with an (*).
A great majority of the project study area is located in highly
developed section of Elkin. The following descriptions of biotic
resources reflect fairly low diversity, which is typical of urbanized
locations.
Man-dominated, Scrub/Shrub, Mixed Hardwood Forest, and Mixed
Pine/hardwood forest are the four terrestrial communities found in the
subject project study area. Dominant faunal components associated with
these terrestrial areas will be discussed in each community description,
however many species are adapted to the entire range of habitats found
along the project alignment and may not be mentioned in each community
description.
6
This highly disturbed community includes road shoulders, lawn, and
garden habitats. Many plant species characteristic of 'the roadside are
adapted to disturbed and maintained habitats. The more well-maintained
(mowed) areas are dominated by fescue (Festuca sp.), plantain (Plantago
sp.), and clover (Trifolium spp.) along with a variety of ornamental
herbs, vines, shrubs and trees. Native trees, such as red maple (Acer
rubrum), shortleaf pine (Pinus echinata), and white pine (Pinus stro us)
are also present throughout yards and lawns.
Many animals present in these disturbed habitats are opportunistic
and capable of surviving on a variety of forage resources ranging from
vegetation (flowers, leaves, seeds, and fruits) to animal matter (living
and dead). Gray squirrel * (Sciurus carolinensis), Virginia opossum
(Didel his virginiana), eastern mole * (Scalopus aquaticus), northern
cardinal * (Cardinalis cardinalis), northern mockingbird * (Mimus
polyglottos), American crow * (Corvus brachyrhynchos), ruby-throated
hummingbird (Archilochus colubris), house sparrow * (Passer domesticus),
and mourning dove (Zenaida macroura) are examples of species attracted to
lawns and gardens by the year-round feeding stations and abundance of
cultivated forage items provided by humans. Six-lined racerunner
(Cnemidophorus sexlineatus), rufous-sided towhee (Pi ilo
er_ythrophthalmus), and several species of mice (Peromyscus spp.) prefer
the less well maintained margins or ecotones of road shoulders and lawns.
One less well maintained area has succeeded to a dense scrub\shrub
stage of development. Lower growing, grassland areas are dominated by
vegetation such as fescue, sericea (Lespedeza spp.), golden rod ( Solidago
sp.), Joe-pye-weed (Eupatorium maculatum), milkweed (Asclepius sp.),
woolly mullein (Verbascum thapsus), black berry (Rubus sp.), Japanese
honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), and poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans).
Saplings and young trees such as, shortleaf pine, Virginia pine Pinus
virginiana), red cedar (Juniperus virginiana), black cherry (Prunus
serotina), flowering dogwood (Cornus florida), and privet (Ligustrum sp.),
along with smooth sumac (Rhus labra), and winged sumac (Rhus copallina)
predominate in the scrub\shrub habitats.
Many animals which use less well maintained habitats prefer dense
vegetation of disturbed areas for nesting and or foraging. Some species,
including the five-lined skink (Eumeces fasciatus) and hispid cotton rat
Sigmodon hispidus) use brush piles, dead vegetation, and vine thickets as
refuge and breeding areas. Avian species common in this early
successional community include red-tailed hawk * (Buteo jamaicensis),
eastern phoebe * (Sayournis phoebe), yellow-rumped warbler * (Dendroica
coronata), and blue grosbeak (Guiraca caerulea). Evidence of eastern
cottontail * (Sylvilagus floridanus), and whitetail deer * (Odocoileus
virginianus) is also abundant in the scrub/shrub community.
This small lightly forested community is found on a steep south bank
of a stream which the project alignment crosses. The open canopy is
composed of tuliptree (Lireodendron tulipifera), red maple, sourwood
(Oxydendrum arboreum), and flowering dogwood. Birds such as Ruby-crowned
kinglet * (Regulus calendula), golden-crowned kinglet * (Regulus satrapa),
and Carolina chickadee are common throughout this community. Moderate to
light ground cover consisting of grape (Vitus rotundifolia), greenbrier
7
(smilax sp.), Christmas fern (Polystichum acrostichoides), and Japanese
honeysuckle exist beneath the canopy. Many of the previously mentioned
animals may also be found in this community.
The mixed pine/hardwood forest is an upland community located
primarily on the east side of US 21 and has in most instances been heavily
impacted by development. Houses and businesses have encroached upon this
relic community. Two primary vegetational layers, including canopy and a
shrub/vine/herb layer are found here.
The canopy is composed of white oak ( uercus alba), hickory (Car_ya
sp.), red maple, sweet gum, tuliptree, black cherry and scattered white
pine, and shortleaf pine. Birds dominate this level of vegetation while a
few mammals and amphibians are also found here. Broad-winged hawk (Buteo
platypterus), red-bellied woodpecker (Melanerpes carolinus), red-breasted
nuthatch * (Sitta canadensis), and red-eyed vireo (Vireo olivaceus) are
common. Gray treefrogs (Hyla chrysoscelis, H. versicolor), gray
squirrel, and raccoon * (Procyon lotor) also nest and or forage in the
canopy. Another canopy species which forages on the forest floor is the
eastern screech-owl (Otus asio).
The shrub/vine\herb layer includes saplings of afore mentioned trees
as well as flowering dogwood, partridge berry (Mitchella repens),
greenbrier, and grape. The vegetative cover in this layer forms many
refuges for a variety of smaller animals. Passerine birds such as tufted
titmouse (Parus bicolor), Carolina wren, black-and-white warbler (Mniotlta
varia) and northern cardinal may be present throughout this habitat.
Other animals likely to be found in or beneath the shrub/vine/herb layer
include marbled salamander (Ambystoma o acum), slimy salamander (Plethodon
glutinosus), copperhead (Agkistrodon contortrix), and southeastern shrew
(Sorex longirostris).
Two unnamed creeks comprise an aquatic community associated with the
proposed project. The northernmost and smallest creek has been culverted
and piped and at the time of survey had no waterflow. This creek is
bordered, almost exclusively, by urban development with very few areas of
natural vegetation left to act as buffer zones for storm runoff which has
resulted in large amounts of silts being deposited on the sand\rock
substrate.
Most of these creeks banks have lawn (tall fescue) or other disturbed
borders. Creek banks that have been relatively undisturbed exhibit
shrub\vine\herb growth including vegetation such as red maple saplings,
• poison ivy, grape, and blackberry.
The southernmost creek to which the northernmost creek is a tributary
does appears to be perennial. Although urban development also exists in
the vicinity of this creek, much of the natural vegetation is left to act
as a buffer zone for storm runoff. However, due to topography and
development in the general area, large amounts of silts are deposited on
the sand\rock substrate of this creek.
8
This creek's banks which are steep and heavily eroded have been
relatively undisturbed (vegetationally speaking). The banks exhibit
shrub\vine\herb growth including vegetation such as tag alder (Alnus
serrulata), poison ivy, grape, and touch-me-not (Impatiens sp.). Mosses,
liverworts and algae are abundant on the creek banks. Bullfrog ( Rana
catesbeiana), northern dusky salamanders (Desmognathus fuscus), cray-Mish
Family Cambaridae) and numerous segmented worms (Oligocheates) exist
under stones and other debris on the creek bed. Although no fish species
were observed here during the field investigation, tessellated darter
(Etheostoma olmstedi), piedmont darter (Percina crassa), and redlipped
s iner (Notropis chiliticus) are species that may inhabit this creek.
There are few natural communities in the project area. Remaining
communities have been highly fragmented and reduced as. from of previous
development. The man-dominated community component of the project area
will receive the greatest impact from habitat reduction. Anticipated
impacts to terrestrial communities are listed in Table 2.
Table 2. Anticipated Impacts to
Terrestrial Communities
(hectares/acres)
Community Type *
MD SS MHF MPHF Total
2.8/9.1 0.2/0.6 0.2/0.5 0.03/0.1 3.1/10.3
Note: Impacts are based on 100 ft construction limits.
MD = Man-Dominated Community
SS = Scrub/Shrub Community
MHF = Mixed Hardwood Forest Community
MPHF = Mixed Pine\Hardwood Forest Community
Total impacts to terrestrial communities is 3.1/10.3 (hectares/
acres). The greatest construction related impacts 2.8/9.1 (hectares/
acres) will take place in the Man-dominated Community.
As mentioned previously, the aquatic component of the project area
has already been altered by siltation from erosion due to development
along US 21 in Elkin. Project construction is likely to increase sediment
loads in the two unnamed creeks crossed by the subject project.
Construction-related sedimentation can be harmful to local populations of
invertebrates which are important parts of the aquatic food chain. Less
mobile organisms such as many of the filter feeders may be covered and
smothered by sedimentation resulting from construction related erosion.
Local fish populations can also be harmed by construction-related
sedimentation. Increased sediment loads and suspended particulates can
9
lead to the smothering of fish eggs, reduced depth of light penetration in
the water column, reduction in the waters oxygen carrying capacity, and
changes in water temperature. To minimize the potential for sedimen-
tation, Best Management Practices and Sedimentation Control and guidelines
will be implemented during project construction.
E. Water Resources
The proposed project lies in the Yadkin River basin. Two unnamed
tributaries of Elkin Creek are crossed by the proposed project alignment.
Water flow is generally from east to west and bottom composition for both
habitats includes a mix of rock, sand, and silt. Dimensions of these
creeks are presented in Table 3.
. This section discusses water quality and special use resource
categories. High Quality Waters are located in the project construction
zone.
Table 3. Water Resources Best Usage Classifications
and Approximate Waterbody Dimensions
WATER CHANNEL CLASSIFICATION
RESOURCE DEPTH WIDTH
unnamed tributary -0- 0.3 m\1.0 ft WS-II CA
(north)
unnamed tributary 0.2 m\0.5 ft 0.8 m\2.5 ft WS-II CA
(south)
NOTE Class WS-II CA: waters protected as water supplies which
are generally in predominantly undeveloped watersheds;
local programs to control nonpoint source and stormwater
discharge of pollution are required; suitable for all Class
C uses;
Class C: suitable for aquatic life propagation and
survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation, and
agriculture.
CA: Critical Area, the area adjacent to a water supply
„ intake or reservoir where risk associated with pollution is
greater than from the remaining portions of the watershed.
The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) lists no
dischargers for the creeks crossed by the proposed project. Waters
classified as High Quality Waters (HQW) are located within 1.7 km (1 mile)
of the subject area, and are classified as WS-II (Elkin Creek and its
unnamed tributaries).
10
The Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN) is an indicator
of long term trends in water quality at fixed monitoring sites by the
sampling for selected benthic macro invertebrates. However, BMAN
information is not available for the immediate project area.
Potential impacts to water resources in the project area will be
increased sedimentation and turbidity from construction-related erosion as
well as non-point discharge of toxic substances from increased roadway
surface area (engine fluids and particulate rubber). Because project
construction will occur in a HQW zone, the "Design Standards In Sensitive
Watersheds" will be followed.
Sedimentation and erosion control measures (Best Management
Practices) will be followed during the construction stage of this project
to prevent or minimize damage to the aquatic environment.
Since the two tributaries are located in a critical area, permanent
spill catch basins will be used as a part of Best Management Practices.
F. Waters of the United States
Wetlands and surface waters fall under the broad category of "Waters
of the United States" as defined in 33 CFR 328.3 and in accordance with
provisions of section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C 1344) the Army
Corps of Engineers (COE) regulates impacts to these resources.
Proposed project construction will involve jurisdictional surface
waters (classified as WS-II CA).
Construction is likely to be authorized by provisions of General
Nationwide permit 33 CFR 330.5 (A) 14. No jurisdictional wetland
communities occur within the project limits.
A Section 401 water quality certification will also be required from
the NC Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources prior to
issuance of the Federal section 404 permit.
There are 25 mountain counties, including Surry County, which contain
waters classified as public trout waters by the Wildlife Resources
Commission (WRC). General 404 permits in these 25 mountain counties
require certification from WRC that the project will not adversely impact
trout waters. This project does not cross, nor is it associated with water
resources designated as trout waters; however, permit certification by the
WRC will still be required.
Projects authorized under General Nationwide Permits usually do not
require mitigation according to the 1989 Memorandum of Agreement between
the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of the Army.
However, the Corps of Engineers has final authority in this matter.
11
G. Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered (E),
Threatened (T), Proposed Endangered (PE) and Proposed Threatened (PT) are
protected under provisions of Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended. The Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)
lists two Federally-protected species for Surry County as of September 20,
1993 (Table 4).
Table 4. Federally-Protected Species for Surry County
SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME STATUS
Falco peregrinus peregrine falcon Endangered
Isotria medeoloides small-whorled pogonia Endangered
A brief description and habitat requirements for the above listed
species follows.
Falco peregrinus (American peregrine falcon) E
Distribution in N.C.: Avery, Burke, Jackson, Madison, Surry,
Transylvania, and Wilkes County.
The American peregrine falcon is found throughout the United States
in areas with high cliffs and open land for foraging. Nesting for the
falcons is generally on high cliff ledges but they may also nest in broken
off tree tops in the eastern deciduous forest and on skyscrapers and
bridges in urban areas.
Prey for the peregrine falcon consists of small mammals and birds.
They occupy a range from .25 to 120 square miles depending on the
availability of food. The hunting range usually extends 10 miles from the
nest. Nesting occurs from mid-March to May.
Biological Conclusion: The proposed project will not impact habitat
for this species. The subject project will not impact the peregrine
falcon.
Isotria medeoloides (small-whorled pogonia) E
Flowers Present: midMay - midJune
Distribution in N.C.: Burke, Haywood, Henderson, Jackson, Macon,
and Surry counties.
The small-whorled pogonia grows in "second growth deciduous" or
deciduous-coniferous forests, with an open canopy, open shrub layer, and
sparse herb layer. It prefers acidic soils. Flowering is inhibited in
areas where there is relatively high shrub coverage or high sapling
density.
12
Biological Conclusion: The proposed project will not impact habitat
for this species. The subject project will not impact the small-whorled
pogonia.
Federal Candidate 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. Organisms which are listed as Endangered (E),
Threatened (T), or Special Concern (SC) by the North Carolina Natural
Heritage Program list of Rare Plant and Animal species are afforded state
protection under the State Endangered Species Act and the North Carolina
Plant Protection and Conservation Act of 1979.
The bog turtle (Clemmys muhlenbergii) is the only federal candidate
species listed for Surry County. This reptile is also listed as a State
threatened species. A review of the NCNHP database reports no occurrences
of state protected species in the study area.
VI. OTHER IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT
A. Historic Properties
The State Historic Preservation Office has reviewed the project and
"is aware of no properties of architectural, historic, or archaeological
located within the planning area" (see Appendix, page 6).
B. Relocation Impacts
Based on the current project, the widening of 21 Business will not
require any residences or businesses to relocate.
C. Social Impacts
The proposed project will have a positive social effect. Widening
US 21 will improve operations for vehicular traffic and increase safety
for all users. Those who must use US 21 Business to get to their places
of employment, deliver services, or other travel will realize improved
efficiency.
The proposed widening of US 21 Business will not disrupt community
cohesion, interfere with the accessibility of facilities and services, and
will not displace community residents and businesses.
D. Land Use
The proposed project is located within the planning and zoning
jurisdiction of the Town of Elkin. Elkin enforces a zoning ordinance and
subdivision regulations, but has not adopted a.land use plan or any other
long range planning document.
13
The project area is characterized by strip commercial development,
including two shopping centers, two large discount stores, and several
other retail and commercial businesses. A National Guard Armory, a
textile plant, and a Highway Patrol office are also in the project area.
Some single family residences are also located along the roadway.
Without a land use plan, the Town of Elkin must use it's zoning
ordinance service as the primary development guidance tool for the
community. Land on both sides of the roadway is zoned HB-Highway
Business, which permits a wide range of commercial land uses.
North Carolina Executive Order Number 96, Conservation of Prime
Agricultural and Forest Lands, required all state agencies to minimize
impacts to prime farmlands designated by the U.S. Soil Conservation
Service. No additional land will be acquired for this project, as the
proposed improvements will occur within the existing right-of-way of US 21
Business. Therefore, no consideration of potential impacts to farmland is
required.
E. Noise Impacts
An analysis was performed to determine the effect of the proposed
project on noise levels in the immediate project area. This investigation
included an inventory of existing noise sensitive land uses and a field
survey of ambient (existing) noise levels in the study area. It also
included a comparison of the predicted noise levels and the ambient noise
levels to determine if traffic noise impacts can be expected resulting
from the proposed project. Traffic noise impacts are determined from the
current procedures for the abatement of highway traffic noise and
construction noise, appearing as Part 772 of Title 23 of the Code of
Federal Regulations. If traffic noise impacts are predicted, examination
and evaluation of alternative noise abatement measures for reducing or
eliminating the noise impacts must be considered.
CHARACTERISTICS OF NOISE
The magnitude of noise is usually described by its sound pressure.
Since the range of sound pressure varies greatly, a logarithmic scale is
used to relate sound pressures to some common reference level, usually the
decibel (dB). Sound pressures described in decibels are called sound
pressure levels and are often defined in terms of frequency weighted
scales (A, B, C, or D).
• The weighted-A scale is used almost exclusively in vehicle noise
measurements because it places most emphasis on the frequency range to
which the human ear is most sensitive (1,000-6,000 Hertz). Sound levels
measured using A-weighting are often expressed as dBA. Throughout this
report, references will be made to dBA, which means an A-weighted decibel
level. Several examples of noise pressure levels in dBA are listed in
Table 5.
14
Review of Table 5 indicates that most individuals in urbanized areas
are exposed to fairly high noise levels from many sources as they go about
their daily activities. The degree of disturbance or annoyance of
unwanted sound depends essentially on three things:
1. the amount and nature of the intruding noise,
2. the relationship between the background noise and the intruding
noise, and
3. the type of action occurring where the noise is heard.
NOISE ABATEMENT CRITERIA
In order to determine that highway noise levels are or are not
compatible with various land uses, the Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA) has developed noise abatement criteria and procedures to be used in
the planning and design of highways. These abatement criteria and
procedures are set forth in the aforementioned Federal reference (Title 23
CFR Part 772). A summary of the noise abatement criteria for various land
uses is presented in Table 6. The Leq, or equivalent sound level, is the
level of constant sound which in a given situation and time period has the
same energy as does time varying sound. In other words, the fluctuating
sound levels of traffic noise are represented in terms of a steady noise
level with the same energy content.
AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS
Ambient noise measurements were taken in the vicinity of the project
to determine the existing background noise level. The purpose of this
noise level information was to quantify the existing acoustic environment
and to provide a base for assessing noise level increases. The field data
was also used to establish ambient noise levels for the locations for
which noise measurements were obtained. The existing Leq noise levels
along US 21 Business as measured at 50 feet from the roadway were in the
range of 64 to 65 dBA.
The existing roadway and traffic conditions were used with the most
current traffic noise prediction model in order to calculate existing
noise levels for comparison with noise levels actually measured. The
calculated existing noise levels were between -0.4 and +0.7 dBA of the
measured noise levels for all of the locations for which noise
measurements were obtained. Differences in dBA levels can be attributed
to "bunching" of vehicles, low traffic volumes, and actual vehicle speeds
versus the computer's "evenly-spaced" vehicles and single vehicle speed.
PROCEDURE FOR PREDICTING FUTURE NOISE LEVELS,
The procedure used to predict future noise levels in this study was
the Noise Barrier Cost Reduction Procedure, STAMINA 2.0 and OPTIMA
(revised March, 1983). The BCR (Barrier Cost Reduction) procedure is
based upon the FHWA Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model
(FHWA-RD-77-108). The BCR traffic noise prediction model uses the number
15
TABLE 5
COMPARISON OF TYPICAL SOUNDS
HEARING: SOUNDS BOMBARDING US DAILY
140 Shotgun blast, jet 100 ft away at takeoff PAIN
Motor test chamber HUMAN EAR PAIN THRESHOLD
130

Firecrackers
120 Severe thunder, pneumatic jackhammer
Hockey crowd
Amplified rock music UNCOMFORTABLY LOUD
110

Textile loom
100 Subway train, elevated train, farm tractor
Power lawn mower, newspaper press
Heavy city traffic, noisy factory LOUD
90

D Diesel truck 40 mph 50 ft. away
E SO Crowded restaurant, garbage disposal
C Average factory, vacuum cleaner
I Passenger car 50 mph 50 ft. away MODERATELY LOUD
B 70

E Quiet typewriter
L 60 Singing birds, window air-conditioner
S Quiet automobile
Normal conversation, average office QUIET
50

Household refrigerator
Quiet office VERY QUIT
40

Average home
30 Dripping faucet
Whisper 5 feet away
20 Light rainfall, rustle of leaves
AVERAGE PERSON'S THRESHOLD OF BEARING
Whisper JUST AUDIBLE
10

0 THRESHOLD FOR ACUTE BEARING
Sources: World Book, Rand McNally Atlas of the Human Body,
Encyclopedia Americana, "Industrial Noise and Hearing
Conversation" by J. B. Olishifski and E. R. Harford
(Researched by N. Jane Hunt and published in the Chicago
Tribune in an illustrated graphic by Tom Heinz.)
lb
TABLE 6
NOISE ABATEMENT CRITERIA
NOISE ABATMIENT CRITERIA
Hourly A-Weighted Sound Level - decibels (dBA)
Activity
Category Leq(h) Description of Activity Category
A 57 Lands on which serenity and quiet are of extraordinary significance and serve an important public
(Exterior) need and where the preservation of those qualities is essential if the area is to continue to
serve its intended purpose.
B 67 Picnic areas, recreation areas, playgrounds, active sports areas, parks, residences, motels,
(Exterior) hotels, schools, churches, libraries, and hospitals.
C 72 Developed lands, properties, or activities not included in Categories A or B above.
(Exterior)
D -- Undeveloped lands
E 52 Residences, motels, hotels, public meeting rooms, schools, churches, libraries, hospitals, and
(Interior) auditoriums.
Source: Title 23 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 772, U. S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway
Administration
DEFINITION OF SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE
Hourly A-Weighted sound Level - decibels (dBA)
Existing Noise Level Increase in dBA from Existing Noise
in Leq(h) Levels to Future Noise Levels
<50 > 15
> 50 > 10
Source: North Carolina Department of Transportation Noise Abatement Guidelines.
17
and type of vehicles on the planned roadway, their speeds, the physical
characteristics of the road (curves, hills, depressed, elevated, etc.),
receptor location and height, and, if applicable, barrier type, barrier
ground elevation, and barrier top elevation.
In this regard, it is to be noted that only preliminary alignment was
available for use in this noise analysis. The project proposes to widen
the existing two and three lane curb and gutter roadway to a five lane (64
ft F-F) curb and gutter facility from SR 1138 (CC Camp Road) to US 21
Bypass in Elkin. The proposed roadway was modeled assuming no special
noise abatement measures would be incorporated. Only those existing
natural or man-made barriers were considered. The roadway sections and
proposed intersections were assumed to be flat and at-grade. Thus, this
analysis represents worst-case topographic conditions. The noise
predictions made in this report are highway-related noise predictions for
the traffic conditions during the year being analyzed.
This computerized model was utilized to enable the determination of
the number of land uses (by type) which, during the peak hour in the
design year 2014, would be exposed to noise levels approaching or
exceeding the FHWA noise abatement criteria and those land uses predicted
to expect a substantial noise increase. The basic approach was to select
receptor locations such as 25, 50, 100, 200, 400, 800, and 1600 feet from
the center of the near traffic lane (adaptable to both sides of the
roadway). The locations of these receptors were determined by the change
in projected traffic volumes along the proposed project. The result of
this procedure was a grid of receptor points along the project. Using
this grid, noise levels were calculated for each identified receptor.
Table 8 indicates the exterior traffic noise level increases for the
identified receptors in the vicinity of the project. Predicted noise
level increases for this project are anticipated to range from 2 to 4 dBA.
When real-life noises are heard, it is possible to barely detect level
changes of 2-3 dBA. A 5 dBA change is more readily noticeable. A 10 dBA
change is judged by most people as a doubling or a halving of the loudness
of the sound.
TRAFFIC NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS/ABATEMENT MEASURES
Traffic noise impacts occur when the predicted traffic noise levels
either: [a] approach or exceed the FHWA noise abatement criteria (with
"approach" meaning within 1 dBA of the Table 6 value), or [b]
substantially exceed the existing noise levels. The NCDOT definition of
substantial increase is shown in the lower portion of Table 6.
Consideration for noise abatement measures must be given to receptors
which fall in either category.
Physical measures to abate anticipated traffic noise levels can often
be applied with a measurable degree of success by the application of solid
mass, attenuable measures to effectively diffract, absorb, and reflect
highway traffic noise emissions. Solid mass, attenuable measures may
include earth berms or artificial abatement walls.
18
TABLE 7
FHWA NOISE ABATEMENT CRITERIA SUMMARY
FBWA NOISE ABATEMENT CRITERIA SUMMARY
US 21 Business, Elkin, From SR 1138 (CC Camp Road) to
US 21 By-Pass, Surry County
TIP# R-2521 State Project# 6.741017

escription Maximum Predicted
Leg Noise Levels
dBA
50' 100' 2001 Contour
Distances
(Maximum)
72 dBA 67 dBA Approximate Number of Impacted
Receptors According to
Title 23 CFR Part 772

A B C D g
1. From SR 1138 to SR 1153 67 63 57 <49' 75'
0 0 0 0 0
2. From SR 1153 to SR 1192/SR 1146 66 62 57 <49' 67'
0 p 0 O 0
3. From SR 1192/SR 1146 to US-21 By-Pass 66 61 57 <49' 61'
0 1 0 p 0
TOTAL
0 1 0 0 0
NOTES - 1. 50', 100', and 200' distances are measured from center of nearest travel lane.
2. 72 dBA and 67 dBA contour distances are measured from center of proposed roadway.
19
TABLE 8
TRAFFIC NOISE LEVEL INCREASE SUMMARY
TRAFFIC NOISE LEVEL INCREASE SUMMARY
US 21 Business, Elkin, From SR 1138 (CC Camp Road) to
US 21 By-Pass, Surry County
TIP# R-2521 State Project# 6.741017
Section
1. From SR 1138 to SR 1153
2. From SR 1153 to SR 1192
/SR 1146
3. From SR 1192/SR 1146 to
US-21 By-Pass
Substantial
Receptor Exterior Noise Level Increases Noise Level
Increases
<=0 1-2 3-4 5-6 7-8 9-10 11-12 13-14 15-16 17-18 19-20 21-22 23-24 >= 25 >= 15 dBA
0 0 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 7 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 3 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
--- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ------------
0 10 33 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
20
The project will maintain no control of access, meaning most
commercial establishments and residences will have direct driveway
connections to the proposed roadway, and all intersections will adjoin the
project at grade.
For a noise barrier to provide sufficient noise reduction it must be
high enough and long enough to shield the receptor from significant
sections of the highway. Access openings in the barrier severely reduce
the noise reduction provided by the barrier. It then becomes economically
unreasonable to construct a barrier for a small noise reduction. Safety
at access openings (driveways, crossing streets, etc.) due to restricted
sight distance is also a concern. Furthermore, to provide a sufficient
reduction, a barrier's length would normally be eight (8) times the
distance from the barrier to the receptor. For example, a receptor
located 50 feet from the barrier would normally require a barrier 400 feet
long. An access opening of 40 feet (10 percent of the area) would limit
its noise reduction to approximately 4 dBA.
Based on the above factors, no physical abatement measures are
feasible and none are recommended for this project.
"DO NOTHING" ALTERNATIVE
The traffic noise impacts for the "do nothing" alternative were also
considered. If the proposed widening did not occur, none of the receptors
would experience traffic noise impacts in the areas of the proposed
widening. For these receptors the exterior noise level increases are
anticipated to be in the range of +0 to +2 dBA. When real life noises are
heard, it is possible to barely detect level changes of 2-3 dBA.
CONSTRUCTION NOISE
The major construction elements of this project are expected to be
earth removal, hauling, grading, and paving. General construction noise
impacts, such as temporary speech interference for passers-by and those
individuals living or working near the project, can be expected
particularly from paving operations and from the earth moving equipment
during grading operations. Construction noise impacts are expected to be
minimal along the proposed roadway, since, for the most part, the project
traverses through low-density areas. However, considering the relatively
short-term nature of construction noise and the limitation of construction
to daytime hours, these impacts are not expected to be substantial. The
transmission loss characteristics of nearby natural elements and man-made
structures are believed to be sufficient to moderate the effects of
intrusive construction noise.
SUMMARY
Based on these preliminary studies, traffic noise abatement is not
feasible or reasonable and no noise abatement measures are proposed. This
evaluation completes the highway traffic noise requirements of Title 23
CFR, Part 772, and unless a major project change develops, no additional
reports are required for this project.
21
F. Air Oualitv Impacts
Air pollution originates from various sources. Emissions from
industrial and internal combustion engines are the most prevalent sources.
The impact resulting from highway construction ranges from intensifying
existing air pollution problems to improving the ambient air conditions.
Motor vehicles emit carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxide (NO),
hydrocarbons (HC), particulate matter, sulfur dioxide (SO2), and lead (Pb)
(listed in order of decreasing emission rate). Automobiles are considered
to be. the major source of CO in the project area. For this reason, most
of the analysis presented is concerned with determining expected carbon
monoxide levels in the vicinity of the project due to traffic flow.
In order to determine the ambient CO concentration for the receptor
closest to the highway project, two concentration components must be used:
local and background. The local component is defined as the CO emissions
from cars operating on highways in the near vicinity (i.e., distances
within 100 meters) of the receptor location. The background concentration
is defined by the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and
Natural Resources as "the concentration of a pollutant at a point that is
the result of emissions outside the local vicinity; that is, the
concentration at the upwind edge of the local sources."
In this study, the local component was determined using line source
computer modeling and the background concentration was obtained from the
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
(NCDEHNR). Once the two concentration components were resolved, they were
added together to determine the ambient CO concentration for the receptor
in question and to compare to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS).
Automobiles are regarded as sources of hydrocarbons and nitrogen
oxides. Hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides emitted from cars are carried
into the atmosphere where they react with sunlight to form ozone and
nitrogen dioxide. Area-wide automotive emissions of HC and NO are
expected to decrease in the future due to the continued installation and
maintenance of pollution control devices on new cars, and thus help lower
HC and NO levels.
Automobiles are not regarded as significant sources of particulate
matter and sulfur dioxide. 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.
Automobiles without catalytic converters can emit lead as a result of
burning regular gasoline containing tetraethyl lead. Newer cars with
catalytic converters burn unleaded gasoline eliminating lead emissions.
In the future, lead emissions are expected to decrease as more cars use
unleaded fuels and as the lead content of leaded gasoline is reduced. "The
Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 makes the sale, supply, or transport of
leaded gasoline or lead additives unlawful afte December 31, 1995."
Because of these reasons, it is not expected that traffic on the proposed
project will cause the NAAQS for lead to be exceeded.
22
A microscale air quality analysis was performed to determine future
CO concentrations resulting from the proposed highway improvements.
"CAL3QHC - A Modeling Methodology For Predicting Pollutant Concentrations
Near Roadway Intersections" was used to predict the CO concentration at
the nearest sensitive receptor to the project.
Inputs into the mathematical model to estimate hourly CO
concentrations consisted of a level roadway under normal conditions with
predicted traffic volumes, vehicle emission factors, and "worst case"
meteorological parameters. The traffic volumes are based on the annual
average daily traffic projections. Carbon monoxide vehicle emission
factors were calculated for the completion year of 1994 and the design
year of 2014 using the EPA publication "Mobile Source Emission Factors"
and the MOBILESA mobile source emissions computer model.
The background CO concentration for the project area was estimated to
be 1.9 parts per million (ppm). Consultation with the Air Quality
Section, Division of Environmental Management, North Carolina Department
of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources indicated that an ambient CO
concentration of 1.9 ppm is suitable for most suburban/rural areas.
The "worst case" air quality receptor was determined to be at a
distance 70 feet from the centerline of the roadway. The "build" and
"no-build" one-hour CO concentrations for the nearest sensitive receptor
for the years of 1994 and 2014 are as follows:
One Hour CO Concentrations (PPM)
"Build" "No-Build"
Receptor 1994 2014 1994 2014
R-9 2.8 2.9 2.8 2.8
Comparison of the predicted CO concentrations with the NAAQS (maximum
permitted for 1-hour averaging period = 35 ppm; 8-hour averaging period =
9 ppm) indicates no violation of these standards. Since the results of
the "worst case" 1- hour CO analysis is less than 9 ppm, it can be
concluded that the 8-hour CO level does not exceed the standard.
The project is located within the jurisdiction for air quality of the
Winston Salem Regional Office for the N.C. Department of Environment,
Health, and Natural Resources. The ambient air quality for Surry county
has been determined to be in compliance with the National Ambient Air
Quality Standards. This project is not anticipated to create any adverse
effect on the air quality of this attainment area.
During construction of the proposed project, all materials resulting
from clearing and grubbing, demolition or other operations will be removed
from the project, burned or otherwise disposed of by the Contractor. Any
burning will be done in accordance with applicable local laws and
ordinances and regulations of the North Carolina State Implementation Plan
for air quality in compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520. Care will be taken to
23
insure that burning will be done at the greatest practical distance from
dwellings and not when atmospheric conditions are such as to create a
hazard to the public. Burning will be performed under constant
surveillance. Also, during construction, measures will be taken to reduce
the dust generated by construction when the control of dust is necessary
for the protection and comfort of motorists or area residents.
G. Groundwater
Groundwater across the project generally occurs at depths of about 90
feet. The project corridor is set along a ridge, so surface water
accumulation should not pose as a flood threat.
H. Floodplain Involvement
Surry County is a participant in the National Flood Insurance Regular
Program; however, the drainage crossings within the project limits are
minor and not included in the detailed flood study for Surry County.
I. Hazardous Materials Involvement
UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK FACILITIES
Three UST facilities are located along the subject section of US 21
Business.
One UST facility is at the Basin Creek Country Store, located in the
northeast quadrant of Glendale Street and US 21 Business. Three 6000
gallon gasoline USTs and one 3000 gallon kerosene UST are located at this
facility. The tanks are located 75 feet from roadway centerline. They
are not on existing right of way and will not be acquired for new right of
way.
Another UST facility is located on the G & B Oil Company property,
located 1,320 feet south of the intersection of Carter Mill Road and US 21
Business. There are four above- ground tanks on-site. The tanks are not
operational, and are located 120 feet from the roadway centerline of US 21
Business. These tanks will not be acquired for right of way.
A UST facility is located on US 21 Business, approximately 350 south
of SR 1153 (Carter Mill Road). The site is on the property of the North
Elkin Body Shop. This site appears to have been an abandoned gas station
and is located 97 feet from the roadway centerline of US 21 Business.
These tanks will not be acquired for right of way.
OTHER POTENTIALLY CONTAMINATED PROPERTIES
The files of the Solid Waste Section, Division of Solid Waste
Management were consulted. No landfills are located on the project
corridor for Surry County.
24
Based on the files of the Solid Waste Section, the Hazardous Waste
Section and the EPA's Superfund list, there no potential environmental
problem sites the should affect this project corridor.
VII. Comments, Coordination and Public Involvement
On August 25, 1993, a letter was mailed to the following federal,
state, and local agencies to solicit suggestions and receive environmental
input concerning the proposed project (Note: an asterisk indicates those
agencies which responded to this letter):
U. S. Geological Survey
*U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Mayor of Elkin
Northwestern Economic Development Commission
*N. C. State Clearinghouse
*N. C. Department of Env. Health and Natural Resources
*N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission
*N. C. Department of Cultural Resources
N. C. Department of Public Instruction
A public meeting on the proposed project was held on November 29,
1993 to inform affected property owners and residents. Approximately 20
people attended the meeting. The public generally supported the proposal.
The only concern raised was driveway access to US 21 Business.
Representatives of NCDOT explained the driveway policy, and notified
residents that their driveway needs will be evaluated.
VIII. Finding of No Significant Impact
Based on the assessment of environmental impacts included in this
document, it has been determined that the project will not have a
significant adverse impact on the environment. This FONSI completes the
environmental review. An Environmental Impact Statement will not be
prepared for this project.
RL/plr
FIGURES

i

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
WIDENING OF US 21 BUSINESS
FROM SR 1138 TO US 21 BYPASS
SURRY COUNTY
T. 1. P. NO. R - 2521
8/93 FIG. 1
Zj v/- .?,` ?cs'1_. _'.e?. ~' _,I?•?. ?ibc_ `r1D7-- 1 r86
.:? t : yam. l ? - ?... _ ;. ? •_ _ : ? . , ? .:
JIB --g-
Cedarbrook •Cem - `N
Country Club - - /N/
:•s_ '122<. '^. ?
I.;
N .\d
to "CP
17
trr74
- \ p
.00
17-
top
1129-
??---
4Ql?y'_ 1 11 _ ...?. ;'??•. ..•- ?:? IOOIr f /? :. :.? r: _ r067
-
n -End Project
a... •`j _ _ _ - c ?'/, n` it ; P, ELenetgc Ch
•?, P \ North Elkin ,,;B
?? 1157 '' \ \-? °_
It '{1I' It -J •t? ?"c' ?? - %/ is Ilk,
. ,
04
?J ,1 r I l9 ? ?c _
4015
Cem
1136 L?=? -? - ` Ual Gro
\ _ J+ .'"-Armory •
rop ..-v'' _. j = uJ _ •_.:•1.. .?••• \\, k.
77
kin`/i -
•ti - ?' _=: 1138
Begin Project e _ .Y\
tu"
A. /
• 1 ?.,--??/ X71.'. p /?.4.i.!/? -? .' ?` / ?n \` 1' //': \? .+ \ __. -
NUIZ'1'H CAROLINA I)1:1'Al{'1'htl?N'1' ul iv. 1144- ;,''?, , .-lam
oo-
FEET _ DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS!"' •• 11•.
PLANNING AND NNVIRONNIEN'I'AI.
WIDENING OF US 21 BUSINESS - .• `?.'• . I _ \ `\
PI' FROM SR 1138 TO US 21 BYPASS ,' ', . ••. - - >- Y 1 =+ 1
Hi
o_ SURRY COUNTY - I? _ ?' `•` - ?__..?. _-? I r
T. 1. P. NO.
R -.2s2, •?, tam ' - Nor_r1
Elkins
• ?° ?a?S__ :I....:,,n'.. :`_ = : :Quad Map
8/93 i toot 2ooa FIG Z •• osoital
G.
+ -
4012 F_n\

V
3
`• r t
'r y
1

62
62
US 21 BYPASS
GRASSY CREEK RD
SR 1159
BURT RD
SR 1157
MAXWELL DR
SR 1192
;ART;-== Mll L RD
SR 1153
Ri GURE 4A
US 21 (BRIDGE ST EXT)
FROM US 21 BYPASS TO SR 1167 (LYLES ST)
ESTIMATED 1994 ADT IN HUNDREDS
28-
34 -1
0 1
s
COLLINS RD
SR 1152
r?
M
iI
i
Project R-2521
SORRY COUNTY
JULY, 1993
C-3j

3 ? ? f I
2i!{ NC C\., 4i1N
Irj Ih I
t2 co ?L1
C N N

? -4
+- 'v 1
L16
11
i r7 13

11 4? I
., i

13 1 , r 1
n
i •

3 i ?

`
^7 C: t•
N 10 -.
SR 1001
2
-? N rD Ln
N
a) Il .
I ? ? I i M
US 21 BYPASS
?LI {2

i t +' , HUDSON AVE
N
t')
SR 1156
o I , o
M zt
T
r
?
?
8 '
?
' r 2
8 1 s ?
6 -1 NORTH, ELKIN DR
{ SR 1145
Q ?? t Q

13 .1?L -2
f r 1
4
13 2y
2 I7 ? 4

9 i mr
? c

r
- ml l?
(fcc- --
--
?rs
13 19
{ - CAK GROVE RD
r
i U) C.)

SR 1 138
ju.)?
X1 72

2 1 '1

i o
co ?t o?
r`
co ,-
Iti 1

L
3 4
Y
ES ST
1 r L
L
SR 1167

r1 _j- - n
US 21 (BRICGE ST EXT)
R'-,M US 21 BYPASS TO SR 1167, (LYL_S ST)
ESTIMATED 2014 ADT IN HUNDREDS
„:1
t
r
112
US 21 BYPASS
I?roN
17
mod m
s - ? I?tT
o?IL 11
?,
24 3- OAK GROG RD
1 r 3` SR 1138
o?
*-N
Project R-252?
SURRY COUNTY
JUL",1993
4 \
`i
NCI
'5
J 1 I
1,
GRASSY CREEK RD - 2

..,

BLiRT RD 13 _ J = 50

S. 1 15 7
21 7 s }
25 = + 30
2
5 -? ;o N r 19 -? c c SR 1001
j u 4
Nii{^ OI ?tO

i C7}: IL

C;
c.^ NI t 2 ?

US 21, BYPASS
i L4 5
HUDSON AVE
Im SR 1155
n .If ?
NCDNI

15 `2
J l ??

MAXWELL DR rd.
g
15 2 s
SR 1 192 2
11 ??'?`r
T r. 8 NORTH =_KN DR
SR 1 145
.t' lit ,t.

a 2

25 2 8
CARTER MILL RD y
SR 1158 25 t - r 8

i
Ny;N
r?r
M
N
4 «
COLLINS RD
? t
SR 1 152 4 2
N N
?
+
C\j
T
T

m
N t 2
I ;r 0 Ct
'
L
LYLES ST
}
R
N ?
? SR 1157
c')
IT
I m im
N 4 N
APPENDIX
United States Department of the Interior

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Asheville Field Office
330 Ridgefield Court
Asheville, North Carolina 28806
September 24, 1993
Mr. L. J. Ward, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
North Carolina Department of Transportation
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Ward:
Subject: Scoping for the proposed widening of US
Bypass to SR 1138, Surry County, North
R-2521, State Project No. 6.741017
L"
C?
¦
TAIE?
AMEBKA?
FQ
SEP 2 9 199#
-,cm 01
Vliiw??
21 Business from US 21
Carolina, T.I.P. No.
On September 1, 1993, we received your letter dated August 20, 1993,
requesting information on potential environmental impacts for your use in
the preparation of an environmental document. The following comments are
provided in accordance with the provisions of the Fish and Wildlife
Coordination Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 661-667e), and Section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543) (Act).
According to information provided in your letter, this project will
involve the widening of US 21 from a two-lane road to a five-lane road on
the existing alignment for a distance of approximately 1 mile. The
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) is particularly concerned about
the potential impacts the proposed action may have on listed or proposed
endangered or threatened species and on stream and wetland ecosystems
within the project impact area. Preference should be given to
alternative alignments, stream-crossing structures, and construction
techniques that avoid or minimize encroachment and impacts to these
resources.
The Service's review of the subject environmental document would be
greatly facilitated if the document contained the following information:
(1) A complete analysis and comparison of the available
alternatives (the build and no-build alternatives).
(2) A description of the fishery and wildlife resources
within existing and required additional rights-of-way
and any areas, such as borrow areas, that may be
affected directly or indirectly by the proposed road
construction.
A-1
(3) Acreage and description of the creeks, streams, or
wetlands that will be impacted because of the
proposed road project. We recommend contacting the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Asheville Regulatory
Field Office, to determine the need for a Section 404
Clean Water Act permit (704/271-4855).
(4) An analysis of the crossing structures considered (i.e.,
spanning structure, culverts, etc.) and the rationale for
selecting the preferred structure(s) for proposed new or
extended crossings.
(5) Acreage of upland habitat, by cover type, that will
be eliminated because of the proposed project.
(6) Mitigation measures that will be employed to avoid,
eliminate, reduce, or compensate for habitat value
losses associated with any part of the proposed
project.
The enclosed page identifies federally protected endangered and
threatened species known from Surry County that may occur within the area
of influence of this proposed action. The legal responsibilities of a
Federal agency or their designated non-Federal representative under
Section 7 of the Act are on file with the Federal Highway Administration.
The enclosed page also contains a list of candidate species that are
currently under status review by the Service which may occur in the
project impact area. Candidate species are not legally protected under
the Act and are not subject to any of its provisions, including
Section 7, until they are formally proposed or listed as endangered or
threatened. We are including these species in our response to give you
advance notification. The presence or absence of these species in the
project impact area should be addressed in the environmental document.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide these scoping comments and
request that you continue to keep us informed as to the progress of this
project. In any future correspondence concerning this project, please
reference our Log Number 4-2-93-127.
S' cerely,
Brian P. Cole
Field Supervisor
Enclosure
cc:
Mr. Randy C. Wilson, Section Manager, Nongame and Endangered Wildlife and
Permits Section, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission,
Archdale Building, 512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, NC 27604-1188
A-2
A
Ms. Linda Pearsall, Director, North Carolina Natural Heritage Program,
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, NC 27611
Mr. Cecil Frost, North Carolina Department of Agriculture, Plant
Conservation Program, P.O. Box 27647, Raleigh, NC 27611
Mr. Dennis L. Stewart, Program Manager, Division of Boating and Inland
Fisheries, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, Archdale
Building, 512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, NC 27604-1188
A-3
IN REPLY REFER TO
LOG NO. 4-2-93-127
SURRY COUNTY
BIRDS
Peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus) - Endangered
REPTILES
Bog turtle (Clemmvs muhlenbergii) - Candidate
PLANTS
Small whorled pogonia (Isotria medeoloides) - Endangered*
*Indicates no specimen from Surry County in at least 20 years.
to,
A-4
NORTH CAROLINA STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
=M208 DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION
116 WEST JONES STREET
09-30-93 RALEIGH NORTH CAROLINA 27603-8003
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW COMMENTS
.MAILED T0: FROM:
NC DOT MRS. CHRYS BAGGETT
RON LUCAS DIRECTOR
HIGHWAY BLDG. N C STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
INTEROFFICE
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
SCOPING-ELKINi WIDENING OF US 21 BUSINESS FROM US 21 BYPASS TO SR
1136.(CC CAMP ROAD)i SURRY COUNTYs.STATE PROJECT 6.741017,t TIP NO-
R-2521
SAI NO 94E42200153 PROGRAM TITLE - SCOPING
THE ABOVE PROJECT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO THE NORTH CAROLINA
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS- AS A RESULT OF THE REVIEW THE FOLLOWING
IS SUBMITTED: ( ) NO COMMENTS WERE RECEIVED
( X) COMMENTS ATTACHED
SHOULD YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONSy PLEASE CALL THIS OFFICE [phone]-
C-C- REGION I

A-5
-
O.w
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
01
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
MEMORANDUM
TO: L. J. Ward, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
Department of Transportation
FROM: David Brook114 -dP'-c` '-q0`
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
SUBJECT: Widening of US 21 Business from US 21 Bypass to
SR 1138 Surry County, R-2521, 6.741017, 94-E-
4220-0153
We have received information concerning the above project from the State
Clearinghouse.
We have conducted a search of our files and are aware of no structures of
historical or architectural importance located within the planning area.
There are no known archaeological sites within the proposed project area. Based
on our present knowledge of the area, it is unlikely that any archaeological
resources which may be eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic
Places will be affected by the project construction. We, therefore, recommend
that no archaeological investigation be conducted in connection with this project.
These comments are made in accord with G.S. 121-12(a) and Executive Order
XVI. If you have any questions regarding them, please contact Renee Gledhill-
Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
cc: ?5CH
B. Church
A-6
109 East Jones Street - Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807
Q3R
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health .and Natural Resources
Policy Development
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
John Humphrey, Director
- 00
?EHNR
or
MEMORANDUM
TO: Chrys Baggett
State Clearinghouse
FROM: Melba McGee?'-/
Project Review Coordinator
RE: 94-0153 Scoping Widening US 21 Business from US 21
Bypass, Surry County
DATE: September 8, 1993
The Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
has reviewed the proposed scoping notice. The attached comments
list and describe information that is necessary for our divisions
to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of the project.
More specific comments will be provided during the environmental
review. The Department of Transportation is encouraged to notify
our commenting divisions if additional assistance is needed.
The Division of Parks and Recreation was unable to respond at
this time. Should comments be provided they will be forwarded for
your file.
attachments
cc: David Foster
A-7
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper

® 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, Planning and Assessment
Dept. of Environment, Health, & Natural Resources
FROM: Stephanie E. Goudreau, Mt. Region Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program f
DATE: September 9, 1993 l
SUBJECT: State Clearinghouse Project No. 94-0153, Scoping
comments for widening US 21 Business from US 21 Bypass
to SR 1138 in Elkin, Surry County, TIP #R-2521
This correspondence responds to a request by you for our
scoping comments.regarding the proposed widening of US 21
.-Business from US 21 Bypass to SR 1138 (CC Camp Road) in Elkin,
Surry County. The North Carolina Department of Transportation
(NCDOT) proposes to widen the roadway to a five-lane, 64-foot
curb and gutter facility.
I conducted a site visit on September 9, 1993. The area
surrounding the 1-mile section of roadway is highly developed and
contains various commercial businesses and industries; therefore,
wildlife habitat is extremely limited. The project crosses an
unnamed tributary to Elkin Creek which likely supports nongame
fish such as chubs, suckers, and shiners. This project should
have minimal impacts on fisheries and wildlife resources provided
the roadway is widened along existing alignment.
The following information should be included in the
Environmental Assessment (EA):
1) Description of fishery and wildlife resources within the
project area, including a listing of federally or state
designated threatened, endangered, or special concern
species. The NCWRC's Nongame and Endangered Species Section
maintains databases for locations of fish and wildlife
species. While there is no charge for the list, a service
charge for computer time is involved. Contact is:
A-8
Mr. Randy Wilson, Manager
Nongame & Endangered species section
Division of Wildlife Management
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
512 N. Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27604-1188
919/733-7291
A listing of designated plant species can be developed
through consultation with the following agency:
Natural Heritage Program
N.C. Division of Parks and Recreation
P. O. Box 27687
Raleigh, NC 27611
919/733-7795
2) Description of waters and/or wetlands affected by the
project.
3) Project map identifying wetland areas. Identification of
wetlands may be accomplished through coordination with the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). If the Corps is not
consulted, the person delineating wetlands should be
identified and criteria listed.
4) Description of project activities that will occur within
wetlands, such as fill or channel alteration. Acreages of
wetlands impacted by alternative project designs should be
listed. Project sponsors should indicate whether the Corps
has been contacted to determine the need for a 404 Permit
under the Clean Water Act. Contact is Mr. Ken Jolly at
919/846-1217.
5) Description of project site and non-wetland vegetative
communities.
6) The extent to which the project will result in loss,
degradation, or fragmentation of wildlife habitat.
7) Any measures proposed to avoid or reduce impacts of the
project or to mitigate for unavoidable habitat losses.
8) A list of document preparers which shows each individual's
professional background and qualifications.
I appreciate the opportunity to provide this information to
you in the early planning stages of this project. If you have
any questions regarding these comments, please contact me at
704/652-4257.
cc: Mr. Joe Mickey, District 7 Fisheries Biologist
Mr. David Sawyer, District 7 Wildlife Biologist
A-9

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
RIF
r4**A
ED E--= F1
September 20, 1993
P
TO: Melba McGee, Planning and Assessment
FROM: Monica Swihart??!?,Kater Quality Planning
SUBJECT: Project Review #94-0153; Scoping Comments - NC DOT
Proposed Improvements to US 21 Business From US 21 Bypass
to SR 1138,,Surry County, TIP #R-2521
The Water Quality Section of the Division of Environmental
Management requests that the following topics be discussed in the
environmental documents prepared on the subject project:
A. Identify the streams potentially impacted by the project. The
stream classifications should be current. From the
preliminary information provided, it appears that the proposed
improvements would occur within the Elkin Creek Water Supply
watershed which is classified as WS-II by the State of North
Carolina.
B. Identify the linear feet of stream channelizations/
relocations. If the original stream banks were vegetated, it
is requested that the channelized/relocated stream banks be
revegetated.
C. Number of stream crossings.
D. Will permanent spill catch basins be utilized? DEM requests
that these catch basins be placed at all water supply stream
crossings. Identify the responsible party for maintenance.
E. Identify the stormwater controls (permanent and temporary) to
be employed.
F. Please ensure that sediment and erosion and control measures
are not placed in wetlands.
A-10
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
Melba McGee
September 20, 1993
Page 2
G. Wetland Impacts i
1) Identify the federal manual used for identifying and
delineating jurisdictional wetlands.
2) Have wetlands been avoided as much as possible?
3) ' Have wetland impacts been minimized?
4) Discuss wetland impacts by plant communities affected.
5) Discuss the quality of wetlands impacted.
6) Summarize the total wetland impacts.
7) List the 401 General Certification numbers requested from
DEM.
H. Will borrow locations be in wetlands? Borrow/waste areas
should avoid wetlands to the maximum extent practicable.
Prior to approval of any borrow/waste site in a wetland, the
contractor shall obtain a 401 Certification from DEM.
I. Did NCDOT utilize the existing road alignments as much as
possible? Why not (if applicable)?
J. To what extent can traffic congestion management techniques
alleviate.the traffic problems in the study area?
K. Please provide a conceptual mitigation plan to help the
environmental review. The mitigation plan may state the
following:
1. Compensatory mitigation will be considered only after
wetland impacts have been avoided and minimized to the
maximum extent possible.
2. On-site, in-kind mitigation is the preferred method of
mitigation. In-kind mitigation within the same watershed
is preferred over out-of-kind mitigation.
3. Mitigation should be in the following order:
restoration, creation, enhancement, and lastly banking.
Written concurrence of 401 Water Quality Certification may be
required for this project. Applications requesting coverage under
our General Certification 14 or General Permit 31 will require
written concurrence. Please be aware that 401 Certification may be
denied if wetland impacts have not been avoided and minimized to
the maximum extent practicable.
10359er.mem
cc: Eric Galamb
A-11
• state of North Carolina
Reviewing Office:
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Rescums
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW - PROJECT COMMENTS Project D Number. 153 Out Date:
_ 9y- 0
After review of this project It has been determined that the EHNR permit(s) and/or approvals Indicated may need I be obtaiMtl in
order for this project to comply with North Carolina Law.
!Questions tsparding these permits should be addressed to the Regionat Office indicated on the reverse of On Corm.
wit applications. mlormation ono puloellnes relative io tnese plans and permits are available from the same
(Regional Office. Normal Process
T
. ime
PERMITS SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REOUIREMENTS !statutory tow
knit)
Permit to construct t operate wastewater treatment Application (1C days before begin construction or sward of Oars
faciliti". Sewer system e:tensions. t tlswr construction oo?ttraets On-site inspection. Post application
systems not 64charping into state surface waters. technical conference usual so am)
NPDES • permit to discharge into surface water and/or Application too days before begin activity. Or*atte Inspection. W120 oars
permit to operate and construct wastewater facilities Pre-appliCtlim conference usual Additionally. Obtain oarnrt to
discharging into state surface waters. 'Construct wastewater treatment faaility•granied after NPDES Reply lNrAt
tirnt. 0 days after receipt of plans or eesus of NPDES
P i unit-hichever Is later.
water Use P~ Prtr-application tecnnicst eornterance usually necessary 30 says
INIA)

suet/ Co?tstruaion Permit
J
Complete application mu t be received and permit issued
7 days
prior to the installation of a well (15 days)
Application ropy must be served on each adjacent ripa•ian property 55 days
edge and FIR Permit owner On-site inspection. Pro-application conference usual Filling
may require Easement to Fill from N.C Department of (W days)
Administration and Fe3eral Ofedpt and Fill Permit.
Permit to eonsuuct t operate Air Pollution Abatement
f
l
t 60 days
aci
ities and
o, Emission Sources as p.er 154 NCAC 21M NIA M days)
A n burning also:rared with subject proposal
must be in eompl;ancc with 15A NCAC 2D.0620.
Demolrtron..or renovat.ons of structures containing
as` cs matetia! must be in compt.an;e with 1SA so days
SAC 2D 0525 which requires notification and removal NIA
prior to demolition Contact As5estos Control Group
919 733.0820 OC days)
Comptea Source Permit required under 1SA NCAC 2D.0800. ,
The Sedimentation Pollvtion Control Act of 1973 must be ptoperly addressed (of any rand disturbing activity An erosion 8 sedrmentatro
control p!an will be required if one or more acres to be disturbed P:an files with pro;.er Regional Office (Land Ovalrty Se:t.l at least 30 20 days
Ca;s Le'ort be;•nn.^S &cltvity A fee or S3C for the first acre &,,d 52000 for eacl. asdrtror.a• acre or part mW accoaan the plan (30 cla S1_
The Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 must be addresser with respect to the referrenced Local Ordinance: (30 days)
Or. site Inspection usual Surety bond filed will'. EKNR Bond amount
!dining Permit va,ies with type mine and number of acres of affected land Any area 30 days
reined greater than one acre must be permite•d. The sppropnate bond (60 days) '
mvst be received before the permit can be issued.
North Carolina Burning permit On-sile Inspection by N C. Division Forest Resources If permit t day
r exceeds 4 days (NIA)
Special Ground Clearance Burning Pormit • 22 On-site inspection by N 0. Division Forest Resources required `if more 1 day
counties In eoasta! N.C. with organic lolls than five acres of ground clearing activities a•e involved inspections (NIA)
should be requested at least ten days before actual burn is planned.'
90. 120 days {
1
Oil Refining Facilities NIA (N!A) f`

If permit required. application fA days before begin eonstivction. 7
f Applicant must h;.c N C. gval.f.ed engineer to prepa:e plans. 3rr dtys
4
Diem Sa!c!y Permit inspect rgr,sirvc ? ;, Ce onstiuction N according to U'NR app(ov t
• td pfans.'N.ay slso taquL•e pt:mil under mc•5qu;1o control prooram. And ((4 days)
' a 4u pttmit from Corps of Cng:,cers An ;n3pcc6on of site is neces-
i
sa•y to verf;r lie:aid Cla!srfica!ion. A minimum fee of 5;:0?QO must ae• A-12
?
eom;any the e;pfka!ion. An ad?itir,,ner processing f&c Wsed on 0

Nona Process
Time

' . `• . +ERMTTS SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REQUIREMENTS tstatutory time
hmiq
file surety bond at 95,000 with EMNR running to State of lit.
10 days
lxsrrnll to *We piorstory oil or on ?retl OonditioNt that any well opened by drill operator etmstl, upon
MIA)
abandonment, be piugw according to ENNR rules and togutations•
Geophys" E:piorstion Pan I Applirvion faw with EKNR at feast 10 days prior to Issue of permit 10 says
Application by fetter. No standard application form. MuA)
State Lakes constnrotion peffat Application fee based on structure site is charged Must lndude IS-20 ays
descriptions i dgwings of structure t proof of ownership pill)
of riparian properly.

401 Water Duality CeRihcation
wA 60 ays
(130 ays)
Crt UA Permit tow MAJOR devei
opnment
8250.00 fee roust accompany applicatien SS days
(150 ays)
22 oars
CAfitA Permit for MINOR development 950.00 fet must accompany application Ch cars)
Several geodetic monuments are located M or nes, the project area if any monuments need to be moved or destroyed, please notify.
N.C Geodetic Survey, Box 27697, Raleigh, N.C. 27611
AGndonment of any willis. if required, must be in accordance with Title 15A, Subchapter 2CS100.
Notification of the proper regional office is reQuested ft-•brphan- underground store tanks (USTS1 are discovered during any excavation operation.
Compliance with 15A NCAC 2M 1000 (Coastal Stonmratet Rules) Is rsqulred. 45 days
(NIA) .
Winer comments ts""n 0091110nar pages as t»cessary, tieing certain to cite comment authority):
ANY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES INCLUDING CLEARING, GRADING, AND
EXCAVATION ACTIVITIES RESULTING IN THE DISTURBANCE OF FIVE (5) OR MORE
ACRES OF TOTAL LAND ARE REQUIRED TO OBTAINA NPDES STORMWATER PERMIT
PRIOR TO BEGINNING THESE ACTIVITIES. 2)d-t-
719,3
7

REGIONAL OFFICES
Duestions regarding these permits should be•addressed to the Regional Office marked below.
[]Asheville Regional Otfict []Fayetteville Regional Ofrice
59 Woodtin Place - Suite 714 Wachovia Building
Asheville, NC 28801 Fayetteville, NC 28301
[phone] [phone]
rtooresvilte Regional Office
13 []Raleigh Regional Office
919 North Alain Street, P.O. Box VA 31%')0 Earren Drive, Suite 101
Mooresville, NC 28115 Ra'eiph, NC 27609
(7041 C-63.1699 (9191733-2314
fl Washington Regional Office LJWitmington Regional Office
1-124 Carolina Avenue 127 Caldinat Drive Extension
Yd;ishington, NC 27889 W.ifmington, NC 26405
• (91919,6-641 (9 i 9) 395.3900
i

I
A
C'r
/V
SCE
0 t95,
State of North CarolinaA
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources At/7. YSrClj
Division of Land Resources ??+'
James G. Martin, Governor PROJECT PJMEW COHHENTS Charles H. Gardner
Wiliam W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary _ Director
Project Number: ? ??' ? ( S 3 County: + 5 v/?/i??
Project Name: G?( S' 3
Geodetic Survey
This project will impact _ geodetic survey markers. N.C. Geodetic
Survey should be contacted prior to construction at P.O. Box'27687,
Raleigh, N.C. 27611 [phone]. Intentional destruction of a
geodetic monument is a violation of N.C. General Statute 102-4.
L/ This project will have no impact on geodetic survey markers.
Other (comments attached)
For more information contact the Geodetic Survey office at [phone].
7- 3
Reviewer 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) acre will be disturbed.
If an environmental document is required to satisfy Environmental
Policy Act (SEPA) requirements, the document must be submitted as-part
of 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
r 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].
Reviewer Dat
e A-13
P.O. Box 27687 • Raleigh, N.C. 27611-7687 • Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH, Project Number
AND NATURAL RESOURCES _
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
Inter-Agency Project Review Response r Sv rr",
Project Name Type of Project L
r--? The applicant should be advised that plans and specifications for all water system
?--? improvements must be approved by the Division of Environmental Health prior to the award
of a contract or the initiation of construction (as required by 15A. NCAC 18C .0300 et. seq.).
For information, contact the Public Water Supply Section, [phone].
This project will be classified as a non-community public water supply and must comply with
state and federal drinking water monitoring requirements. For more information the applicant
should contact the Public Water Supply Section, [phone].
If this project is constructed as proposed, we will recommend closure of feet of adjacent
waters to the harvest of shellfish. For information regarding the shellfi-sF -sanitation progra
m, 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 demolition of dilapidated
structures, an extensive rodent control program may be necessary in order to prevent the
migration of the rodents to adjacent areas. The information concerning rodent control,
contact the local health department or the Public Health Pest Management Section at (919)
733-6407.
The applicant should be advised to contact the local health department regarding their
.
requirements for septic tank installations (as required under 15A NCAC 18A .1900 et. se Ve
For information concerning septic tank and other on-site waste disposal methods, contact On-Site Wastewater Section at. [phone].
The applicant should be advised to contract the local health department regarding the sanitary
?---? facilities required for this project.
If existing water lines will be relocated during the construction, plans for the water line
relocation must be submitted to the Division of Environmental Health, Public Water Supply
Section, Plan Review Branch, 1330 St. Mary's Street, Raleigh, North Carolina, [phone].
I'ALJS 9/9
Reviewer Section/Branch Date
A-14
DEHNR 3198 (Revised 8/93)
Division of Environmental Health