20001149 Ver 1_Complete File_20000906

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources 4 0-
Division'of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor NCDENR
Bill Holman, Secretary Kerr T. Stevens, Director
September 8, 2000
Randolph County
DWQ Project No. 00-1149
TIP Project No. U-2200
Widening of US 220 Business from SR 3590 to SR 2261 in Asheboro
APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification with Additional Conditions
Mr. William D. Gilmore, P.E.
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
Dear Mr. Gilmore:
You have our approval, in accordance with the attached conditions and those listed below, to
temporarily fill 0.02 acres of surface water and impact 55 if of stream within a tributary of
Hacketts Creek for the purpose of widening US 220 Business in Asheboro from SR 3590 to SR
2261. The project should be constructed in accordance with your application dated 21 August
2000 (received 6 September 2000). After reviewing your application, we have decided that this
project is covered by General Water Quality Certification Number 3289. This certification
corresponds to the Nationwide Permit Number 14 issued by the Corps of Engineers. In addition,
you should acquire any other federal, state or local permits before you proceed with your project
including (but not limited to) Sediment and Erosion Control, Non-Discharge and Water Supply
Watershed regulations. This approval will expire with the accompanying 404 permit, unless
otherwise specified in the Water Quality Certification. The following additional conditions will
be required:
1. Any culverts required for this project shall be installed in such a manner that the original
stream profile is not altered (i.e. the depth of the channel should not be reduced by a
widening of the streambed).
2. All culverts shall be installed at least one foot below the channel bed so as to allow passage
of water and aquatic life.
3. All work shall be performed during low flow conditions.
4. The presence of equipment in the channels must be minimized.
5. Mowing of existing vegetated buffers is strongly discouraged, so that they may be utilized for
storm water sheet flow.
6. Use of rip-rap for bank stabilization is to be minimized; rather, native vegetation is to be
planted when practical.
This approval is valid solely for the purpose and design described in your application (unless
modified below). Should your project change, you must notify the DWQ and submit a new
application. If the property is sold, the new owner must be given a copy of this Certification and
1621 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
approval letter, and is thereby responsible for complying with all the conditions. If the proposed
fill is in excess of 150 linear feet of stream length or 1 acre of wetlands, compensatory mitigation
will required as described in 15A NCAC 211.0506 (h) (6) and (7). For this approval to be valid,
you must follow the conditions listed in the attached certification and any additional conditions
listed above.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this certification, you may ask for an
adjudicatory hearing. You must act within 60 days of the date that you receive this
letter. To ask for a hearing, send a written petition that conforms to Chapter 150B of
the North Carolina General Statutes to the Office of Administrative Hearings, 6714
Mail Service Center, Raleigh, N.C. 27699-6714. This certification and its conditions
are final and binding unless you ask for a hearing.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Quality under Section 401 of the Clean
Water Act. If you have any questions, please telephone John Dorney at 919-733-9646.
Sincerely,
Attachment
Pc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Raleigh Field Office
NCDWQ Winston-Salem Regional Office
Central Files
Stevens
STAIZ
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAINIES B. HUNT JR.
GOVERNOR
VAYf'
RCCty vEU
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road
Suite 120
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615
ATTENTION: Mr. Eric Alsmeyer
NCDOT Coordinator
Dear Sir:
F
1WC1L?;'.
WP.?.
SUBJECT: Randolph County, Widening of US 220 Business (Fayetteville Street) in
Asheboro from SR 3590 to SR 2261, TIP No. U-2200, State Project No.
8.1571301, Federal Aid Project No. STP-22013(1).
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to widen a section
of US 220 Business (Fayetteville Street) to a five-lane, curb and gutter facility. The
proposed project extends from SR 3590 to SR 2261 in Randolph County, a distance of
approximately 2.1-km (1.3 miles). The project is located in the Cape Fear River Sub
basin number 03-06-09.
US 220 Business, within the project area, is situated on a slight ridge, where runoff from
the west side of the roadway eventually drains to Haskett Creek (Class "C") and runoff
from the east side of the roadway eventually drains to Penwood Branch (Class "C"). No
High Quality Waters or Outstanding Resource Waters occur within the project area. The
only stream impacts associated with the proposed project are 0.02 acres of temporary fill
and 55 linear feet of stream impact to a tri
The stream impacts ar o t e proposed 54-inch pipeline to the
aforementioned tributary. There are no impacts to jurisdictional wetlands associated with
this project.
MAILING ADDRESS:
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27899.1548
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
WEBSITE: WMV.DOH.DOT.STATE.NC.US
DAVID MCCOY
SECRETARY
August 21, 2000 0 ®1 9 49
LOCATION:
TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
RALEIGH, NC
The NCDOT anticipates that these activities will be authorized under a Nationwide
Permit 14. Enclosed please find the project site map, the permit drawing, and the pre-
construction notification form for the above referenced project. By copy of this letter, we
are also requesting a 401 General Water Quality Certification (for NWP 14) from
The NC Division of Water Quality. If you have any questions or need any additional
information, please contact Mr. Randy Griffin at [phone] extension 294.
Sincerely,
'--?
William D. Gilmore, P.E., Branch Manager
Project Development and Environmental
Analysis Branch
WDG/RWGjr/rwgjr
cc: Mr. David Franklin, COE, Wilmington
Mr. John Dorney, NCDWQ
Mr. David Cox, NC WRC
Mr. Calvin Leggett, P.E., Program Development Branch
Ms. Deborah Barbour, P.E., Highway Design Branch
Mr. Dave Henderson, P.E., Hydraulics Unit
Mr. Timothy V. Rountree, P.E., Structure Design Unit
Mr. John Alford, P.E., Roadway Design Unit
Mr. W.D. Johnson, Roadside Environmental
Mr. Bill Rosser, P.E., Division 8 Engineer
LEGEND
WETLAND BOUNDARY PROPOSED BRIDGE
RT
WETLAND PROPOSED BOX CULVE

DENOTES FILL IN ?nnnem;iereeeueunnesnuunaueooueeenni PROPOSED PIPE CULVERT
WETLAND
® DENOTES FILL IN (DASHED
EXISTNG LINES DENOTE
STRUCTURES)
SURFACE WATER
® DENOTES FILL IN
SURFACE WATER
(POND) SINGLE TREE
DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN WETLAND rr! r!`?-?"L_ WOODS LINE
DENOTES EXCAVATION
IN WETLAND III
GIy9
DRAINAGE INLET

•
• DENOTES MECHANIZED
CLEARING
ROOTWAD

--- ?- FLOW DIRECTION
T-B TOP OF BANK OOpOO VORTEX ROCK WEIR
WE - EDGE OF WATER
? IMIT OF CUT
P Ac)a RIP RAP
_ -
- PRO
. L
- -F - PROP. LIMIT OF FILL RIP RAP ENERGY
DISSIPATOR BASIN
p
--"11?--- PROP. RIGHT OF WAY ?°tl°tl
- - NG- - NATURAL GROUND
- -PL - PROPERTY LINE VANE
-TDE- TEMP. DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
-POE- PERMANENT DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
- EAB- • EXIST. ENDANGERED
ANIMAL BOUNDARY
- EPB- ' EXIST. ENDANGERED
PLANT BOUNDARY
WATER SURFACE
XXXXX LIVE STAKES
E?D BOULDER
N. C. DEPT.OF TRANSPORTATION
-- ---- CORE FIBER ROLLS DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
O ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER
OR PARCEL NUMBER RANDOLPH COUNTY
PROJECT: 8.1571301 (U-2200)
WIDENING OF BUSINESS 220
IN ASHEBORO
EET

U?

ti
O
ti
1 ? 1
1 ?
1 Op
I
h
U
w ?I
F
1
1
\ 1
Z;
M
n
h
ti
r

z

0
F CIO
? C4
?aH w
°axz z o
z`?o o ? a
x
o x
?
o
oz z z
W>x o z
w
o a 3 F-,
W
u W
z
?I

w
0
x

s
g

?I

0

F °

x z o
e
a
z?° .,
M p m

Fez w z z
m
Q ° 3 w
U
z

i?

?1t o
11?
I ,o
/ a
/ ? y5
Q y
/? pl
/m a
5
Aa
I ?( I? I t
45+00
rl I ?.s
? I I de
©7 I I I
u
II
? ?II
? II
', I Ix
II
?? II Y I
0?II I
?
- ?I
II
If
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
I
I 1'
I ?1
I II
I V
I /
I /
z
0
H
d ?,
o
oaz ?
axx o za
U
ca w
o
LT.
C)
z z
o
Fez

w
? w
o
z
_
? x w
U r
x
s x , ip
? /cQ f I
I ? ro
I q/ I C-C
t
Ir
I ?
O
It ?-- J Q
I/
W
F
a
U
w
C
z
0
z
NI

O
0
w
U
Z
O
Q N
Q Z
N O O
=a
LL _
?- 0 0
LL 2 O
00
a. > a6 w
0 o f =
Cj N
W
2 O
x
a

001149,
DWQ ID:
CORPS ACTION ID:
NATIONWIDE PERMIT REQUESTED (PROVIDE NATIONWIDE PERMIT 4): 14
PRE-CONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION APPLICATION
FOR NATIONWIDE PERMITS THAT REQUIRE:
1) NOTIFICATION TO THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS
2) APPLICATION FOR SECTION 401 CERTIFICATION
3) COORDINATION WITH THE NC DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
SEND THE ORIGINAL AND (1) COPY OF THIS COMPLETED FORM TO THE APPROPRIATE
FIELD OFFICE OF THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET).
SEVEN (7) COPIES SHOULD BE SENT TO THE N.C. DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL
MANAGEMENT (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET). PLEASE PRINT.
1. OWNERS NAME: N. C. Department of Transportation Project
Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
2. MAILING ADDRESS: 1548 Mail Service Center
CITY: Raleiah
SUBDIVISION NAME:
STATE: NC ZIP CODE: 27699-1548
PROJECT LOCATION ADDRESS, INCLUDING SUBDIVISION NAME (IF DIFFERENT FROM
MAILING ADDRESS ABOVE):
3. TELEPHONE NUMBER (HOME):
(WORK): 733-3141
4. IF APPLICABLE: AGENT'S NAME OR RESPONSIBLE CORPORATE OFFICIAL,
ADDRESS, PHONE NUMBER:
William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
5. LOCATION OF WORK (PROVIDE A MAP, PREFERABLY A COPY OF USGS
TOPOGRAPHIC MAP OR AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY WITH SCALE):
COUNTY: Randolph NEAREST TOWN OR CITY: Asheboro

I
SPECIFIC LOCATION (INCLUDE ROAD NUMBERS, LANDMARKS, ETC.):
US 220 Business from Pritchard Street (SR 3590) to Old Liberty Road
(SR 2261)
6. IMPACTED OR NEAREST STREAM/RIVER: Haskett Creek
RIVER BASIN: Cape Fear River Basin
7a. IS PROJECT LOCATED NEAR WATER CLASSIFIED AS TROUT, TIDAL SALTWATER
(SA), HIGH QUALITY WATERS (HQW), OUTSTANDING RESOURCE WATERS (ORW),
WATER SUPPLY (WS-I OR WS-II)? YES [ ] NO [X] IF YES, EXPLAIN:
7b. IS THE PROJECT LOCATED WITHIN A NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL
MANAGEMENT AREA OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN (AEC)?YES[ ] NO[X]
7c. IF THE PROJECT IS LOCATED WITHIN A COASTAL COUNTY (SEE PAGE 7 FOR
LIST OF COASTAL COUNTIES), WHAT IS THE LAND USE PLAN (LUP) DESIGNATION?
8a. HAVE ANY SECTION 404 PERMITS BEEN PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED FOR USE ON
THIS PROPERTY? YES [ ] NO [XJ IF YES, PROVIDE ACTION I.D. NUMBER OF
PREVIOUS PERMIT AND ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (INCLUDE PHOTOCOPY OF 401
CERTIFICATION):
8b. ARE ADDITIONAL PERMIT REQUESTS EXPECTED FOR THIS PROPERTY IN THE
FUTURE? YES [ ] NO [XJ IF YES, DESCRIBE ANTICIPATED WORK:
9a. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES IN TRACT OF LAND: N\A
9b. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES OF WETLANDS LOCATED ON PROJECT
SITE: N\A
2
I
10a. NUMBER OF ACRES OF WETLANDS IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT BY:
FILLING: 0.0 EXCAVATION: 0.0
FLOODING: 0.0 OTHER: 0.0
DRAINAGE: 0.0 TOTAL ACRES TO BE IMPACTED: 0.0
10b. (1) STREAM CHANNEL TO BE IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT (IF
RELOCATED, PROVIDE DISTANCE BOTH BEFORE AND AFTER RELOCATION):
LENGTH BEFORE: 55 FT AFTER: N\A FT
WIDTH BEFORE (based on normal high water contours): N\A FT
WIDTH AFTER: N\A FT
AVERAGE DEPTH BEFORE: N\A FT AFTER: N\A FT
(2) STREAM CHANNEL IMPACTS WILL RESULT FROM: (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)
OPEN CHANNEL RELOCATION: PLACEMENT OF PIPE IN CHANNEL: X
CHANNEL EXCAVATION: X CONSTRUCTION OF A DAM/FLOODING:
OTHER:
11. IF CONSTRUCTION OF A POND IS PROPOSED, WHAT IS THE SIZE OF THE
WATERSHED DRAINING TO THE POND? N\A
WHAT IS THE EXPECTED POND SURFACE AREA? N\A
12. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK INCLUDING DISCUSSION OF TYPE OF
MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT TO BE USED (ATTACH PLANS: 8 1/2" X 11" DRAWINGS
ONLY): Widen existing facility to a five-lane curb and gutter
section to improve safety and traffic flow.
Road construction equipment
13. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED WORK: Improve safety and traffic flow on
US 220 Business
3
14. STATE REASONS WHY IT IS BELIEVED THAT THIS ACTIVITY MUST BE CARRIED
OUT IN WETLANDS. (INCLUDE ANY MEASURES TAKEN TO MINIMIZE WETLAND
IMPACTS):
The widening is on existing location and is a linear oroiect.
Therefore, crossing jurisdictional areas is unavoidable
17. DOES THE PROJECT INVOLVE AN EXPENDITURE OF PUBLIC FUNDS OR THE USE
OF PUBLIC (STATE) LAND?
YES [X1 NO [ ] (IF NO, GO TO 18)
a. IF YES, DOES THE PROJECT REQUIRE PREPARATION OF AN
ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NORTH
CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT?
YES [X] NO [ ]
b. IF YES, HAS THE DOCUMENT BEEN REVIEWED THROUGH THE NORTH
CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION STATE CLEARINGHOUSE?
YES [X] NO [ ]
IF ANSWER TO 17b IS YES, THEN SUBMIT APPROPRIATE DOCUMENTATION FROM THE
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE TO DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT REGARDING
COMPLIANCE WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT.
QUESTIONS REGARDING THE STATE CLEARINGHOUSE REVIEW PROCESS SHOULD BE
DIRECTED TO MS. CHRYS BAGGETT, DIRECTOR STATE CLEARINGHOUSE, NORTH
CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION, 116 WEST JONES STREET, RALEIGH,
NORTH CAROLINA 27603-8003, TELEPHONE [phone].
4
18. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS SHOULD BE INCLUDED WITH THIS APPLICATION IF
PROPOSED ACTIVITY INVOLVES THE DISCHARGE OF EXCAVATED OR FILL MATERIAL
INTO WETLANDS:
a. WETLAND DELINEATION MAP SHOWING ALL WETLANDS, STREAMS, LAKES
AND PONDS ON THE PROPERTY (FOR NATIONWIDE PERMIT NUMBERS 14, 18, 21,
26, 29, AND 38). ALL STREAMS (INTERMITTENT AND PERMANENT) ON THE
PROPERTY MUST BE SHOWN ON THE MAP. MAP SCALES SHOULD BE 1 INCH EQUALS
50 FEET OR 1 INCH EQUALS 100 FEET OR THEIR EQUIVALENT.
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. ATTACH A COPY OF THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN IF REQUIRED.
e. WHAT IS LAND USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTY? Residential/
Commercial
f. IF APPLICABLE, WHAT IS PROPOSED METHOD OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL?
N\A
g. SIGNED AND DATED AGENT AUTHORIZATION LETTER, IF APPLICABLE.
NOTE: WETLANDS OR WATERS OF THE U.S. MAY NOT BE IMPACTED PRIOR
TO:
1) ISSUANCE OF A SECTION 404 CORPS OF ENGINEERS PERMIT,
2) EITHER THE ISSUANCE OR WAIVER OF A 401 DIVISION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT (WATER QUALITY) CERTIFICATION, AND
3) (IN THE TWENTY COASTAL COUNTIES ONLY), A LETTER FROM THE
NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT STATING THE PROPOSED
ACTIVITY IS CONSISTENT WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA COASTAL MANAGEMENT
PROGRAM.
44
OWNER'S/AGE T'S SIGNATURE DATE
(AGENT'S SIGNATURE VALID ONLY
IF AUTHORIZATION LETTER FROM
THE OWNER IS PROVIDED (18g.))
5

J:wi:s B. HUNT JR.
GOVERNOR
0 1149
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PAYMEr,?T
RECEIVED
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road
Suite 120
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615
? ST'W
August 21, 2000
ATTENTION: Mr. Eric Alsmeyer
NCDOT Coordinator
Dear Sir:
DAVID MCCOY
SECRETARY
,
I 6

SUBJECT: Randolph County, Widening of US 220 Business (Fayetteville Street) in
Asheboro from SR 3590 to SR 2261, TIP No. U-2200, State Project No.
8.1571301, Federal Aid Project No. STP-22013(1).
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to widen a section
of US 220 Business (Fayetteville Street) to a five-lane, curb and gutter facility. The
proposed project extends from SR 3590 to SR 2261 in Randolph County, a distance of
approximately 2.1-km (1.3 miles). The project is located in the Cape Fear River Sub
basin number 03-06-09.
US 220 Business, within the project area, is situated on a slight ridge, where runoff from
the west side of the roadway eventually drains to Haskett Creek (Class "C") and runoff
from the east side of the roadway eventually drains to Penwood Branch (Class "C"). No
High Quality Waters or Outstanding Resource Waters occur within the project area. The
only stream impacts associated with the proposed project are 0.02 acres of temporary fill
in surface waters and 55 linear feet of stream impact to a tributary of Hasketts Creek.
The stream impacts are associated with the tie-in of the proposed 54-inch pipeline to the
aforementioned tributary. There are no impacts to jurisdictional wetlands associated with
this project.
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] LOCATION:
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS FAX: [phone] TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER 1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548 WEBSITE: WWW.DON.DOTSTATE.NC.US RALEIGH, NC
A
The NCDOT anticipates that these activities will be authorized under a Nationwide
Permit 14. Enclosed please find the project site map, the permit drawing, and the pre-
construction notification form for the above referenced project. By copy of this letter, we
are also requesting a 401 General Water Quality Certification (for NWP 14) from
The NC Division of Water Quality. If you have any questions or need any additional
information, please contact Mr. Randy Griffin at [phone] extension 294.
Sincerely,
'-?-?
C' ??"LU.trv
William D. Gilmore, P.E., Branch Manager
Project Development and Environmental
Analysis Branch
WDG/RWGjr/rwgjr
cc: Mr. David Franklin, COE, Wilmington
Mr. John Dorney, NCDWQ
Mr. David Cox, NCWRC
Mr. Calvin Leggett, P.E., Program Development Branch
Ms. Deborah Barbour, P.E., Highway Design Branch
Mr. Dave Henderson, P.E., Hydraulics Unit
Mr. Timothy V. Rountree, P.E., Stricture Design Unit
Mr. John Alford, P.E., Roadway Design Unit
Mr. W.D. Johnson, Roadside Environmental
Mr. Bill Rosser, P.E., Division 8 Engineer
LEGEND
.... ..WLB°°••°°...... ° WETLAND BOUNDARY PROPOSED BRIDGE
WETLAND PROPOSED BOX CULVERT
-WL8
® DENOTES
WETLANpL IN ueddnnuernnnneunnnnuunundnunendudu' PROPOSED PIPE CULVERT
® DENOTES FILL (DASHED LINES DENOTE
SURFACE WATER R EXISTNG STRUCTURES)
DENOTES FILL IN
SURFACE WATER
(POND) SINGLE TREE
® DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN WETLAND WOODS LINE
DENOTES EXCAVATION
E IN WETLAND DRAINAGE INLET
e
• DENOTES MECHANIZED
CLEARING ROOTWAD
--- --? FLOW DIRECTION
T-t? TOP OF BANK 000400 VORTEX ROCK WEIR
WE - EDGE OF WATER
_ -? - PROP. LIMIT OF CUT Aca RIP RAP
- - F - PROP. LIMIT OF FILL RIP RAP ENERGY
DISSIPATOR BASIN
acCPi? PROP. RIGHT OF WAY amnn
- - NO- - NATURAL GROUND
--PL- PROPERTY LINE VANE
-TOE- TEMP. DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
- PDE - PERMANENT DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
- EAB - EXIST. ENDANGERED
ANIMAL BOUNDARY
- EPB- • EXIST. ENDANGERED
PLANT BOUNDARY
- - 0- - - - WATER SURFACE
X X X LIVE STAKES
X X
C?D BOULDER
--•-- -- CORE FIBER ROLLS
O ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER
OR PARCEL NUMBER
N. C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
RANDOLPH COUNTY
PROJECT: 8.1571301 (U-2200)
WIDENING OF BUSINESS 220
IN ASHEBORO
T
W
z
0

x °
z
x ? w

H°z
z z z
A> o
a w
.o
u a
z
w
0
w
o

o
06
1
tol
1 H

?I
1
06 z w ?
1 ? p
W

\ 1 All
\ 1 "I sal \ ` ti? i r
^I
r
I
NI• • \ ? iVl NI NI I
p,
??
?I SI "' 1 _ 1
?
FI zi v I fil I ?
I ,
1
?IJ
O
? _ ? _
3I
pp I CC -

3 \\ ? ? sl I r _
( ?
7

'
.
\ I
\ I I
s ?
? rs YtroH `?
1 I
I-'
I ? I ? f
I
I.
ZI $I Q

? e.r?e

c?
0

g
g
h
a
?I
4
g
z
0

QCf) o

a z 0
z"° o V) C)
?
F
o CL
a
oz0
n
E?
w
?0z L) w z z
a?? ti z
o> CL-. 0 w

w
z x

3
z
110
II?o
1,0
/e
I c, ?
i a @ 4
/ m
I I I "•
?fl©I I I
TT-- - ??
a•1.©•1.0.1° - ? 111 : 9 e
I II
? II s
I II ?
? j II
? II
' IIK
? II
' I
Iz
0
H

C) w

axe
o o
zx
U

F o a
o w W

w
w o?
w
0
°
z
F?° zz
Q?? a w
ca a a
U a
z

r?
I ?
/rQ
E Q
Ili ??, a•o
I alo
------------
1
4
I?
Dnc =INEZ
r?
w
F
a
U
Gc.
h
z
d
F
O
z

0
0
I
W
J
U
R
c
F
G?
x
v
a x , IQ
i
ro
I hj ? I I
161
,
DWQ ID: CORPS ACTION ID:
NATIONWIDE PERMIT REQUESTED (PROVIDE NATIONWIDE PERMIT 0)
14
PRE-CONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION APPLICATION
FOR NATIONWIDE PERMITS THAT REQUIRE:
1) NOTIFICATION TO THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS
2) APPLICATION FOR SECTION 401 CERTIFICATION
3) COORDINATION WITH THE NC DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
SEND THE ORIGINAL AND (1) COPY OF THIS COMPLETED FORM TO THE APPROPRIATE
FIELD OFFICE OF THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET).
SEVEN (7) COPIES SHOULD BE SENT TO THE N.C. DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL
MANAGEMENT (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET). PLEASE PRINT.
1. OWNERS NAME: N. C. Department of Transportation Project
Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
2. MAILING ADDRESS: 1548 Mail Service Center
SUBDIVISION NAME:
CITY: Raleigh STATE: NC ZIP CODE: 27699-1548
PROJECT LOCATION ADDRESS, INCLUDING SUBDIVISION NAME (IF DIFFERENT FROM
MAILING ADDRESS ABOVE):
3. TELEPHONE NUMBER (HOME): (WORK): 733-3141
4. IF APPLICABLE: AGENT'S NAME OR RESPONSIBLE CORPORATE OFFICIAL,
ADDRESS, PHONE NUMBER:
William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
5. LOCATION OF WORK (PROVIDE A MAP, PREFERABLY A COPY OF USGS
TOPOGRAPHIC MAP OR AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY WITH SCALE):
COUNTY: Randolph NEAREST TOWN OR CITY: Asheboro
1
SPECIFIC LOCATION (INCLUDE ROAD NUMBERS, LANDMARKS, ETC.):
US 220 Business from Pritchard Street (SR 3590) to Old Liberty Road
(SR 2261)
6. IMPACTED OR NEAREST STREAM/RIVER: Haskett Creek
RIVER BASIN: Cape Fear River Basin
7a. IS PROJECT LOCATED NEAR WATER CLASSIFIED AS TROUT, TIDAL SALTWATER
(SA), HIGH QUALITY WATERS (HQW), OUTSTANDING RESOURCE WATERS (ORW),
WATER SUPPLY (WS-I OR WS-II)? YES [ ] NO [X] IF YES, EXPLAIN:
7b. IS THE PROJECT LOCATED WITHIN A NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL
MANAGEMENT AREA OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN (AEC)?YES[ ] NO[X]
7c. IF THE PROJECT IS LOCATED WITHIN A COASTAL COUNTY (SEE PAGE 7 FOR
LIST OF COASTAL COUNTIES), WHAT IS THE LAND USE PLAN (LUP) DESIGNATION?
8a. HAVE ANY SECTION 404 PERMITS BEEN PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED FOR USE ON
THIS PROPERTY? YES [ ] NO [X] IF YES, PROVIDE ACTION I.D. NUMBER OF
PREVIOUS PERMIT AND ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (INCLUDE PHOTOCOPY OF 401
CERTIFICATION):
8b. ARE ADDITIONAL PERMIT REQUESTS EXPECTED FOR THIS PROPERTY IN THE
FUTURE? YES [ ] NO [X] IF YES, DESCRIBE ANTICIPATED WORK:
9a. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES IN TRACT OF LAND: N\A
9b. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES OF WETLANDS LOCATED ON PROJECT
SITE: N\A
2
10a. NUMBER OF ACRES OF WETLANDS IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT BY:
FILLING: 0.0 EXCAVATION: 0.0
FLOODING: 0.0 OTHER: 0.0
DRAINAGE: 0.0 TOTAL ACRES TO BE IMPACTED: 0.0
10b. (1) STREAM CHANNEL TO BE IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT (IF
RELOCATED, PROVIDE DISTANCE BOTH BEFORE AND AFTER RELOCATION):
LENGTH BEFORE: 55 FT AFTER: N\A FT
WIDTH BEFORE (based on normal high water contours): N\A FT
WIDTH AFTER: N\A FT
AVERAGE DEPTH BEFORE: N\A FT AFTER: N\A FT
(2) STREAM CHANNEL IMPACTS WILL RESULT FROM: (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)
OPEN CHANNEL RELOCATION: PLACEMENT OF PIPE IN CHANNEL: X
CHANNEL EXCAVATION: X CONSTRUCTION OF A DAM/FLOODING:
OTHER:
11. IF CONSTRUCTION OF A POND IS PROPOSED, WHAT IS THE SIZE OF THE
WATERSHED DRAINING TO THE POND? N\A
WHAT IS THE EXPECTED POND SURFACE AREA? N\A
12. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK INCLUDING DISCUSSION OF TYPE OF
MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT TO BE USED (ATTACH PLANS: 8 112" X 11" DRAWINGS
ONLY): Widen existing facility to a five-lane curb and gutter
section to improve safety and traffic flow.
Road construction equipment
13. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED WORK: Improve safety and traffic flow on
US 220 Business
3

14. STATE REASONS WHY IT IS BELIEVED THAT THIS ACTIVITY MUST BE CARRIED
OUT IN WETLANDS. (INCLUDE ANY MEASURES TAKEN TO MINIMIZE WETLAND
IMPACTS):
The widening is on existing location and is a linear oroiect.
Therefore, crossing jurisdictional areas is unavoidable
17. DOES THE PROJECT INVOLVE AN EXPENDITURE OF PUBLIC FUNDS OR THE USE
OF PUBLIC (STATE) LAND?
YES (XI NO [ J (IF NO, GO TO 18)
a. IF YES, DOES THE PROJECT REQUIRE PREPARATION OF AN
ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NORTH
CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT?
YES [XI NO [ J
b. IF YES, HAS THE DOCUMENT BEEN REVIEWED THROUGH THE NORTH
CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION STATE CLEARINGHOUSE?
YES [XJ NO [ J
IF ANSWER TO 17b IS YES, THEN SUBMIT APPROPRIATE DOCUMENTATION FROM THE
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE TO DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT REGARDING
COMPLIANCE WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT.
QUESTIONS REGARDING THE STATE CLEARINGHOUSE REVIEW PROCESS SHOULD BE
DIRECTED TO MS. CHRYS BAGGETT, DIRECTOR STATE CLEARINGHOUSE, NORTH
CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION, 116 WEST JONES STREET, RALEIGH,
NORTH CAROLINA 27603-8003, TELEPHONE [phone].
4
4
18. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS SHOULD BE INCLUDED WITH THIS APPLICATION IF
PROPOSED ACTIVITY INVOLVES THE DISCHARGE OF EXCAVATED OR FILL MATERIAL
INTO WETLANDS:
a. WETLAND DELINEATION MAP SHOWING ALL WETLANDS, STREAMS, LAKES
AND PONDS ON THE PROPERTY (FOR NATIONWIDE PERMIT NUMBERS 14, 18, 21,
26, 29, AND 38). ALL STREAMS (INTERMITTENT AND PERMANENT) ON THE
PROPERTY MUST BE SHOWN ON THE MAP. MAP SCALES SHOULD BE 1 INCH EQUALS
50 FEET OR 1 INCH EQUALS 100 FEET OR THEIR EQUIVALENT.
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. ATTACH A COPY OF THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN IF REQUIRED.
e. WHAT IS LAND USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTY? Residential/
Commercial
f. IF APPLICABLE, WHAT IS PROPOSED METHOD OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL?
N\A
g. SIGNED AND DATED AGENT AUTHORIZATION LETTER, IF APPLICABLE.
NOTE: WETLANDS OR WATERS OF THE U.S. MAY NOT BE IMPACTED PRIOR
TO:
1) ISSUANCE OF A SECTION 404 CORPS OF ENGINEERS PERMIT,
2) EITHER THE ISSUANCE OR WAIVER OF A 401 DIVISION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT (WATER QUALITY) CERTIFICATION, AND
3) (IN THE TWENTY COASTAL COUNTIES ONLY), A LETTER FROM THE
NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT STATING THE PROPOSED
ACTIVITY IS CONSISTENT WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA COASTAL MANAGEMENT
PROGRAM. l 1 `cam l
OWNER'S/AGE T'S SIGNATURE DATE
(AGENT'S SIGNATURE VALID ONLY
IF AUTHORIZATION LETTER FROM
THE OWNER IS PROVIDED (18g.))
5
nASWrv?
~'? s 001149
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMEs B. HUNT JR.
GOVERNOR
DAYMEIV T
RECEIVED
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road
Suite 120
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615
ATTENTION: Mr. Eric Alsmeyer
August 21, 2000
DAVID MCCOY
SECRETARY
WETLANDti GOE1P
WpTFR?!If?_IIY SFCI?
NCDOT Coordinator
Dear Sir:
SUBJECT: Randolph County, Widening of US 220 Business (Fayetteville Street) in
Asheboro from SR 3590 to SR 2261, TIP No. U-2200, State Project No.
8.1571301, Federal Aid Project No. STP-22013(1).
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to widen a section
of US 220 Business (Fayetteville Street) to a five-lane, curb and gutter facility. The
proposed project extends from SR 3590 to SR 2261 in Randolph County, a distance of
approximately 2.1-km (1.3 miles). The project is located in the Cape Fear River Sub
basin number 03-06-09.
US 220 Business, within the project area, is situated on a slight ridge, where runoff from
the west side of the roadway eventually drains to Haskett Creek (Class "C") and runoff
from the east side of the roadway eventually drains to Penwood Branch (Class "C"). No
High Quality Waters or Outstanding Resource Waters occur within the project area. The
only stream impacts associated with the proposed project are 0.02 acres of temporary fill
in surface waters and 55 linear feet of stream impact to a tributary of Hasketts Creek.
The stream impacts are associated with the tie-in of the proposed 54-inch pipeline to the
aforementioned tributary. There are no impacts to jurisdictional wetlands associated with
this project.
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] LOCATION:
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS FAX: [phone] TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER 1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
RALEIGH NC 27899-1548 WEBSITE: WWW.DOH.DOT.STATE.NC.US RALEIGH, NC
The NCDOT anticipates that these activities will be authorized under a Nationwide
Permit 14. Enclosed please find the project site map, the permit drawing, and the pre-
construction notification form for the above referenced project. By copy of this letter, we
are also requesting a 401 General Water Quality Certification (for NWP 14) from
The NC Division of Water Quality. If you have any questions or need any additional
information, please contact Mr. Randy Griffin at [phone] extension 294.
Sincerely,
?--?
William D. Gilmore, P.E., Branch Manager
Project Development and Environmental
Analysis Branch
WDG/RWGjr/rwgjr
cc: Mr. David Franklin, COE, Wilmington
Mr. John Dorney, NCDWQ
Mr. David Cox, NCWRC
Mr. Calvin Leggett, P.E., Program Development Branch
Ms. Deborah Barbour, P.E., Highway Design Branch
Mr. Dave Henderson, P.E., Hydraulics Unit
Mr. Timothy V. Rountree, P.E., Structure Design Unit
Mr. John Alford, P.E., Roadway Design Unit
Mr. W.D. Johnson, Roadside Environmental
Mr. Bill Rosser, P.E., Division 8 Engineer

LEGEND
°-- .WLB°°°..........° WETLAND BOUNDARY PROPOSED BRIDGE
WETLAND PROPOSED BOX CULVERT
---W L E) -'
® DENOTES FILL IN imuenaacdeeunnneennuumnnennneunnui PROPOSED PIPE CULVERT
WETLAND '
® DENOTES FILL IN (DASHED LINES DENOTE
SURFACE WATER EXISTNG STRUCTURES)
Cl111111? DENOTES FILL
SURFACE WATER
R
(POND) SINGLE TREE
® DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN WETLAND r!`1r!??_?`ti-r"Lr%!L WOODS LINE
DENOTES EXCAVATION
IN WETLAND DRAINAGE INLET
• DENOTES MECHANIZED
• CLEARING ROOTWAD
- FLOW DIRECTION
T-t? TOP OF BANK 000p0 VORTEX ROCK WEIR
WE - EDGE OF WATER
_ -C- - PROP. LIMIT OF CUT RIP RAP
- -E- - PROP. LIMIT OF FILL RIP RAP ENERGY
PROP. RIGHT OF WAY DISSIPATOR BASIN
I.
- - NG- - NATURAL GROUND
- -PL - PROPERTY LINE -?? VANE
-TOE- TEMP. DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
- PDE - PERMANENT DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
- EAB- EXIST. ENDANGERED
ANIMAL BOUNDARY
- EPB- E PILANT BOUNDARYD
- . 0- . - - WATER SURFACE
X X X LIVE STAKES
X X
BOULDER
--- -- -- CORE FIBER ROLLS
O ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER
OR PARCEL NUMBER
N. C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
RANDOLPH COUNTY
PROJECT: 8.1571301 (U-2200)
WIDENING OF BUSINESS 220
IN ASHEBORO
EET -2- OF

O
M
i 06
,
, Er
U
w ?I
,
0
M
n
ti
00

rl

z
0
d ?, c C4

o>F
? Cf)
w
adz ., z o

dxU ? p m
w
x
HOB ?
o O
d
H°z u z z
v? d

>
Q

o

w
.A a
U ?
z
c
x

12!
z
0

a x z o
d ? U ? m m
?
o w
o
ozo ?
?
c? d
w
z
;d
c>? o
x o
H
U Q a 3 w
w
z ?
3
b
z
Il©
? to
n -
If a a ?
5
?+ pl
1 II
X,e II
--
------? r ,T----
Q'?'O'I'fl'I'?,0
I I I `? e
I II
a I II ?
p '? II
? II
', I Ix
' I
II I

I°
? I
0
/ 1Q C]
II' Q ?, W
o,lo
N
w
m
U
w
a
N
z
a
d
F
O
z

0
0
II
(xl
..a
U
z
0

oaz ? w
axe o z0
z C=)
Noa o w?

0
H°z zz
54
Q?a
?
w
o a
a
z
C1.
0
w
w
a x , la
'o
' %o rl
/
ro
'v / i /'O I I
i IQ ? I I
??? lal
,
WL?eo ,v.,l1
0®1149
DWQ ID: CORPS ACTION ID:
NATIONWIDE PERMIT REQUESTED (PROVIDE NATIONWIDE PERMIT #) 14
PRE-CONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION APPLICATION
FOR NATIONWIDE PERMITS THAT REQUIRE:
1) NOTIFICATION TO THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS
2) APPLICATION FOR SECTION 401 CERTIFICATION
3) COORDINATION WITH THE NC DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
SEND THE ORIGINAL AND (1) COPY OF THIS COMPLETED FORM TO THE APPROPRIATE
FIELD OFFICE OF THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET).
SEVEN (7) COPIES SHOULD BE SENT TO THE N.C. DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL
MANAGEMENT (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET). PLEASE PRINT.
1. OWNERS NAME: N. C. Department of Transportation Proiect
Development and Environmental Analvsis Branch
2. MAILING ADDRESS: 1548 Mail Service Center
SUBDIVISION NAME:
CITY: Raleigh STATE: NC ZIP CODE: 27699-1548
PROJECT LOCATION ADDRESS, INCLUDING SUBDIVISION NAME (IF DIFFERENT FROM
MAILING ADDRESS ABOVE):
3. TELEPHONE NUMBER (HOME): (WORK): 733-3141
4. IF APPLICABLE: AGENT'S NAME OR RESPONSIBLE CORPORATE OFFICIAL,
ADDRESS, PHONE NUMBER:
William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manaqer
5. LOCATION OF WORK (PROVIDE A MAP, PREFERABLY A COPY OF USGS
TOPOGRAPHIC MAP OR AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY WITH SCALE):
COUNTY: Randolph NEAREST TOWN OR CITY: Asheboro
r
1
SPECIFIC LOCATION (INCLUDE ROAD NUMBERS, LANDMARKS, ETC.):
US 220 Business from Pritchard Street (SR 3590) to Old Liberty Road
(SR 2261)
6. IMPACTED OR NEAREST STREAM/RIVER: Haskett Creek
RIVER BASIN: Cape Fear River Basin
7a. IS PROJECT LOCATED NEAR WATER CLASSIFIED AS TROUT, TIDAL SALTWATER
(SA), HIGH QUALITY WATERS (HQW), OUTSTANDING RESOURCE WATERS (ORW),
WATER SUPPLY (WS-I OR WS-II)? YES [ ] NO [X] IF YES, EXPLAIN:
7b. IS THE PROJECT LOCATED WITHIN A NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL
MANAGEMENT AREA OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN (AEC)?YES[ ] NO[X]
7c. IF THE PROJECT IS LOCATED WITHIN A COASTAL COUNTY (SEE PAGE 7 FOR
LIST OF COASTAL COUNTIES), WHAT IS THE LAND USE PLAN (LUP) DESIGNATION?
8a. HAVE ANY SECTION 404 PERMITS BEEN PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED FOR USE ON
THIS PROPERTY? YES [ ] NO [X] IF YES, PROVIDE ACTION I.D. NUMBER OF
PREVIOUS PERMIT AND ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (INCLUDE PHOTOCOPY OF 401
CERTIFICATION):
8b. ARE ADDITIONAL PERMIT REQUESTS EXPECTED FOR THIS PROPERTY IN THE
FUTURE? YES [ ] NO [X] IF YES, DESCRIBE ANTICIPATED WORK:
9a. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES IN TRACT OF LAND: N\A
9b. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES OF WETLANDS LOCATED ON PROJECT
SITE: N\A
2
10a. NUMBER OF ACRES OF WETLANDS IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT BY:
FILLING: 0.0 EXCAVATION: 0.0
FLOODING: 0.0 OTHER: 0.0
DRAINAGE: 0.0 TOTAL ACRES TO BE IMPACTED: 0.0
10b. (1) STREAM CHANNEL TO BE IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT (IF
RELOCATED, PROVIDE DISTANCE BOTH BEFORE AND AFTER RELOCATION):
LENGTH BEFORE: 55 FT AFTER: N\A FT
WIDTH BEFORE (based on normal high water contours): N\A FT
WIDTH AFTER: N\A FT
AVERAGE DEPTH BEFORE: N\A FT AFTER: N\A FT
(2) STREAM CHANNEL IMPACTS WILL RESULT FROM: (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)
OPEN CHANNEL RELOCATION: PLACEMENT OF PIPE IN CHANNEL: X
CHANNEL EXCAVATION: X CONSTRUCTION OF A DAM/FLOODING:
OTHER:
11. IF CONSTRUCTION OF A POND IS PROPOSED, WHAT IS THE SIZE OF THE
WATERSHED DRAINING TO THE POND? N\A
WHAT IS THE EXPECTED POND SURFACE AREA? N\A
12. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK INCLUDING DISCUSSION OF TYPE OF
MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT TO BE USED (ATTACH PLANS: 8 1/2" X 11" DRAWINGS
ONLY): Widen existing facility to a five-lane curb and gutter
section to improve safety and traffic flow.
Road construction equipment
13. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED WORK: Improve safety and traffic flow on
US 220 Business
3

14. STATE REASONS WHY IT IS BELIEVED THAT THIS ACTIVITY MUST BE CARRIED
OUT IN WETLANDS. (INCLUDE ANY MEASURES TAKEN TO MINIMIZE WETLAND
IMPACTS):
The widening is on existinq location and is a linear oroiect.
Therefore, crossinq jurisdictional areas is unavoidable
16 YGU ARE REQUIRED TG GGNTAB'T THE SATE f}ISTGRIG PRESERVATIGN OFFIGEP
(SHPG) (&EE AGENGY ADDRESSES SHEET) REGARDING THE BREB$Prc6 Gz W.ISR:AGTIG
PRGPERTIES 1N THE PERMIT AREA WHICH MAY BE AFFEGTEB-BY THE PRGP9?B
THE a z rrc
PROdEET BATE GGNTAETEB
17. DOES THE PROJECT INVOLVE AN EXPENDITURE OF PUBLIC FUNDS OR THE USE
OF PUBLIC (STATE) LAND?
YES [X] NO [ ] (IF NO, GO TO 18)
a. IF YES, DOES THE PROJECT REQUIRE PREPARATION OF AN
ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NORTH
CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT?
YES [X] NO [ ]
b. IF YES, HAS THE DOCUMENT BEEN REVIEWED THROUGH THE NORTH
CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION STATE CLEARINGHOUSE?
YES [X] NO [ ]
IF ANSWER TO 17b IS YES, THEN SUBMIT APPROPRIATE DOCUMENTATION FROM THE
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE TO DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT REGARDING
COMPLIANCE WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT.
QUESTIONS REGARDING THE STATE CLEARINGHOUSE REVIEW PROCESS SHOULD BE
DIRECTED TO MS. CHRYS BAGGETT, DIRECTOR STATE CLEARINGHOUSE, NORTH
CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION, 116 WEST JONES STREET, RALEIGH,
NORTH CAROLINA 27603-8003, TELEPHONE [phone].
4
18. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS SHOULD BE INCLUDED WITH THIS APPLICATION IF
PROPOSED ACTIVITY INVOLVES THE DISCHARGE OF EXCAVATED OR FILL MATERIAL
INTO WETLANDS:
a. WETLAND DELINEATION MAP SHOWING ALL WETLANDS, STREAMS, LAKES
AND PONDS ON THE PROPERTY (FOR NATIONWIDE PERMIT NUMBERS 14, 18, 21,
26, 29, AND 38). ALL STREAMS (INTERMITTENT AND PERMANENT) ON THE
PROPERTY MUST BE SHOWN ON THE MAP. MAP SCALES SHOULD BE 1 INCH EQUALS
50 FEET OR 1 INCH EQUALS 100 FEET OR THEIR EQUIVALENT.
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. ATTACH A COPY OF THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN IF REQUIRED.
e. WHAT IS LAND USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTY? Residential/
Commercial
f. IF APPLICABLE, WHAT IS PROPOSED METHOD OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL?
N\A
g. SIGNED AND DATED AGENT AUTHORIZATION LETTER, IF APPLICABLE.
NOTE: WETLANDS OR WATERS OF THE U.S. MAY NOT BE IMPACTED PRIOR
TO:
1) ISSUANCE OF A SECTION 404 CORPS OF ENGINEERS PERMIT,
2) EITHER THE ISSUANCE OR WAIVER OF A 401 DIVISION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT (WATER QUALITY) CERTIFICATION, AND
3) (IN THE TWENTY COASTAL COUNTIES ONLY), A LETTER FROM THE
NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT STATING THE PROPOSED
ACTIVITY IS CONSISTENT WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA COASTAL MANAGEMENT
PROGRAM. /
C k4 l?? zt
it-
OWNER'S/AGE?JT'S SIGNATURE DATE
(AGENT'S SIGNATURE VALID ONLY
IF AUTHORIZATION LETTER FROM
THE OWNER IS PROVIDED (18g.))
5
0.01149
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JANH:s B. HUNT JR.
GOVERNOR
I?L?,EIVf?D
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road
Suite 120
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615
August 21, 2000
DAVID MCCOY
SECRETARY
L °° 5FP
s
s
L.
WETLAfVCiS G?i
WATER ti.;,'_dfY ROW .,
ATTENTION: Mr. Eric Alsmeyer
NCDOT Coordinator
Dear Sir:
SUBJECT: Randolph County, Widening of US 220 Business (Fayetteville Street) in
Asheboro from SR 3590 to SR 2261, TIP No. U-2200, State Project No.
8.1571301, Federal Aid Project No. STP-22013(1).
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to widen a section
of US 220 Business (Fayetteville Street) to a five-lane, curb and gutter facility. The
proposed project extends from SR 3590 to SR 2261 in Randolph County, a distance of
approximately 2.1-km (1.3 miles). The project is located in the Cape Fear River Sub
basin number 03-06-09.
US 220 Business, within the project area, is situated on a slight ridge, where runoff from
the west side of the roadway eventually drains to Haskett Creek (Class "C") and runoff
from the east side of the roadway eventually drains to Penwood Branch (Class "C"). No
High Quality Waters or Outstanding Resource Waters occur within the project area. The
only stream impacts associated with the proposed project are 0.02 acres of temporary fill
in surface waters and 55 linear feet of stream impact to a tributary of Hasketts Creek.
The stream impacts are associated with the tie-in of the proposed 54-inch pipeline to the
aforementioned tributary. There are no impacts to jurisdictional wetlands associated with
this project.
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] LOCATION:
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS FAX. [phone] TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER 1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
RALEIGH NC 27899-1548 WEBSITE: WWW.DOH.DOT.STATE.NC.US RALEIGH. NC
The NCDOT anticipates that these activities will be authorized under a Nationwide
Permit 14. Enclosed please find the project site map, the permit drawing, and the pre-
construction notification form for the above referenced project. By copy of this letter, we
are also requesting a 401 General Water Quality Certification (for NWP 14) from
The NC Division of Water Quality. If you have any questions or need any additional
information, please contact Mr. Randy Griffin at [phone] extension 294.
Sincerely,
William D. Gilmore, P.E., Branch Manager
Project Development and Environmental
Analysis Branch
WDG/R WGj r/rwgj r
cc: Mr. David Franklin, COE, Wilmington
Mr. John Dorney, NCDWQ
Mr. David Cox, NCWRC
Mr. Calvin Leggett, P.E., Program Development Branch
Ms. Deborah Barbour, P.E., Highway Design Branch
Mr. Dave Henderson, P.E., Hydraulics Unit
Mr. Timothy V. Rountree, P.E., Structure Design Unit
Mr. John Alford, P.E., Roadway Design Unit
Mr. W.D. Johnson, Roadside Environmental
Mr. Bill Rosser, P.E., Division 8 Engineer
LEGEND
---WLB••°•°•°°°•••° WETLAND BOUNDARY PROPOSED BRIDGE
WETLAND PROPOSED BOX CULVERT
-W L E)
® DENOTES FILL IN vueeeeeuareeaeenneeeuuaueeeneeneoeni PROPOSED PIPE CULVERT
WETLAND ?
® DENOTES FILL IN (DASHED LINES DENOTE
SURFACE WATER EXISTNG STRUCTURES)
® DENOTES FILL
SURFACE WATER
R
(POND) SINGLE TREE
DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN WETLAND r! r! rr`?-r!`Lrr`L WOODS LINE
DENOTES EXCAVATION ?d
IN WETLAND ?Hd?9 DRAINAGE INLET
• DENOTES MECHANIZED
• • •• • • • CLEARING ROOTWAD
-- ?- FLOW DIRECTION t;7
Tom-- TOP OF BANK 000p0 VORTEX ROCK WEIR
WE - EDGE OF WATER
_ -? - PROP. LIMIT OF CUT RIP RAP
- - F - PROP. LIMIT OF FILL RIP RAP ENERGY
p 0[SSIPATOR BASIN
PROP. RIGHT OF WAY
a?ter!I?
- - NG- - NATURAL GROUND
- -PL - PROPERTY LINE VANE
-TDE- TEMP. DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
-POE- PERMANENT DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
- EAB- EXIST. ENDANGERED
ANIMAL BOUNDARY
- EPB- EXIST. ENDANGERED
PLANT BOUNDARY
- . 7- - - - WATER SURFACE
XXX XX LIVE STAKES
BOULDER
--- --• -- CORE FIBER ROLLS
O ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER
OR PARCEL NUMBER
N. C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
RANDOLPH COUNTY
PROJECT: 8.1571301 (U-2200)
WIDENING OF BUSINESS 220
IN ASHEBORO

C?
Z;
1
I 06
1
I F+
U
w ?I
1 A O F
1 ??TG ^n 1
\ i.
0
rn
t
tn

E-I

Iz
0
N

134 z o

? w

w o ?

H o z j
c?]
z
z
Q>? o
a
Q
w
.A
u a
z
c

c?

z
0
o

o z z 0
U ?
?? M cA
E-O ? o O ? I
ozo F c? w
Foz w z z

o>? ti
?
w
Q a 3 F
w
U w
z ?
b
z
?Jl o
?`Ilo
A ?p
C1
/ p I
/ a a 4
Y
8 /? 8
\Qn I I I
II ? ?
? II g
a I II ?
p ? II
? II
', I Ix
II
' I
II i
0
rl
? I
I I
I I
lal
I'I
I
I ?
? to
0
o
I- 'El
?' o o

?Ir
II
V
H
d
a
U
C
w
z
.a
d
w
F
O
z

0
II
W
..1
U
0011 49
DWQ ID: CORPS ACTION ID:
NATIONWIDE PERMIT REQUESTED (PROVIDE NATIONWIDE PERMIT) 14
PRE-CONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION APPLICATION
FOR NATIONWIDE PERMITS THAT REQUIRE:
1) NOTIFICATION TO THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS
2) APPLICATION FOR SECTION 401 CERTIFICATION
3) COORDINATION WITH THE NC DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
SEND THE ORIGINAL AND (1) COPY OF THIS COMPLETED FORM TO THE APPROPRIATE
FIELD OFFICE OF THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET).
SEVEN (7) COPIES SHOULD BE SENT TO THE N.C. DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL
MANAGEMENT (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET). PLEASE PRINT.
1. OWNERS NAME: N. C. Department of Transportation Proiect
Development and Environmental Analvsis Branch
2. MAILING ADDRESS: 1548 Mail Service Center
SUBDIVISION NAME:
CITY: Raleigh STATE: NC ZIP CODE: 27699-1548
PROJECT LOCATION ADDRESS, INCLUDING SUBDIVISION NAME (IF DIFFERENT FROM
MAILING ADDRESS ABOVE):
3. TELEPHONE NUMBER (HOME): (WORK): 733-3141
4. IF APPLICABLE: AGENT'S NAME OR RESPONSIBLE CORPORATE OFFICIAL,
ADDRESS, PHONE NUMBER:
William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manaqer
5. LOCATION OF WORK (PROVIDE A MAP, PREFERABLY A COPY OF USGS
TOPOGRAPHIC MAP OR AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY WITH SCALE):
COUNTY: Randolph NEAREST TOWN OR CITY: Asheboro
I
SPECIFIC LOCATION (INCLUDE ROAD NUMBERS, LANDMARKS, ETC.):
US 220 Business from Pritchard Street (SR 3590) to Old Liberty Road
(SR 2261)
6. IMPACTED OR NEAREST STREAM/RIVER: Haskett Creek
RIVER BASIN: Cape Fear River Basin
7a. IS PROJECT LOCATED NEAR WATER CLASSIFIED AS TROUT, TIDAL SALTWATER
(SA), HIGH QUALITY WATERS (HQW), OUTSTANDING RESOURCE WATERS (ORW),
WATER SUPPLY (WS-I OR WS-II)? YES [ ] NO [X] IF YES, EXPLAIN:
7b. IS THE PROJECT LOCATED WITHIN A NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL
MANAGEMENT AREA OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN (AEC)?YES[ ] NO[X]
7c. IF THE PROJECT IS LOCATED WITHIN A COASTAL COUNTY (SEE PAGE 7 FOR
LIST OF COASTAL COUNTIES), WHAT IS THE LAND USE PLAN (LUP) DESIGNATION?
Ba. HAVE ANY SECTION 404 PERMITS BEEN PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED FOR USE ON
THIS PROPERTY? YES [ ] NO [X] IF YES, PROVIDE ACTION I.D. NUMBER OF
PREVIOUS PERMIT AND ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (INCLUDE PHOTOCOPY OF 401
CERTIFICATION):
8b. ARE ADDITIONAL PERMIT REQUESTS EXPECTED FOR THIS PROPERTY IN THE
FUTURE? YES [ ] NO [X] IF YES, DESCRIBE ANTICIPATED WORK:
9a. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES IN TRACT OF LAND: N\A
9b. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES OF WETLANDS LOCATED ON PROJECT
SITE: N\A
2
10a. NUMBER OF ACRES OF WETLANDS IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT BY:
FILLING: 0.0 EXCAVATION: 0.0
FLOODING: 0.'0 OTHER: 0.0
DRAINAGE: 0.0 TOTAL ACRES TO BE IMPACTED: 0.0
10b. (1) STREAM CHANNEL TO BE IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT (IF
RELOCATED, PROVIDE DISTANCE BOTH BEFORE AND AFTER RELOCATION):
LENGTH BEFORE: 55 FT AFTER: N\A FT
WIDTH BEFORE (based on normal high water contours): N\A FT
WIDTH AFTER: N\A FT
AVERAGE DEPTH BEFORE: N\A FT AFTER: N\A FT
(2) STREAM CHANNEL IMPACTS WILL RESULT FROM: (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)
OPEN CHANNEL RELOCATION: PLACEMENT OF PIPE IN CHANNEL: X
CHANNEL EXCAVATION: X CONSTRUCTION OF A DAM/FLOODING:
OTHER:
11. IF CONSTRUCTION OF A POND IS PROPOSED, WHAT IS THE SIZE OF THE
WATERSHED DRAINING TO THE POND? N\A
WHAT IS THE EXPECTED POND SURFACE AREA? N\A
12. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK INCLUDING DISCUSSION OF TYPE OF
MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT TO BE USED (ATTACH PLANS: B 1/2" X 11" DRAWINGS
ONLY): Widen existing facility to a five-lane curb and gutter
section to improve safety and traffic flow.
Road construction equipment
13. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED WORK: Improve safety and traffic flow on
US 220 Business
3
14. STATE REASONS WHY IT IS BELIEVED THAT THIS ACTIVITY MUST BE CARRIED
OUT IN WETLANDS. (INCLUDE ANY MEASURES TAKEN TO MINIMIZE WETLAND
IMPACTS):
The widening is on existing location and is a linear oroject.
Therefore, crossing jurisdictional areas is unavoidable
17. DOES THE PROJECT INVOLVE AN EXPENDITURE OF PUBLIC FUNDS OR THE USE
OF PUBLIC (STATE) LAND?
YES [X1 NO [ ] (IF NO, GO TO 18)
a. IF YES, DOES THE PROJECT REQUIRE PREPARATION OF AN
ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NORTH
CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT?
YES [X] NO ( )
b. IF YES, HAS THE DOCUMENT BEEN REVIEWED THROUGH THE NORTH
CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION STATE CLEARINGHOUSE?
YES [XI NO [ ]
IF ANSWER TO 17b IS YES, THEN SUBMIT APPROPRIATE DOCUMENTATION FROM THE
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE TO DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT REGARDING
COMPLIANCE WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT.
QUESTIONS REGARDING THE STATE CLEARINGHOUSE REVIEW PROCESS SHOULD BE
DIRECTED TO MS. CHRYS BAGGETT, DIRECTOR STATE CLEARINGHOUSE, NORTH
CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION, 116 WEST JONES STREET, RALEIGH,
NORTH CAROLINA 27603-8003, TELEPHONE [phone].
4
18. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS SHOULD BE INCLUDED WITH THIS APPLICATION IF
PROPOSED ACTIVITY INVOLVES THE DISCHARGE OF EXCAVATED OR FILL MATERIAL
INTO WETLANDS:
a. WETLAND DELINEATION MAP SHOWING ALL WETLANDS, STREAMS, LAKES
AND PONDS ON THE PROPERTY (FOR NATIONWIDE PERMIT NUMBERS 14, 18, 21,
26, 29, AND 38). ALL STREAMS (INTERMITTENT AND PERMANENT) ON THE
PROPERTY MUST BE SHOWN ON THE MAP. MAP SCALES SHOULD BE 1 INCH EQUALS
50 FEET OR 1 INCH EQUALS 100 FEET OR THEIR EQUIVALENT.
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. ATTACH A COPY OF THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN IF REQUIRED.
e. WHAT IS LAND USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTY? Residential/
Commercial
f. IF APPLICABLE, WHAT IS PROPOSED METHOD OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL?
N\A
g. SIGNED AND DATED AGENT AUTHORIZATION LETTER, IF APPLICABLE.
NOTE: WETLANDS OR WATERS OF THE U.S. MAY NOT BE IMPACTED PRIOR
TO:
1) ISSUANCE OF A SECTION 404 CORPS OF ENGINEERS PERMIT,
2) EITHER THE ISSUANCE OR WAIVER OF A 401 DIVISION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT (WATER QUALITY) CERTIFICATION, AND
3) (IN THE TWENTY COASTAL COUNTIES ONLY), A LETTER FROM THE
NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT STATING THE PROPOSED
ACTIVITY IS CONSISTENT WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA COASTAL MANAGEMENT
PROGRAM.
?/-- - ;A
OWNER'S/AGE T'S SIGNATURE DATE
(AGENT'S SIGNATURE VALID ONLY
IF AUTHORIZATION LETTER FROM
THE OWNER IS PROVIDED (18g.))
5

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
kvoi:s B. HUNT JR.
GOVERNOR
PAYMENT
RECEIVED
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road
Suite 120
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615
August 21, 2000
DAVID MCCoY
SECRETARY
[?-?V/!
L . SEA g
WETLANDS: t;'0
ATTENTION: Mr. Eric Alsmeyer
NCDOT Coordinator
Dear Sir:
SUBJECT: Randolph County, Widening of US 220 Business (Fayetteville Street) in
Asheboro from SR 3590 to SR 2261, TIP No. U-2200, State Project No.
8.1571301, Federal Aid Project No. STP-22013(1).
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to widen a section
of US 220 Business (Fayetteville Street) to a five-lane, curb and gutter facility. The
proposed project extends from SR 3590 to SR 2261 in Randolph County, a distance of
approximately 2.1-km (1.3 miles). The project is located in the Cape Fear River Sub
basin number 03-06-09.
US 220 Business, within the project area, is situated on a slight ridge, where runoff from
the west side of the roadway eventually drains to Haskett Creek (Class "C") and runoff
from the east side of the roadway eventually drains to Penwood Branch (Class "C"). No
High Quality Waters or Outstanding Resource Waters occur within the project area. The
only stream impacts associated with the proposed project are 0.02 acres of temporary fill
in surface waters and 55 linear feet of stream impact to a tributary of Hasketts Creek.
The stream impacts are associated with the tie-in of the proposed 54-inch pipeline to the
aforementioned tributary. There are no impacts to jurisdictional wetlands associated with
this project.
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] LOCATION:
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS FAX: [phone] TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER 1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548 WEBSITE.' WWW.DOH.DOT.STATE.NC.US RALEIGH, NC
r
The NCDOT anticipates that these activities will be authorized under a Natiomvide
Permit 14. Enclosed please find the project site map, the permit drawing, and the pre-
construction notification form for the above referenced project. By copy of this letter, we
are also requesting a 401 General Water Quality Certification (for NWP 14) from
The NC Division of Water Quality. If you have any questions or need any additional
information, please contact Mr. Randy Griffin at [phone] extension 294.
'Sincerely,
v C"
William D. Gilmore, P.E., Branch Manager
Project Development and Environmental
Analysis Branch
WDG/R WGj r/rwgj r
cc: Mr. David Franklin, COE, Wilmington
Mr. John Dorney, NCDWQ
Mr. David Cox, NCWRC
Mr. Calvin Leggett, P.E., Program Development Branch
Ms. Deborah Barbour, P.E., Highway Design Branch
Mr. Dave Henderson, P.E., Hydraulics Unit
Mr. Timothy V. Rountree, P.E., Structure Design Unit
Mr. John Alford, P.E., Roadway Design Unit
Mr. W.D. Johnson, Roadside Environmental
Mr. Bill Rosser, P.E., Division 8 Engineer
LEGEND
....... WLB._,°°°""°'°- WETLAND BOUNDARY PROPOSED BRIDGE
WETLAND PROPOSED BOX CULVERT
-WLB., ;
® DENOTES FILL IN
suumieuuems¢nannauunuunnecenn.nub
WETLAND PROPOSED PIPE CULVERT
® DENOTES FILL IN (DASHED LINES DENOTE
SURFACE WATER EX[STNG STRUCTURES)
DENOTES FILL IN
SURFACE WATER
(POND) SINGLE TREE
® DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN WETLAND r!r^Lr!?.-?"Lr? WOODS LINE
® DENOTES EXCAVATION
E.TiMd
IN WETLAND DRAINAGE INLET
3?i?9a
• DENOTES MECHANIZED
• CLEARING ROOTWAD
FLOW DIRECTION
TB? TOP OF BANK OOODO VORTEX ROCK WEIR
WE - EDGE OF WATER
_ -? - PROP. LIMIT OF CUT RIP RAP
- -E- - PROP. LIMIT OF FILL RIP RAP ENERGY
DISSIPATOR BASIN
PROP. RIGHT OF WAY
- - NG - - NATURAL GROUND
- -PL - PROPERTY LINE VANE
-TDE- TEMP. DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
-POE- PERMANENT DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
- EAB- EXIST. ENDANGERED
ANIMAL BOUNDARY
- EPB- EXIST. ENDANGERED
PLANT BOUNDARY
- . ?- _ . - WATER SURFACE
X X X LIVE STAKES
X X
BOULDER
CORE FIBER ROLLS
O ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER
OR PARCEL NUMBER
N. C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
RANDOLPH COUNTY
PROJECT: 8.1571301 (U-2200)
WIDENING OF BUSINESS 220
IN ASHEBORO

c0)
0
?
? ti
? w
qo
?

0
06
r

z
O
QV
? oo ca
z 0

BO °

O
LT.
oz

z
?

o
z
o?? a w
w
w
z

g
g
is-

z
0

r?
?

o o

?
oz$ ?
H o
c? d
w
Hoz w z z
24
c?C ti
Z z

Q
a Q ?,
U 3 w
w
z

z
JL o
„o
10
/ B
a /m
???1 I ? ? F? I!I
\Q_ i1 II II
I 3 @
II
a I II u
? 'I II
? II
', I Ix
II
' I
II I
Q x ? ? GQ
El
r I
? ro
u l II
? & II
flail
- 4
U 1 ?\
Q ?
? u
? 1 no
1? fJ

N
?i
w
a
m
U
c
N
z
d
F
O
z

0
0
.r
w
U
0011 49
DWQ ID: CORPS ACTION ID:
NATIONWIDE PERMIT REQUESTED (PROVIDE NATIONWIDE PERMIT #)
14
PRE-CONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION APPLICATION
FOR NATIONWIDE PERMITS THAT REQUIRE:
1) NOTIFICATION TO THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS
2) APPLICATION FOR SECTION 401 CERTIFICATION
3) COORDINATION WITH THE NC DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
SEND THE ORIGINAL AND (1) COPY OF THIS COMPLETED FORM TO THE APPROPRIATE
FIELD OFFICE OF THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET).
SEVEN (7) COPIES SHOULD BE SENT TO THE N.C. DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL
MANAGEMENT (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET). PLEASE PRINT.
1. OWNERS NAME: N. C. Department of Transportation Proiect
Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
2. MAILING ADDRESS: 1548 Mail Service Center
SUBDIVISION NAME:
CITY: Raleigh STATE: NC ZIP CODE: 27699-1548
PROJECT LOCATION ADDRESS, INCLUDING SUBDIVISION NAME (IF DIFFERENT FROM
MAILING ADDRESS ABOVE):
3. TELEPHONE NUMBER (HOME): (WORK): 733-3141
4. IF APPLICABLE: AGENT'S NAME OR RESPONSIBLE CORPORATE OFFICIAL,
ADDRESS, PHONE NUMBER:
William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manaaer
5. LOCATION OF WORK (PROVIDE A MAP, PREFERABLY A COPY OF USGS
TOPOGRAPHIC MAP OR AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY WITH SCALE):
COUNTY: Randolph NEAREST TOWN OR CITY: Asheboro
I
SPECIFIC LOCATION (INCLUDE ROAD NUMBERS, LANDMARKS, ETC.):
US 220 Business from Pritchard Street (SR 3590) to Old Liberty Road
(SR 2261)
6. IMPACTED OR NEAREST STREAM/RIVER: Haskett Creek
RIVER BASIN: Cape Fear River Basin
7a. IS PROJECT LOCATED NEAR WATER CLASSIFIED AS TROUT, TIDAL SALTWATER
(SA), HIGH QUALITY WATERS (HQW), OUTSTANDING RESOURCE WATERS (ORW),
WATER SUPPLY (WS-I OR WS-II)? YES [ ] NO [X] IF YES, EXPLAIN:
7b. IS THE PROJECT LOCATED WITHIN A NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL
MANAGEMENT AREA OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN (AEC)?YES[ ] NO[X]
7c. IF THE PROJECT IS LOCATED WITHIN A COASTAL COUNTY (SEE PAGE 7 FOR
LIST OF COASTAL COUNTIES), WHAT IS THE LAND USE PLAN (LUP) DESIGNATION?
8a. HAVE ANY SECTION 404 PERMITS BEEN PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED FOR USE ON
THIS PROPERTY? YES [ ] NO [X] IF YES, PROVIDE ACTION I.D. NUMBER OF
PREVIOUS PERMIT AND ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (INCLUDE PHOTOCOPY OF 401
CERTIFICATION):
8b. ARE ADDITIONAL PERMIT REQUESTS EXPECTED FOR THIS PROPERTY IN THE
FUTURE? YES [ ] NO [X] IF YES, DESCRIBE ANTICIPATED WORK:
9a. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES IN TRACT OF LAND: N\A
9b. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES OF WETLANDS LOCATED ON PROJECT
SITE: N\A
2
10a. NUMBER OF ACRES OF WETLANDS IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT BY:
FILLING: 0.0 EXCAVATION: 0.0
FLOODING: 0.0 OTHER: 0.0
DRAINAGE: 0.0 TOTAL ACRES TO BE IMPACTED: 0.0
10b. (1) STREAM CHANNEL TO BE IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT (IF
RELOCATED, PROVIDE DISTANCE BOTH BEFORE AND AFTER RELOCATION):
LENGTH BEFORE: 55 FT AFTER: N\A FT
WIDTH BEFORE (based on normal high water contours): N\A FT
WIDTH AFTER: N\A FT
AVERAGE DEPTH BEFORE: N\A FT AFTER: N\A FT
(2) STREAM CHANNEL IMPACTS WILL RESULT FROM: (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)
OPEN CHANNEL RELOCATION: PLACEMENT OF PIPE IN CHANNEL: X
CHANNEL EXCAVATION: X CONSTRUCTION OF A DAM/FLOODING:
OTHER:
11. IF CONSTRUCTION OF A POND IS PROPOSED, WHAT IS THE SIZE OF THE
WATERSHED DRAINING TO THE POND? N\A
WHAT IS THE EXPECTED POND SURFACE AREA? N\A
12. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK INCLUDING DISCUSSION OF TYPE OF
MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT TO BE USED (ATTACH PLANS: 8 1/2" X 11" DRAWINGS
ONLY): Widen existing facility to a five-lane curb and gutter
section to improve safety and traffic flow.
Road construction eauiDment
13. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED WORK: Improve safety and traffic flow on
US 220 Business
3
14. STATE REASONS WHY IT IS BELIEVED THAT THIS ACTIVITY MUST BE CARRIED
OUT IN WETLANDS. (INCLUDE ANY MEASURES TAKEN TO MINIMIZE WETLAND
IMPACTS):
The widening is on existing location and is a linear Droiect.
Therefore, crossing jurisdictional areas is unavoidable
17. DOES THE PROJECT INVOLVE AN EXPENDITURE OF PUBLIC FUNDS OR THE USE
OF PUBLIC (STATE) LAND?
YES [X) NO [ ] (IF NO, GO TO 18)
a. IF YES, DOES THE PROJECT REQUIRE PREPARATION OF AN
ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NORTH
CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT?
YES [X) NO [ ]
b. IF YES, HAS THE DOCUMENT BEEN REVIEWED THROUGH THE NORTH
CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION STATE CLEARINGHOUSE?
YES [X] NO [
IF ANSWER TO 17b IS YES, THEN SUBMIT APPROPRIATE DOCUMENTATION FROM THE
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE TO DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT REGARDING
COMPLIANCE WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT.
QUESTIONS REGARDING THE STATE CLEARINGHOUSE REVIEW PROCESS SHOULD BE
DIRECTED TO MS. CHRYS BAGGETT, DIRECTOR STATE CLEARINGHOUSE, NORTH
CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION, 116 WEST JONES STREET, RALEIGH,
NORTH CAROLINA 27603-8003, TELEPHONE [phone].
4
18. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS SHOULD BE INCLUDED WITH THIS APPLICATION IF
PROPOSED ACTIVITY INVOLVES THE DISCHARGE OF EXCAVATED OR FILL MATERIAL
INTO WETLANDS:
a. WETLAND DELINEATION MAP SHOWING ALL WETLANDS, STREAMS, LAKES
AND PONDS ON THE PROPERTY (FOR NATIONWIDE PERMIT NUMBERS 14, 18, 21,
26, 29, AND 38). ALL STREAMS (INTERMITTENT AND PERMANENT) ON THE
PROPERTY MUST BE SHOWN ON THE MAP. MAP SCALES SHOULD BE 1 INCH EQUALS
50 FEET OR 1 INCH EQUALS 100 FEET OR THEIR EQUIVALENT.
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. ATTACH A COPY OF THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN IF REQUIRED.
e. WHAT IS LAND USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTY? Residential/
Commercial
f. IF APPLICABLE, WHAT IS PROPOSED METHOD OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL?
N\A
g. SIGNED AND DATED AGENT AUTHORIZATION LETTER, IF APPLICABLE.
NOTE: WETLANDS OR WATERS OF THE U.S. MAY NOT BE IMPACTED PRIOR
TO:
1) ISSUANCE OF A SECTION 404 CORPS OF ENGINEERS PERMIT,
2) EITHER THE ISSUANCE OR WAIVER OF A 401 DIVISION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT (WATER QUALITY) CERTIFICATION, AND
3) (IN THE TWENTY COASTAL COUNTIES ONLY), A LETTER FROM THE
NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT STATING THE PROPOSED
ACTIVITY IS CONSISTENT WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA COASTAL MANAGEMENT
PROGRAM.
?-/ - 44 ?' a?- 6-/", -
OWNER'S/AGE T'S SIGNATURE DATE
(AGENT'S SIGNATURE VALID ONLY
IF AUTHORIZATION LETTER FROM
THE OWNER IS PROVIDED (18g.))
5

r
O
STATE OF NOR-1-1-1 CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
J,1hlt:s B. HUNT' JR.
GOVERNOR
August 21, 2000
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road
Suite 120
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615
ATTENTION: Mr. Eric Alsmeyer
NCDOT Coordinator
Dear Sir:
DAVID MCCOY
SECRETARY
SEP 6
Ww?rulrv??
Y
Iy Sljr,
f'AYI?????1 -
RECEIVED
SUBJECT: Randolph County, Widening of US 220 Business (Fayetteville Street) in
Asheboro from SR 3590 to SR 2261, TIP No. U-2200, State Project No.
8.1571301, Federal Aid Project No. STP-22013(1).
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to widen a section
of US 220 Business (Fayetteville Street) to a five-lane, curb and gutter facility. The
proposed project extends from SR 3590 to SR 2261 in Randolph County, a distance of
approximately 2.1-km (1.3 miles). The project is located in the Cape Fear River Sub
basin number 03-06-09.
US 220 Business, within the project area, is situated on a slight ridge, where runoff from
the west side of the roadway eventually drains to Haskett Creek (Class "C") and runoff
from the east side of the roadway eventually drains to Penwood Branch (Class "C"). No
High Quality Waters or Outstanding Resource Waters occur within the project area. The
only stream impacts associated with the proposed project are 0.02 acres of temporary till
in surface waters and 55 linear feet of stream impact to a tributary of Hasketts Creek.
The stream impacts are associated with the tie-in of the proposed 54-inch pipeline to the
aforementioned tributary. There are no impacts to jurisdictional wetlands associated with
this project.
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] LOCATION:
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS FAX: [phone] TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER 1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
RALEIGH NC 27899-1548 WEBSITE: W W ..DOH.DOT.STATE.NC.US RALEIGH, NC
I
,.
The NCDOT anticipates that these activities will be authorized under a Nationwide
Permit 14. Enclosed please find the project site map, the permit drawing, and the pre-
construction notification form for the above referenced project. By copy of this letter, we
are also requesting a 401 General Water Quality Certification (for NWP 14) from
The NC Division of Water Quality. If you have any questions or need any additional
information, please contact Mr. Randy Griffin at [phone] extension 294.
Sincerely,
L J?
William D. Gilmore, P.E., Branch Manager
Project Development and Environmental
Analysis Branch
WDG/R WGj r/rwgj r
cc: Mr. David Franklin, COE, Wilmington
Mr. John Dorney, NCDWQ
Mr. David Cox, NCWRC
Mr. Calvin Leggett, P.E., Program Development Branch
Ms. Deborah Barbour, P.E., Highway Design Branch
Mr. Dave Henderson, P.E., Hydraulics Unit
Mr. Timothy V. Rountree, P.E., Structure Design Unit
Mr. John Alford, P.E., Roadway Design Unit
Mr. W.D. Johnson, Roadside Environmental
Mr. Bill Rosser, P.E., Division 8 Engineer

......WLB BOUNDARY
WEB,..
WETLAND
--W L B
® DENOTES FILL IN
WETLAND
DENOTES FILL
® SURFACE WATER
R
® DENOTES FILL IN
SURFACE WATER
(POND)
® DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN WETLAND
DENOTES EXCAVATION
IN WETLAND
• DENOTES MECHANIZED
CLEARING
--- - FLOW DIRECTION
TB TOP OF BANK
WE - EDGE OF WATER
_ -? - PROP. LIMIT OF CUT
- -F - PROP. LIMIT OF FILL
?rd-- PROP. RIGHT OF WAY
- - NG- - NATURAL GROUND
- -PL - PROPERTY LINE
-TOE - TEMP. DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
-POE- PERMANENT DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
- EAB- EXIST. ENDANGERED
ANIMAL BOUNDARY
- EPB- • EXIST. ENDANGERED
PLANT BOUNDARY
WATER SURFACE
X X X
X X LIVE STAKES
BOULDER
. •-- -- CORE FIBER ROLLS
0 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER
OR PARCEL NUMBER
LEGEND
PROPOSED BRIDGE
PROPOSED BOX CULVERT
unnennnnnnnuunununnnununnennnnnunud PROPOSED PIPE CULVERT
(DASHED LINES DENOTE
EXISTNG STRUCTURES)
0 SINGLE TREE
r^Lr!-r!'ti-?`Lr"ti_ WOODS LINE
?I"`ifnll DRAINAGE INLET
tim, asp ROOTWAD
VORTEX ROCK WEIR
0000 0
RIP RAP
RIP RAP ENERGY
DISSIPATOR BASIN
r VANE
N. C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
RANDOLPH COUNTY
PROJECT: 8.1571301 (U-2200)
WIDENING OF BUSINESS 220
IN ASHEBORO
SHEET - 9 OF _ _J
i
Q
w
c?
0
M
? n
1 00
,
U
I wW ?I
0
M
kn
00
I

?I
N

z
0
F t:D
cli

F Cf)
o?H
a?z ?
., w
z
o

F p o ? Q

H°z
?t z z
Q?? o ?
.A a

z
1+
c
GL
x
v.

0
x

s
g
h
a:

2!
z
0
N

3
o
a z ? z o
v
C? ?
n m p
W

0 Z F c? w
?? z w z z
Q> C O w
° a w
v 3 w
z x
r
I?
Il o
? 'I w > o
? ? ° I I ° o a
II?o ?.
I II ?- u
`p I 1

/ a x 1

a I I„ 'p I I
I
/ ?
i ? , ?= lal

o
I
I
?!I° I I
II/ Ifs
I

I
w
45+00 1:

I II >r6 •??, a ?
o
' I I I ?
I ? ? o `QI,.
tea \
I

- ------ ? r IITr----
p?vOnp,,,. Q ' 6LL
I
I ? `? O
?
II a I a
o''
1
I
II I Q•,a',,Q
r ?
I I I

1
I
? I -----
?
1 I
I
? II I
I
I I I ?
' IIx I
z I

j x? I I? I V
x
m
t
a
U
C
O
z
a
a.
O
z
NI

0
0
u
ap'1149
DWQ ID: CORPS ACTION ID:
NATIONWIDE PERMIT REQUESTED (PROVIDE NATIONWIDE PERMIT #)
14
PRE-CONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION APPLICATION
FOR NATIONWIDE PERMITS THAT REQUIRE:
1) NOTIFICATION TO THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS
2) APPLICATION FOR SECTION 401 CERTIFICATION
3) COORDINATION WITH THE NC DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
SEND THE ORIGINAL AND (1) COPY OF THIS COMPLETED FORM TO THE APPROPRIATE
FIELD OFFICE OF THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET).
SEVEN (7) COPIES SHOULD BE SENT TO THE N.C. DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL
MANAGEMENT (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET). PLEASE PRINT.
1. OWNERS NAME: N. C. Department of Transportation Protect
Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
2. MAILING ADDRESS: 1548 Mail Service Center
SUBDIVISION NAME:
CITY: Raleigh STATE: NC ZIP CODE: 27699-1548
PROJECT LOCATION ADDRESS, INCLUDING SUBDIVISION NAME (IF DIFFERENT FROM
MAILING ADDRESS ABOVE):
3. TELEPHONE NUMBER (HOME): (WORK): 733-3141
4. IF APPLICABLE: AGENT'S NAME OR RESPONSIBLE CORPORATE OFFICIAL,
ADDRESS, PHONE NUMBER:
William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manaaer
5. LOCATION OF WORK (PROVIDE A MAP, PREFERABLY A COPY OF USGS
TOPOGRAPHIC MAP OR AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY WITH SCALE):
COUNTY: Randolph NEAREST TOWN OR CITY: Asheboro
1
SPECIFIC LOCATION (INCLUDE ROAD NUMBERS, LANDMARKS, ETC.):
US 220 Business from Pritchard Street (SR 3590) to Old Liberty Road
(SR 2261)
6. IMPACTED OR NEAREST STREAM/RIVER: Haskett Creek
RIVER BASIN: Cape Fear River Basin
7a. IS PROJECT LOCATED NEAR WATER CLASSIFIED AS TROUT, TIDAL SALTWATER
(SA), HIGH QUALITY WATERS (HQW), OUTSTANDING RESOURCE WATERS (ORW),
WATER SUPPLY (WS-I OR WS-II)? YES [ ] NO [X] IF YES, EXPLAIN:
7b. IS THE PROJECT LOCATED WITHIN A NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL
MANAGEMENT AREA OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN (AEC)?YES[ ] NO[X]
7c. IF THE PROJECT IS LOCATED WITHIN A COASTAL COUNTY (SEE PAGE 7 FOR
LIST OF COASTAL COUNTIES), WHAT IS THE LAND USE PLAN (LUP) DESIGNATION?
8a. HAVE ANY SECTION 404 PERMITS BEEN PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED FOR USE ON
THIS PROPERTY? YES [ ] NO [X] IF YES, PROVIDE ACTION I.D. NUMBER OF
PREVIOUS PERMIT AND ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (INCLUDE PHOTOCOPY OF 401
CERTIFICATION):
8b. ARE ADDITIONAL PERMIT REQUESTS EXPECTED FOR THIS PROPERTY IN THE
FUTURE? YES [ ] NO [X] IF YES, DESCRIBE ANTICIPATED WORK:
9a. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES IN TRACT OF LAND: N\A
9b. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES OF WETLANDS LOCATED ON PROJECT
SITE: N\A
2
10a. NUMBER OF ACRES OF WETLANDS IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT BY:
FILLING: 0.0 EXCAVATION: 0.0
FLOODING: 0.0 OTHER: 0.0
DRAINAGE: 0.0 TOTAL ACRES TO BE IMPACTED: 0.0
10b. (1) STREAM CHANNEL TO BE IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT (IF
RELOCATED, PROVIDE DISTANCE BOTH BEFORE AND AFTER RELOCATION):
LENGTH BEFORE: 55 FT AFTER: N\A FT
WIDTH BEFORE (based on normal high water contours): N\A FT
WIDTH AFTER: N\A FT
AVERAGE DEPTH BEFORE: N\A FT AFTER: N\A FT
(2) STREAM CHANNEL IMPACTS WILL RESULT FROM: (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)
OPEN CHANNEL RELOCATION: PLACEMENT OF PIPE IN CHANNEL: X
CHANNEL EXCAVATION: X CONSTRUCTION OF A DAM/FLOODING:
OTHER:
11. IF CONSTRUCTION OF A POND IS PROPOSED, WHAT IS THE SIZE OF THE
WATERSHED DRAINING TO THE POND? N\A
WHAT IS THE EXPECTED POND SURFACE AREA? N\A
12. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK INCLUDING DISCUSSION OF TYPE OF
MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT TO BE USED (ATTACH PLANS: 8 1/2" X 11" DRAWINGS
ONLY): Widen existing facility to a five-lane curb and putter
section to improve safety and traffic flow.
Road construction equipment
13. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED WORK: Improve safety and traffic flow on
US 220 Business
3

14. STATE REASONS WHY IT IS BELIEVED THAT THIS ACTIVITY MUST BE CARRIED
OUT IN WETLANDS. (INCLUDE ANY MEASURES TAKEN TO MINIMIZE WETLAND
IMPACTS):
The widening is on existing location and is a linear project.
Therefore, crossing jurisdictional areas is unavoidable
17. DOES THE PROJECT INVOLVE AN EXPENDITURE OF PUBLIC FUNDS OR THE USE
OF PUBLIC (STATE) LAND?
YES [X] NO [ ] (IF NO, GO TO 18)
a. IF YES, DOES THE PROJECT REQUIRE PREPARATION OF AN
ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NORTH
CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT?
YES [X] NO [ ]
b. IF YES, HAS THE DOCUMENT BEEN REVIEWED THROUGH THE NORTH
CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION STATE CLEARINGHOUSE?
YES [XI NO [ ]
IF ANSWER TO 17b IS YES, THEN SUBMIT APPROPRIATE DOCUMENTATION FROM THE
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE TO DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT REGARDING
COMPLIANCE WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT.
QUESTIONS REGARDING THE STATE CLEARINGHOUSE REVIEW PROCESS SHOULD BE
DIRECTED TO MS. CHRYS BAGGETT, DIRECTOR STATE CLEARINGHOUSE, NORTH
CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION, 116 WEST JONES STREET, RALEIGH,
NORTH CAROLINA 27603-8003, TELEPHONE [phone].
4

18. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS SHOULD BE INCLUDED WITH THIS APPLICATION IF
PROPOSED ACTIVITY INVOLVES THE DISCHARGE OF EXCAVATED OR FILL MATERIAL
INTO WETLANDS:
a. WETLAND DELINEATION MAP SHOWING ALL WETLANDS, STREAMS, LAKES
AND PONDS ON THE PROPERTY (FOR NATIONWIDE PERMIT NUMBERS 14, 18, 21,
26, 29, AND 38). ALL STREAMS (INTERMITTENT AND PERMANENT) ON THE
PROPERTY MUST BE SHOWN ON THE MAP. MAP SCALES SHOULD BE 1 INCH EQUALS
50 FEET OR 1 INCH EQUALS 100 FEET OR THEIR EQUIVALENT.
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. ATTACH A COPY OF THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN IF REQUIRED.
e. WHAT IS LAND USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTY? Residential/
Commercial
f. IF APPLICABLE, WHAT IS PROPOSED METHOD OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL?
N\A
g. SIGNED AND DATED AGENT AUTHORIZATION LETTER, IF APPLICABLE.
NOTE: WETLANDS OR WATERS OF THE U.S. MAY NOT BE IMPACTED PRIOR
TO:
1) ISSUANCE OF A SECTION 404 CORPS OF ENGINEERS PERMIT,
2) EITHER THE ISSUANCE OR WAIVER OF A 401 DIVISION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT (WATER QUALITY) CERTIFICATION, AND
3) (IN THE TWENTY COASTAL COUNTIES ONLY), A LETTER FROM THE
NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT STATING THE PROPOSED
ACTIVITY IS CONSISTENT WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA COASTAL MANAGEMENT
PROGRAM.
OWNER'S/AGE T'S SIGNATURE DATE
(AGENT'S SIGNATURE VALID ONLY
IF AUTHORIZATION LETTER FROM
THE OWNER IS PROVIDED (18g.))
5
.,. SiNr o?
.11 49
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JA,'vIES B. HUNT JR.
GOVERNOR
August 21, 2000
DAVID MCCoY
SECRETARY
PAYMENT
RECEIVED
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road
Suite 120
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615
ATTENTION: Mr. Eric Alsmeyer
NCDOT Coordinator
Dear Sir:
P U
i j
t t
5
SEP 6
SUBJECT: Randolph County, Widening of US 220 Business (Fayetteville Street) in
Asheboro from SR 3590 to SR 2261, TIP No. U-2200, State Project No.
8.157130 1, Federal Aid Project No. ST11-220130 ).
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to widen a section
of US 220 Business (Fayetteville Street) to a five-lane, curb and gutter facility. The
proposed project extends from SR 3590 to SR 2261 in Randolph County, a distance of
approximately 2.1-km (1.3 miles). The project is located in the Cape Fear River Sub
basin number 03-06-09.
US 220 Business, within the project area, is situated on a slight ridge, where runoff from
the west side of the roadway eventually drains to Haskett Creek (Class "C") and runoff
from the east side of the roadway eventually drains to Penwood Branch (Class "C"). No
High Quality Waters or Outstanding Resource Waters occur within the project area. The
only stream impacts associated with the proposed project are 0.02 acres of temporary fill
in surface waters and 55 linear feet of stream impact to a tributary of Hasketts Creek.
The stream impacts are associated with the tie-in of the proposed 54-inch pipeline to the
aforementioned tributary. There are no impacts to jurisdictional wetlands associated with
this project.
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] LOCATION:
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS FAX: [phone] TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER 1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
RALEIGH NC 27899-1548 WEBSITE: WWWDOH.DOT.STATE.NC.US RALEIGH, NC
The NCDOT anticipates that these activities will be authorized under a Nationwide
Permit 14. Enclosed please find the project site map, the permit drawing, and the pre-
construction notification form for the above referenced project. By copy of this letter, we
are also requesting a 401 General Water Quality Certification (for NWP 14) from
The NC Division of Water Quality. If you have any questions or need any additional
information, please contact Mr. Randy Griffin at [phone] extension 294.
Sincerely,
?C' 4ut
William D. Gilmore, P.E., Branch Manager
Project Development and Environmental
Analysis Branch
WDG/RWGjr/rwgj r
cc: Mr. David Franklin, COE, Wilmington
Mr. John Dorney, NCDWQ
Mr. David Cox, NCWRC
Mr. Calvin Leggett, P.E., Program Development Branch
Ms. Deborah Barbour, P.E., Highway Design Branch
Mr. Dave Henderson, P.E., Hydraulics Unit
Mr. Timothy V. Rountree, P.E., Stricture Design Unit
Mr. John Alford, P.E., Roadway Design Unit
Mr. W.D. Johnson, Roadside Environmental
Mr. Bill Rosser, P.E., Division 8 Engineer
WLB"""'° WETLAND BOUNDARY

WETLAND
-WLB.
® DENOTES FILL IN
WETLAND
DENOTES FILL
® SURFACE WATER
R
® DENOTES FILL IN
SURFACE WATER
(POND)
® DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN WETLAND
DENOTES EXCAVATION
IN WETLAND
•
• DENOTES MECHANIZED
CLEARING
r-- -- FLOW DIRECTION
T??- TOP OF BANK
WE - EDGE OF WATER
_ -C- - PROP. LIMIT OF CUT
- -F - PROP. LIMIT OF FILL
Pte-- PROP. RIGHT OF WAY
- - NG- - NATURAL GROUND
- -PL - PROPERTY LINE
-TDE- TEMP. DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
-PDE- PERMANENT DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
- EAB- EXIST. ENDANGERED
ANIMAL BOUNDARY
- EPB- EXIST. ENDANGERED
PLANT BOUNDARY
- - ?- - - - WATER SURFACE
X X X LIVE STAKES
X X
BOULDER
-- ?-• -- CORE FIBER ROLLS
O ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER
OR PARCEL NUMBER
LEGEND
PROPOSED BRIDGE
PROPOSED BOX CULVERT
!UeenosuwutltltlUNtltluvIMal flu U" PROPOSED PIPE CULVERT
(DASHED LINES DENOTE
EXISTNG STRUCTURES)
0 SINGLE TREE
WOODS LINE
a"r?raa DRAINAGE INLET
1g??LUe
ROOTWAO
4 VORTEX ROCK WEIR
000p0
RIP RAP
RIP RAP ENERGY
OISSIPATOR BASIN
VANE
N. C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
RANDOLPH COUNTY
PROJECT: 8.1571301 (U-2200)
WIDENING OF BUSINESS 220
IN ASHEBORO
OF
z
0

O
M
1 ?
1 Op
I
1
U
\ . I' W QC F
1
? I
0
M
n
h
ti
QO
r

Z0

?xU ? b oa
w
?
F ? J c O ? I
o
oz z z
wj? o z
w I

W
W
z

tr
n

r
I,?

C?

a
?I

z
0
o
dCl) g

3 w
z

o
0

? w ?
Fla N
o x

ozo °° d
w
Fez w z z
aid ti z
c>? 0 w

Q
v
a 3

w
w
z ?

b

Jl o
,.o
ri
\p©? II
p•'©-?t I11 I? I e
I II
? II
s I II
p ? II
? II
' IL
t
? II
?I
?T
x r ro
r , cQ
C]

W
a
W
U
t
W
U
z
a
d
Gs.
h
W
F
O
z
W

ii
W
J
U
00AA49
DWQ ID: CORPS ACTION ID:
NATIONWIDE PERMIT REQUESTED (PROVIDE NATIONWIDE PERMIT #)
14
PRE-CONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION APPLICATION
FOR NATIONWIDE PERMITS THAT REQUIRE:
1) NOTIFICATION TO THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS
2) APPLICATION FOR SECTION 401 CERTIFICATION
3) COORDINATION WITH THE NC DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
SEND THE ORIGINAL AND (1) COPY OF THIS COMPLETED FORM TO THE APPROPRIATE
FIELD OFFICE OF THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET).
SEVEN (7) COPIES SHOULD BE SENT TO THE N.C. DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL
MANAGEMENT (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET). PLEASE PRINT.
1. OWNERS NAME: N. C. Department of Transportation Proiect
Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
2. MAILING ADDRESS: 1548 Mail Service Center
SUBDIVISION NAME:
CITY: Raleigh STATE: NC ZIP CODE: 27699-1548
PROJECT LOCATION ADDRESS, INCLUDING SUBDIVISION NAME (IF DIFFERENT FROM
MAILING ADDRESS ABOVE):
3. TELEPHONE NUMBER (HOME): (WORK): 733-3141
4. IF APPLICABLE: AGENT'S NAME OR RESPONSIBLE CORPORATE OFFICIAL,
ADDRESS, PHONE NUMBER:
William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
5. LOCATION OF WORK (PROVIDE A MAP, PREFERABLY A COPY OF USGS
TOPOGRAPHIC MAP OR AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY WITH SCALE):
COUNTY: Randolph NEAREST TOWN OR CITY: Asheboro
1
SPECIFIC LOCATION (INCLUDE ROAD NUMBERS, LANDMARKS, ETC.):
US 220 Business from Pritchard Street (SR 3590) to Old Liberty Road
(SR 2261)
6. IMPACTED OR NEAREST STREAM/RIVER: Haskett Creek
RIVER BASIN: Cape Fear River Basin
7a. IS PROJECT LOCATED NEAR WATER CLASSIFIED AS TROUT, TIDAL SALTWATER
(SA), HIGH QUALITY WATERS (HQW), OUTSTANDING RESOURCE WATERS (ORW),
WATER SUPPLY (WS-I OR WS-II)? YES [ ] NO [X] IF YES, EXPLAIN:
7b. IS THE PROJECT LOCATED WITHIN A NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL
MANAGEMENT AREA OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN (AEC)?YES[ ] NO[X]
7c. IF THE PROJECT IS LOCATED WITHIN A COASTAL COUNTY (SEE PAGE 7 FOR
LIST OF COASTAL COUNTIES), WHAT IS THE LAND USE PLAN (LUP) DESIGNATION?
8a. HAVE ANY SECTION 404 PERMITS BEEN PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED FOR USE ON
THIS PROPERTY? YES [ ] NO [X] IF YES, PROVIDE ACTION I.D. NUMBER OF
PREVIOUS PERMIT AND ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (INCLUDE PHOTOCOPY OF 401
CERTIFICATION):
8b. ARE ADDITIONAL PERMIT REQUESTS EXPECTED FOR THIS PROPERTY IN THE
FUTURE? YES [ ] NO [X] IF YES, DESCRIBE ANTICIPATED WORK:
9a. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES IN TRACT OF LAND: N\A
9b. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES OF WETLANDS LOCATED ON PROJECT
SITE: N\A
2
10a. NUMBER OF ACRES OF WETLANDS IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT BY:
FILLING: 0.0 EXCAVATION: 0.0
FLOODING: 0.0 OTHER: 0.0
DRAINAGE: 0.0 TOTAL ACRES TO BE IMPACTED: 0.0
10b. (1) STREAM CHANNEL TO BE IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT (IF
RELOCATED, PROVIDE DISTANCE BOTH BEFORE AND AFTER RELOCATION):
LENGTH BEFORE: 55 FT AFTER: N\A FT
WIDTH BEFORE (based on normal high water contours): N\A FT
WIDTH AFTER: N\A FT
AVERAGE DEPTH BEFORE: N\A FT AFTER: N\A FT
(2) STREAM CHANNEL IMPACTS WILL RESULT FROM: (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)
OPEN CHANNEL RELOCATION: PLACEMENT OF PIPE IN CHANNEL: X
CHANNEL EXCAVATION: X CONSTRUCTION OF A DAM/FLOODING:
OTHER:
11. IF CONSTRUCTION OF A POND IS PROPOSED, WHAT IS THE SIZE OF THE
WATERSHED DRAINING TO THE POND? N\A
WHAT IS THE EXPECTED POND SURFACE AREA? N\A
12. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK INCLUDING DISCUSSION OF TYPE OF
MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT TO BE USED (ATTACH PLANS: 8 1/2" X 11" DRAWINGS
ONLY): Widen existing facility to a five-lane curb and gutter
section to improve safety and traffic flow.
Road construction equipment
13. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED WORK: Improve safety and traffic flow on
US 220 Business
3
14. STATE REASONS WHY IT IS BELIEVED THAT THIS ACTIVITY MUST BE CARRIED
OUT IN WETLANDS. (INCLUDE ANY MEASURES TAKEN TO MINIMIZE WETLAND
IMPACTS):
The widening is on existing location and is a linear orolect.
Therefore, crossing jurisdictional areas is unavoidable
17. DOES THE PROJECT INVOLVE AN EXPENDITURE OF PUBLIC FUNDS OR THE USE
OF PUBLIC (STATE) LAND?
YES [X] NO [ J (IF NO, GO TO 18)
a. IF YES, DOES THE PROJECT REQUIRE PREPARATION OF AN
ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NORTH
CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT?
YES [X] NO [ ]
b. IF YES, HAS THE DOCUMENT BEEN REVIEWED THROUGH THE NORTH
CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION STATE CLEARINGHOUSE?
YES [X] NO [ ]
IF ANSWER TO 17b IS YES, THEN SUBMIT APPROPRIATE DOCUMENTATION FROM THE
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE TO DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT REGARDING
COMPLIANCE WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT.
QUESTIONS REGARDING THE STATE CLEARINGHOUSE REVIEW PROCESS SHOULD BE
DIRECTED TO MS. CHRYS BAGGETT, DIRECTOR STATE CLEARINGHOUSE, NORTH
CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION, 116 WEST JONES STREET, RALEIGH,
NORTH CAROLINA 27603-8003, TELEPHONE [phone].
4
18. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS SHOULD BE INCLUDED WITH THIS APPLICATION IF
PROPOSED ACTIVITY INVOLVES THE DISCHARGE OF EXCAVATED OR FILL MATERIAL
INTO WETLANDS:
a. WETLAND DELINEATION MAP SHOWING ALL WETLANDS, STREAMS, LAKES
AND PONDS ON THE PROPERTY (FOR NATIONWIDE PERMIT NUMBERS 14, 18, 21,
26, 29, AND 38). ALL STREAMS (INTERMITTENT AND PERMANENT) ON THE
PROPERTY MUST BE SHOWN ON THE MAP. MAP SCALES SHOULD BE 1 INCH EQUALS
50 FEET OR 1 INCH EQUALS 100 FEET OR THEIR EQUIVALENT.
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. ATTACH A COPY OF THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN IF REQUIRED.
e. WHAT IS LAND USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTY? Residential/
Commercial
f. IF APPLICABLE, WHAT IS PROPOSED METHOD OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL?
N\A
g. SIGNED AND DATED AGENT AUTHORIZATION LETTER, IF APPLICABLE.
NOTE: WETLANDS OR WATERS OF THE U.S. MAY NOT BE IMPACTED PRIOR
TO:
1) ISSUANCE OF A SECTION 404 CORPS OF ENGINEERS PERMIT,
2) EITHER THE ISSUANCE OR WAIVER OF A 401 DIVISION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT (WATER QUALITY) CERTIFICATION, AND
3) (IN THE TWENTY COASTAL COUNTIES ONLY), A LETTER FROM THE
NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT STATING THE PROPOSED
ACTIVITY IS CONSISTENT WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA COASTAL MANAGEMENT
PROGRAM.
44 6.1,, ?( ?LI LO'a o
OWNER'S/AGE T'S SIGNATURE DATE
(AGENT'S SIGNATURE VALID ONLY
IF AUTHORIZATION LETTER FROM
THE OWNER IS PROVIDED (18g.))
5
of/?
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources fflW4
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor NCDENR
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary Kerr T. Stevens, Director
July 28, 1999
MEMORANDUM
To: Melba McGee
Through: John Dornew.
From: John Hennessy l/'
Subject: Comments on the EA for the widening of Fayetteville Street (US 220 Business) from
Pritchard Street to Old Liberty Road (SR 2261) in Randolph County (U-2200), Federal
Aid Project No. STP-22013(l), State Project No. 8.157130 1, TIP Project No. U-2200,
DENR Project Number 0013-0008.
This office has reviewed the referenced document. The Division of Water Quality (DWQ) is responsible
for the issuance of the Section 401 Water Quality Certification for activities that impact Waters of the U.S.,
including wetlands. It is our understanding that the preferred alternative, as presented in the EA, will
probably not result in any impacts to jurisdictional wetlands or streams. However, should the project result
in any impacts to jurisdictional waters, the DWQ offers the following comments based on review of the
aforementioned document:
A) After the selection of the preferred alternative and prior to an issuance of the 401 Water Quality
Certification, the NCDOT is respectfully reminded that they will need to demonstrate the
avoidance and minimization of impacts to wetlands (and streams) to the maximum extent practical.
Based on the impacts described in the document, wetland mitigation may not required for this
project. Should the impacts to jurisdictional wetlands exceed 1.0 acres, mitigation may be
required in accordance with NCDWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H.0506 (h)(2) ).
B) In accordance with the NCDWQ Wetlands Rules ( 15A NCAC 2H.0506(b)(6) }, mitigation will be
required for impacts of greater than 150 linear feet to any single perennial stream. In the event that
mitigation is required, the mitigation plan should be designed to replace appropriate lost functions
and values. In accordance with the NCDWQ Wetlands Rules (15A NCAC 2H.0506 (h)(3)}, the
Wetland Restoration Program may be available for use as stream mitigation.
C) Where streams must be crossed, the DWQ prefers bridges be used in lieu of culverts. However,
we realize that economic considerations often require the use of culverts. Please be advised that
culverts should be countersunk to allow unimpeded passage by fish and other aquatic organisms.
Moreover, in areas where high quality wetlands or streams are impacted, a bridge may prove
preferable. When applicable, DOT should not install the bridge bents in the creek, to the
maximum extent practicable.
D) Sediment and erosion control measures should not be 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
Mr. William D. Gilmore memo
07/'_8/99
Page '_
E) Borrow/waste areas should avoid wetlands to the maximum extent practicable. Impacts to
wetlands in borrow/waste areas could precipitate compensatory mitigation.
F) The 401 Water Quality Certification application will need to specifically address the proposed
methods for stormwater management. More specifically, stormwater should not be permitted to
discharge directly into the creek. Instead, stormwater should be designed to drain to a properly
designed stormwater detention facility/apparatus.
G) There should be a discussion on mitigation plans for unavoidable impacts. If mitigation is
required, it is preferable to present a conceptual (if not finalized) mitigation plan with the
environmental documentation. While the NCDWQ realizes that this may not always be practical,
it should be noted that for projects requiring mitigation, appropriate mitigation plans will be
required in conjunction with the issuance of a 401 Water Quality Certification.
H) Future documentation should include an itemized listing of the proposed wetland and stream
impacts with corresponding mapping.
I) Based on the information presented in the document, the magnitude of impacts to wetlands and
streams will not require an application to the Corps of Engineers or the Division of Water Quality.
However, should subsequent analysis reveal the presence of jurisdictional waters, please be
advised that a 401 Water Quality Certification requires satisfactory protection of water quality to
ensure that water quality standards are met and no wetland or stream uses are lost. Final permit
authorization will require the submittal of a formal application by the NCDOT and written
concurrence from the NCDWQ. Please be aware that any approval will be contingent on
appropriate avoidance and minimization of wetland and stream impacts to the maximum extent
practical, the development of an acceptable stormwater management plan, and the inclusion of
appropriate mitigation plans where appropriate.
The NCDWQ appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on your project. Should you have any
questions or require any additional information, please contact John Hennessy at [phone].
cc: Eric Alsmeyer, Corps of Engineers
Tom Mccartney, USFWS
David Cox, NCWRC
Ron Linville, NCDWQ Regional Office
C:\ncdot\TIP U-2200\comments\ U-2200 comments.doc

Fayetteville Street, (US 220 Business)
From Pritchard Street to Old Liberty Road (SR 2261)
Asheboro, Randolph County
Federal-Aid Project No. STP-22013(1)
State Project No. 8.1571301
T.I.P. No. U-2200
11
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Submitted Pursuant to 42 U. S. C. 4332(2)(C)
APPROVED:
? n
DatJ William D. Gilmore, P. E., Mana r
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch, NCDOT
3"31 9f
Date ,?Vich L. Graf, P. E.
bivis n Administrator, FHWA
Fayetteville Street. (US 220 Business)
From Pritchard Street to Old Liberty Road (SR 2261)
Asheboro, Randolph County
Federal-Aid Project No. STP-220B(l )
State Project No. 8.1571301
T.I.P. No. U-2200
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
March 1999
Documentation Prepared in Project Development and
Environmental Analysis Branch By:
is ele L. James
Project Planning Engineer
Teresa A. Hart, Unit Head
Project Planning Unit, NCDOT
EAMP
CAr?i
'lv? '('ern (. _, J? /'i?f"?i•0
(` o
r
• 3 qq 6°z' 4
Richard B. Davis, P. E., As tant Manager ?.
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Brart?liF, CD F`?. *j i
a'
`i???i?i1111•'?F
Summary of Environmental Commitments
Precautions will be taken to minimize impacts to water resources. NCDOT's Best
Management Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters will be strictly enforced
during the construction stage of the project. Provisions to preclude contamination by
toxic substances during the construction interval will also be strictly enforced.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT
M
A. General Description ............................................................................. I
B. Historical Resume and Project Status .................................................. I
II. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE PROPOSED
PROJECT ......................................................................................................... .
A. Summary of Proposed Improvements
1. Project Length 2
2 Cross Section ........................................................................... 2
3. Right of Way Width ................................................................. 2
4. Access Control 2
5. Bridges .................................................................................... 2
6. Design Speed and Speed Zones 2
7. Intersection Treatment and Type of Control ............................ 3
8. Parking ..................................................................................... 3
9. Sidewalks ................................................................................. 3
10. Current Cost Estimate .............................................................. 3
III. NEED FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT ...................................................... 3
A. Purpose and Need ................................................................................ 3
B. Existing Roadway Inventory ................................................................ 4
1. Project Terminals ..................................................................... 4
2. Roadway Cross Section ........................................................... 4
3. Right of Way ............................................................................ 4
4. Type of Roadside Development ............................................... 4
5. Access Control ......................................................................... 5
6. Structures .............................................. 5
...................................
7. Speed Limit .............................................................................. 5
8. Intersecting Roads and Types of Control ................................. 5
9. Sidewalks ............................................. 5
....................................
10. Utilities ..................................................................................... 5
11. Greenways ................................................................................ 5
12. School Buses .........................................
.. 5
..
...............................
13. Railroad Crossing ..................................................................... 6
14. Bicycles .................................................................................... 6
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
C. Functional Classification and Thoroughfare Plan ................................ 6
D. Accident History .................................................................................. 6
E. Traffic Volumes and Capacity ............................................................. 6
1. Signalized Intersections ........................................................... 7
2. Unsignalized Intersections ....................................................... 8
3. Additional Recommendations .................................................. 8
IV. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS AND ALTERNATIVES TO
THE PROPOSED PROJECT .......................................................................... 8
A. Recommended Improvements ............................................................. 8
B. Other Alternatives Considered ............................................................. 8
C. Alternative Modes of Transportation ................................................... 9
D. Public Transportation ........................................................................... 9
E. Postponement of Project ...................................................................... 9
V. SOCIAL, ECONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS TO
THE PROPOSED PROJECT .......................................................................... 9
A. Cultural Resources ............................................................................... 9
1. Architectural Resources ........................................................... 9
2. Archaeological Resources ...................................................... 10
3. Social Impacts ........................................................................ 10
4. Environmental Justice ............................................................ 10
5. Relocation Impacts ................................................................. 11
B. Land Use ............................................................................................ 12
1. Scope and Status of Planning ................................................. 12
2. Current Zoning ....................................................................... 12
3. Existing Land Use .................................................................. 12
4. Future Land Use ..................................................................... 12
5. Income, Poverty Status and Unemployment .......................... 13
6. Farmland ................................................................................ 13
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
C. Natural Environment .......................................................................... III
1. Project Description ................................................................ . 13
a. Soils .......................................................................... . 14
b. Water Resources ....................................................... . 14
C. Plant Communities .................................................... . 17
d. Wildlife Communities ............................................... . 18
e. Summary of Community Impacts ............................. . 18
f. Waters of the United States ....................................... . 19
2. Protected Species 9
a. Rare and Protected Species ....................................... . 19
b. Federally Protected Species ...................................... . 19
4. Air Quality and Traffic Noise 2
a. Air Quality Analysis .................................................. 22
b. Highway Traffic Noise/Construction Noise
Analysis ...................................................................... 24
C. Characteristics of Noise ............................................. 25
d. Noise Abatement Criteria .......................................... 26
e. Ambient Noise Levels ................................................ 26
f. Procedure for Predicting Future Noise Levels........... 27
g. Traffic Noise Impacts and Noise Contours ................ 28
h. Traffic Noise Abatement Measures ........................... 29
1. Highway Alignment ....................................... 29
2. Traffic System Management Measures.......... 29
3. Noise Barriers ................................................ 29
i. "Do Nothing" Alternative .......................................... 30
j. Construction Noise ..................................................... 30
k. Summary .................................................................... 30
D. Construction Effects ........................................................................... 31
E. Hazardous Materials .......................................................................... 32
F. Geodetic Survey Markers ................................................................... 33
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
V. COMMENTS AND COORDINATION ........................................................ 33
A. Government Response ....................................................................... 33
B. Public Response ................................................................................. 33
LIST OF PREPARERS
FIGURES
APPENDIX
SUMMARY
Description of Action - The North Carolina Department of Transportation
(NCDOT), Division of Highways, proposes to improve a 2.6 kilometer (1.6 mile)
section of Fayetteville Street (US 220 Business) from Pritchard Street to Old
Liberty Road (SR 2261) in Asheboro, Randolph County (see Appendix A, Figures
I and 2). The proposed improvement will widen the existing multi-lane roadway
to a five-lane 20.7 meter (68-foot), face to face, curb and gutter facility (see
Appendix A, Figure 3). The improved facility will consist of two 3.6 meter
(12-foot) travel lanes in each direction and a continuous left center turn lane. The
outside lanes will have additional width to provide for bicycle lanes. The current
estimated cost for this improvement is $6,533,125 including $2,083,125 for right
of way acquisition and $4,450,000 for construction. The total estimated cost in
the Draft 2000-2006 TIP is $4,752,000. The project is currently scheduled for
right of way acquisition in Fiscal Year (FY) 1999 and construction in FY 2001.
2. Environmental Impacts - The proposed project will have a positive overall impact
on travel along Fayetteville Street (US 220 Business) by reducing the potential for
rear-end collisions, angle or sideswipe accidents, and accidents involving left-turn
movements. The proposed improvements are in conformance with the Asheboro
Thoroughfare Plan (See Appendix A, Figure 4). The potential increase in
urbanization resulting from construction of the proposed project can be managed
through the implementation of land use controls and zoning regulations. The
proposed project will not impact any prime or important farmlands. The proposed
widening will displace seven (7) businesses and three (3) residences. No public
parks or recreational facilities will be involved. No properties on or eligible for
listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NR) will be affected by the
proposed project. See Appendix B-1 Concurrence Form. No traffic noise
abatement measures are proposed. The predicted noise level increases for this
project range up to +4 dBA for the design year 2020. Construction will result in
some delay and inconvenience to motorists, but this will be short-term in nature.
There may be some erosion and siltation during construction, however, strict
adherence to Best Management Practices will be used to minimize impacts..
3. Alternatives - Due to the nature of the project, the widening of an existing
segment of roadway, no alternative corridors were studied. The recommended
symmetrical widening best uses the existing right of way and minimizes impacts
to the project area. Also, due to the extent and type of existing development along
Fayetteville Street (US 220), a four lane divided section is not a prudent
alternative. A five lane curb and gutter section is recommended for this heavily
developed area. The "do nothing" alternative was also considered, but rejected.
The proposed cross section will provide a safer travelway to accommodate the
current and projected traffic volumes.
4. Coordination - Federal, State, and local agencies were consulted during the
preparation of this Environmental Assessment. Comments from the following
were received and considered during the preparation of this assessment:
5
6
City of Asheboro
Randolph County Commissioners
N. C. Department of Cultural Resources
N. C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
N. C. State Clearinghouse
N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers - Wilmington
U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service - Raleigh
In addition to agency responses, local residents offered verbal and written
comments at a citizens informational workshop. Additional written comments
were also received after the workshop.
Actions Required by Other Agencies - Based on information currently available,
no permits will be required to construct the project.
Additional Information - Additional information concerning the proposal and
assessment can be obtained by contacting either of the following:
Nicholas Graf, P. E.
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601
Telephone [phone]
William D. Gilmore, P. E., Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
P. O. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Telephone [phone]
Fayetteville Street, (US 220 Business)
From Pritchard Street to Old Liberty Road (SR 2261)
Asheboro, Randolph County
Federal-Aid Project No. STP-22013(1)
State Project No. 8.1571301
T.I.P. No. U-2200
1. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT
A. General Description
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), Division of
Highways, proposes to improve to a 2.6 kilometer (1.6 mile) section of Fayetteville Street
(US 220 Business) from Pritchard Street to Old Liberty Road (SR 2261) in Asheboro,
Randolph County (see Appendix A, Figures 1 and 2). The proposed improvement will
widen the existing multi-lane roadway to a five-lane 20.4 meter (68-foot) face to face
curb and gutter facility (see Appendix A, Figure 3). The proposed cross section will
consist of two 3.6 meter (12-foot) inside travel lanes, two 4.2 meter (14-foot) outside
travel lanes, and a 3.6 meter (12-foot) continuous left center turn lane. The wide outside
lanes will be provided to accommodate bicycle traffic.
The project is included in the Draft 2000-2006 TIP with the total cost estimated at
$4,450,000. This estimate includes $2,800,000 for construction, $1,400,000 for right-of-
way and $250,000 for prior funding. The current estimated cost for the recommended
improvement is $6,533,125 which includes $4,450,000 for construction and $2,083,125
for right of way acquisition. The project is currently scheduled for right of way
acquisition in Federal Fiscal Year (FFY) 1999 and construction in FFY 2001.
B. Historical Resume and Project Status
A feasibility study of the proposed improvements was completed by the North
Carolina Department of Transportation in June, 1987. This feasibility study recom-
mended widening the existing roadway to a 19.2 meter (64-foot), face to face, curb and
gutter facility. The feasibility study reviewed the proposed widening of Fayetteville
Street (US 220 Business) from Old Liberty Road (SR 2261) to US 311, a distance of
6.7 kilometers (4.2 miles).
This project is included in the Draft 2000-2006 Transportation Improvement
Program (TIP) with right-of-way acquisition scheduled to begin in FFY 1999 and
construction scheduled to begin in FFY 2001.
A Citizens' Informational workshop was held on December 3, 1997, in Asheboro
by NCDOT representatives to present the proposed project to the public and to obtain
comments and/or suggestions about the anticipated improvement. The workshop was
held at the Asheboro City Hall Council's Chambers. Approximately 7 people attended

the workshop to express their interest in the project. Prior to the workshop a local
officials meeting was held with approximately 20 people attending.
II. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT
A. Summary of Proposed Improvements
Project Length
The project's proposed improvements total 2.6 kilometers (1.6 miles).
2. Cross Section
It is recommended to widen Fayetteville Street (US 220 Business) in the
studied section to a 5-lane, 20.4 meter (68-foot) curb and gutter facility (see
Appendix A, Figure 3). All travel lanes will be 3.6 meters (12 feet) wide except
for the outside lanes which will be 4.3 meters (14-feet) wide. The additional
pavement on the outside lanes will provide for bicycle traffic.
3. Right of Way Width
The proposed widening will be accomplished within the existing
30 meters (100 feet) right of way width throughout most of the project. Widening
will be symmetrical about the existing centerline. Approximately 9.0 meters
(30 feet) of additional right of way will be required from East Pritchard Street
(SR 2261) to Hampton Road (SR 1485). Temporary construction easements may
be necessary at some locations in addition to the proposed right of way.
4. Access Control
No control of access is present on the proposed project and none is
recommended.
5. Bridges
No bridges are located within the project limits.
6. Design Speed and Speed Zones
The design speed will be in conformance with the existing alignment, or a
minimum of 80 km/h (50 mph). Design speed is a correlation of the physical
features of a highway which influence vehicle operation and reflects the degree of
safety and mobility desired along a highway. Design speed is not to be
interpreted as the recommended or posted speed.
3
7. Intersection Treatment and Type of Control
All roadway intersections will be at-grade. Traffic signals are proposed
to be upgraded at East Pritchard Street, Old Liberty Road (SR 2261, SR 1491),
and Allred Street (SR 2182 and SR 1491).
8. Parkin
Parking is presently not permitted and will not be provided for or
permitted along the project.
9. Sidewalks
Any existing sidewalks disturbed by the proposed construction will be
replaced. Sidewalks currently exist in some locations in the project area. The
City of Asheboro requested sidewalks be constructed on both sides of the roadway
throughout the project to accommodate existing and future pedestrian needs.
NCDOT and the City of Asheboro will share in the cost of the sidewalks, based
on the guidelines contained in the NCDOT Sidewalk Policy.
10. Current Cost Estimate
Construction $ 4,450,000
Right of Way $ 2,083,125
Total Cost $ 6,533,125
The construction cost estimate includes 15% for engineering and
contingencies. The right of way cost estimate includes the costs of acquisition,
utilities, and relocations. The cost of constructing sidewalks throughout the
project length will cost an additional $240,000 (not included in the above
estimate).
III. NEED FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT
A. Purpose and Need
Fayetteville Street (US 220 Business) is designated as a major thoroughfare on the
adopted Randolph County Urban Area Thoroughfare Plan and is one of the more heavily
traveled arterial routes in the city. This facility has a high number of commercial
developments and side roads. Fayetteville Street is also a major north-south connector
between Asheboro and Greensboro. The project is needed to improve traffic flow and
safety along the studied portion of Fayetteville Street (US 220 Business).
4
B. Existing Roadway Inventory
Project Terminals
The northern project terminus is at the intersection of Fayetteville Street
(US 220 Business) and Old Liberty Road (SR 2261). This point is the southern
terminus on Fayetteville Street (US 220 Business) of the Draft 2000-2006 TIP
Project U-3600. Project U-3600 proposes to widen Fayetteville Street (US 220
Business) to US 220 at US 311, a distance of 3.23 kilometers (5.2 miles).
Currently, at this location, Fayetteville Street (US 220 Business) is a four-lane
facility. Approximately 60.9 meters (200 feet) north of this intersection,
Fayetteville Street (US 220 Business) transitions to a three-lane roadway. Also
just south of this intersection, Fayetteville Street (US 220 Business) transitions
predominantly into a three lane roadway.
At the southern project terminus, Fayetteville Street (US 220 Business)
intersects Pritchard Street. North and south of this intersection, Fayetteville Street
(US 220 Business) is a four lane roadway.
2. Roadway Cross Section
The existing roadway consists of a three lane, 10.9 meter (36-foot)
shoulder section throughout most of the project, except at the Pritchard Street and
Old Liberty Road (SR 2261) Intersections. At both of these locations,
Fayetteville Street (US 220 Business) transitions into a 4-lane section. At the Old
Liberty Road (SR 2261) Intersection, the four lanes are divided by a striped island
thereby providing one thru lane in each direction and exclusive right and left turn
lanes in each direction. Fayetteville Street (US 220 Business) then transitions into
a 3-lane section heading north. Approximately 439 meters (1440 feet) north of'
the intersection, the roadway tapers to a 2-lane section. East Pritchard Street
consists of exclusive eastbound left and right turn lanes. There is one lane for
eastbound traffic.
3. Right of Way
The existing right of way width is 21.3 meters (70 feet) from East
Pritchard Street to Hampton Road (SR 1485), a distance of approximately
183 meters (600 feet). The remainder of the project has an existing 30.5 meter
(100-foot) right of way width that is symmetrical about the center-line of the
roadway.
4. Type of Roadside Development
Roadside development is mainly commercial with some light residential
development scattered along the project.
5
5. Access Control
There is no control of access along the project.
6. Structures
No structures are located within the project limits.
7. Speed Limit
The posted limit is 56 km/hr (35 mph) throughout the project length.
8. Intersecting Roads and Types of Controls
All streets intersect Fayetteville Street (US 220 Business) at-grade.
Signals are presently located at Pritchard Street, Old Liberty Road (SR 2261), and
Allred Street (SR 1491, SR 2182). Remaining intersections within the project
limits are stop sign controlled.
9. Sidewalks
Sidewalks exist in a few short segments along the project.
10. Utilities
Utilities along this project include aerial power, telephone, and a small
amount of underground power and telephone. An underground water line runs
along the west side of the road for the length of the project and along the east side
on the northern half of the project. There is underground gas on the east side for
the length of the project. Sanitary sewer lines run along both sides of the road
throughout the project. Water, sewer, gas, aerial power and aerial phone also exist
along most side streets. Anticipated utility impacts are considered high.
11. Greenways
No greenways exist within the limits of the project.
12. School Buses
Eight school buses make two trips per day along the studied section of
Fayetteville Street (US 220) for a total of 16 bus trips daily. These buses travel
both in the morning and afternoons.
6
13. Railroad Crossing
There are no railroads in the vicinity of this project.
14. Bicvcles
This section of Fayetteville Street (US 220 Business) is not a designated
bicycle route. There are no exclusive bicycle lanes or trails along the existing
roadway.
C. Functional Classification and Thoroughfare Plan
Fayetteville Street (US 220 Business) is classified as an Urban Other Principal
Arterial in the Statewide Classification System, and is a part of the Federal-Aid System.
The route is designated as a major thoroughfare on the adopted Randolph County Urban
Area Thoroughfare Plan (See Appendix A, Figure 4). Fayetteville Street (US 220
Business) is one of the more heavily traveled arterial routes in the city.
D. Accident History
A total of 194 accidents were reported along the studied portion of Fayetteville
Street (US 220 Business) during the period from March 1, 1995 to February 28, 1998.
The primary types of accidents were rear-end collisions (62.9%), accidents involving
angle or sideswipe collisions (12.9%), and accidents involving left turn cross traffic
(11.3%). These three types of accidents account for 87.1 % of all accidents occurring
along this section of Fayetteville Street (US 220 Business). Accidents also occurred most
frequently at the intersections.
The total accident rate for the studied section of Fayetteville Street (US 220
Business) is 567.58 accidents per 100 million vehicle miles (acc/100 mvm) compared to
the state average for US routes of 273.10 acc/100 mvm. The accident rate for the project
is significantly higher than the statewide average of US routes. This rate will likely
continue to increase unless provisions are made to accommodate the projected traffic
volumes. The proposed widening improvements will reduce the potential for the types of
accidents occurring along the project. The proposed project will improve the overall
safety and convenience of motorists.
E. Traffic Volumes and Capacity
The current Average Daily Traffic (ADT) is 16,200 vehicles per day (vpd) at the
northern project terminal. The highest concentration of traffic occurs between SR 1492
and Allred Street (SR 1491) with 21,900 vpd. Heading south, traffic continues to drop to
18,400 vpd at the project terminus, south of Pritchard Street.
The characteristics are the same in the design year 2020. The ADT at the northern
terminal is projected to be 36,000 vpd. The highest volumes will occur between SR 1492
7
and SR 1491, at 36,500 to 36,700 vpd. The estimated design year traffic volume at the
southern project terminal is 31,700 vpd.
These average daily traffic estimates include 20o truck-tractor semi-trailers and
3% dual tired vehicles. Estimated 1996/2020 average daily traffic volumes are shown in
Appendix A, Figures 5A through Figure 5D.
The traffic carrying ability of a roadway is described by levels of service (LOS)
which range from A through F. At signalized intersections the ability of the intersection
to handle traffic can also be described by Levels of Service A through F. Level of service
A, the highest level of service, is characterized by very low delay in which most vehicles
do not stop at all. Typically, drivers are unrestricted and turns are freely made. In level
of service B, traffic operation is stable but more vehicles are stopping and causing higher
levels of delay. Level of service C is characterized by stable operation with drivers
occasionally having to wait through more than one red indication. Most drivers feel
somewhat restricted in these circumstances. At level of service D, the influence of
congestion becomes more noticeable. Delay to approaching vehicles may be substantial
during short periods of the peak hour. Level of service E is considered to be the limit of
acceptable delay and represents the theoretical capacity of the facility. Level of service F
represents over saturated or jammed conditions which are considered unacceptable to
most drivers.
All signalized intersections (both existing and proposed) were analyzed by the
NCDOT Traffic Engineering Branch. The results for the "worst case" intersections are
summarized below.
Signalized Intersections
All roads currently intersecting the project alignment are at-grade. The
following intersections are signalized and are operating at Level of Service F
during peak periods: Fayetteville Street (US 220 Business)/Old Liberty Road
(SR 2261) and Vision Drive, Fayetteville Street (US 220 Business)/Allred Street
(SR 1491 and SR 2182), Fayetteville Street (US 220 Business)/Pritchard Street.
Capacity analyses were performed utilizing the 2020 design year traffic
projections for all three intersections in order to determine operational levels of
service. If their recommendation of improvements are implemented, the expected
2020 design year results at the intersections are as follows:
a. Fayetteville Street (US 220 Business)/Old Liberty Road (SR 2261)
and Vision Drive - LOS C
b. Fayetteville Street (US 20 Business)/Allred Street (SR 1491 and
SR 2182) - LOS B in the AM and LOS C in the PM peak hour.
C. Fayetteville Street (US 220 Business)/Pritchard Street - LOS B
8
2. Unsianalized Intersections
Several unsignalized intersections exist along the studied portion of
Fayetteville Street (US 220 Business). An analysis was performed to determine
the effect of the proposed widening on unsignalized intersections. No new traffic
signals are currently recommended as part of this project.
3. Additional Recommendations
It is recommended by the NCDOT Congestion Management Section to
cul-de-sac West Pritchard Street (approximately 200 feet north of the East
Pritchard Street intersection). See Appendix B-2. By doing this, West Pritchard
Street will no longer be accessible from Fayetteville Street (US 220 Business) and
traffic operations along Fayetteville Street (US 220 Business) will be improved.
Also, East Allred Street (SR 2182) will be shifted to the south to align
with West Allred Street (SR 1491).
IV. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS AND ALTERNATIVES TO
THE PROPOSED PROJECT
A. Recommended Improvements
The recommended alternative consists of widening the existing multi-lane facility
to a 5-lane, face to face, curb and gutter section (see Appendix A, Figure 3). The
five-lane section will consist of two travel lanes in each direction separated by a
continuous 3.6 meter (12-foot) center turn lane. The outside travel lanes will be
4.3 meters (14 feet) wide to accommodate bicycle traffic. The proposed roadway will be
widened symmetrically about the existing center line throughout most of the project.
Asymmetrical widening to the west will occur from just south of East Pritchard Street to
Hampton Road (SR 1485). Asymmetrical widening to the east will occur approximately
100 feet south of Saunders Street to 185 feet north of Saunders Street. The majority of
the improvement will be constructed within the existing right of way and require the
relocation of 7 businesses and 3 residences.
B. Other Alternatives Considered
Due to the nature of the project, the widening of an existing segment of roadway,
no alternative corridors were considered. The recommended symmetrical widening best
uses the existing right of way, and minimizes impacts to the project area.
A four lane undivided section was considered for this project but was rejected due
to the heavy commercial development along Fayetteville Street (US 220 Business). A
4-lane undivided section is not suitable because of the numerous driveways and streets
along the project which encourage left turning movements. Without a left turn lane,
safety hazards for both turning through and motorists would exist.
9
The "no build" alternative was also considered, but rejected. Without the
proposed improvements, the existing traffic service will continue to deteriorate and the
high accident rates will not be addressed.
C. Alternative Modes of Transportation
No alternative mode of transportation is considered to be a practical alternative to
this highway project. Highway transportation is the dominant mode of transportation in
the project area, and the project involves widening an existing roadway. The City of
Asheboro does not have a public transportation system at the present time. The
development of a public transportation system is not considered to be a prudent
alternative. Increased use of staggering work hours, car-pooling, and van-pooling could
relieve some congestion on Fayetteville Street (US 220 Business); however, these con-
gestion management measures are not within the control of NCDOT and will not meet
the transportation needs for the growing residential and industrial areas surrounding
Asheboro.
D. Postponement of Project
Postponement of the project would result in continuing deterioration of traffic and
safety conditions in the future as traffic demands increase. Therefore, this alternative is
not recommended.
V. SOCIAL, ECONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
A. Cultural Resources
Architectural Resources
This project is subject to compliance with Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR
Part 800. Section 106 requires that if a federally funded, licensed, or permitted
project has an effect on a property noted in or eligible for the NR, the Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation be given an opportunity to comment.
The State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) conducted a search of their
maps and files and located the following structures of historical or architectural
importance within the general area of the project:
Randolph Dairy, 920 North Fayetteville Street
Piedmont Electric Machine & Welding Company
1110 North Fayetteville Street
Both of the properties were recorded during the 1978 inventory of historic
architectural resources in Asheboro and were included in The Architectural
History of Randolph County, N. C., published in 1985. The SHPO recommended
an architectural historian with the NCDOT evaluate these buildings for National
Register of Historic Places eligibility, survey the area of potential effect for
buildings over fifty years old, and report the findings to them. See letter dated
March 13, 1996 in Appendix B-3.
A survey of the project area identified one property over fifty years old in
the area of potential effect (Piedmont Electric Machine and Welding Company).
This property is not considered eligible for the NR. See Appendix B-1 Con-
currence Form. The Randolph Dairy is not located within the area of potential
effect.
Section 4(f) of the U. S. Department of Transportation Act of 1966
specifies protection to publicly owned land of a public park, recreation area,
wildlife and waterfowl refuges, and historic sites of national, state or local
significance may be used for Federal Aid projects only if there is no feasible or
prudent alternative to the use of such land and the proposed project includes all
possible planning to minimize harm to the resources. This project does not
involve Section 4(f) properties.
2. Archaeological Resources
There are no known archaeological sites within the proposed project area.
It is unlikely an archaeological resources which may be eligible for inclusion in
the NR of Historic Places will be affected by the project corridor. Therefore, the
SHPO recommended that no archaeological investigation be conducted in
connection with this project. See letter dated March 13, 1996 in Appendix B-3.
3. Social Impacts
Motorists in Randolph County will have a safer highway on which to
travel. Fayetteville Street (US 220 Business) will be more accessible for
motorists traveling along the project corridor.
4. Environmental Justice
Examination of the Environmental Justice Analysis map indicates some
census blocks abutting the project roadway contain non-white populations from
the county average up to three times the county average. However, aerial
photographs indicate these areas consist of commercial uses fronting the road with
residential neighborhoods to the rear of the commercial strip. The project should
not have any direct impacts on minority communities. This assessment has not
found any evidence or indication of discrimination on the basis of race, color,
national origin, age, sex or disability. This assessment has not found any
evidence or indication that this project will result in disproportionately high and
adverse impacts on minority or low-income populations. The project may benefit
some of the minority communities surrounding the project by reducing congestion
and by the added safety of the proposed facility.
5. Relocation Impacts
Based on preliminary designs, the recommended improvements may
require the displacement of seven businesses and three residences. A copy of the
relocation report is located in Appendix B-4. The Division of Highways offers a
Relocation Assistance Program to help minimize the effects of displacement.
The Relocation Program will be conducted in accordance with the North
Carolina Relocation Assistance Act GS-133-17. The program is designed to
provide assistance to displaced persons in occupying a new place to live or in
which to do business. At least one relocation officer is assigned to each highway
project for this purpose.
The relocation officer will, at the time right of way is authorized,
determine the needs of displaced families, individuals, business concerns,
non-profit organizations, and farm operations for relocation assistance advisory
services, moving cost, replacement housing payments, mortgage differential and
incidental cost without regard to race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. The
officer will contact the displacee, within ample time prior to displacement, to
allow negotiations for, and possession of replacement housing which meets
decent, safe and sanitary standards and is adequate to accommodate the relocatee.
Relocation of displaced persons will be made in areas not generally less desirable
in regard to public utilities and commercial facilities. Rent and sale prices of
replacement housing offered will be within the financial means of the families and
individuals displaced. Replacement properties will be made available to displaced
families and individuals in the same general area from which they are being
displaced and reasonably accessible to their places of employment. The
relocation officer will also assist owners of displaced businesses, non-profit
organizations, and farm operations in locating and moving to replacement
property.
All tenant and owner occupant displacees will receive an explanation
regarding options available to them, such as (1) purchase of replacement housing,
(2) rental of replacement housing, either private or public, or (3) relocating
existing owner-occupant housing. The relocation officer will also supply
information concerning other State or Federal Programs offering assistance to
displaced persons. Provision will be made for other advisory services as needed
in order to minimize hardships to displaced persons in adjusting to a new location.
Last resort housing will be provided, if necessary, in accordance with North
Carolina law.
12
The Moving and Replacement Housing Payments Program is designed to
(a) compensate the relocatee for the costs of moving from homes, businesses, and
farm operations acquired for a highway project, (b) provide incidental purchase
payments for replacement dwellings such as attorneys' fees, surveys, appraisals,
and other closing costs, and (c) make payment for any increased interest expenses
for replacement dwellings. Reimbursement for replacement housing payments.
increased interest payments, and incidental purchase expenses may not exceed
522,500 combined total, unless last resort housing becomes necessary. Tenants
may receive a rental assistance payment not to exceed $5,250 unless last resort
housing becomes necessary.
Last Resort Housing is a program used when comparable replacement
housing is not available, or when it is unavailable within the displacee's financial
means, and the replacement payment exceeds the federal/state legal limitation.
The purpose of the program is to allow broad latitudes in methods of
implementation by the state so that decent, safe, and sanitary replacement housing
can be provided.
B. Land Use
Scope and Status of Planning
The proposed improvements occur within the planning and zoning
jurisdiction of the City of Asheboro.
The City is currently using Randolph County's Land Use Plan as its
primary planning guide. The County adopted the Randolph County Land Use
Plan, which was last updated in 1987. The City enforces a zoning ordinance and
subdivision regulations.
2. Current Zoning
The project is zoned B-2 Commercial, permitting a general mix of
commercial uses. Multiple family housing within the area is "grandfathered" as
existing non-conforming uses. No zoning changes are anticipated due to this
project or its land development plan update.
3. Existing Land Use
The project area is a mixed use corridor. Existing land uses include retail,
entertainment, heavy commercial and service establishments, automotive sales
and services, offices, food services, banks, small apartment buildings, duplexes,
churches and a private school.
13
4. Future Land Use
The Asheboro Planning Department anticipates no formal land use
classification changes due to this project or its land development plan update.
5. Income, Poverty Status and Unemployment
The 1990 median household income for Randolph County was $27,130
while the average household income was $31,289. Per capita income was
$12,182. Randolph County had 8,777 persons (8.3%) living below the poverty
level, of whom 3,132 (3.0%) live at or below 50% of the poverty level.
According to the Employment Security Commission the county's
unemployment rate as of July 1998 was 2.9%. This rate is lower than the state's
3.5% unemployment rate.
6. Farmland
The Farmland Protection Policy Act of 1981 requires all federal agencies
or their representatives to consider the impact of land acquisition and construction
projects on prime and important farmland soils, as designated by the U.S. Soil
Conservation Service. Land that is developed or planned for urban development
by the local governmental authority is exempt from the requirements of the Act.
The area of the proposed improvement has been designated for urban
development by the City of Asheboro. Therefore, further consideration of farm-
land impacts is not required.
C. Natural Environment
Project Description
The proposed project calls for widening US 220 Business (Fayetteville Street),
from SR 3590 to SR 2261, to a five lane, 20.4 m (68-ft), curb and gutter roadway. The
project length is 2.6 km (1.6 mi).
Research was conducted prior to field investigations. Information sources used in
this pre-field investigation of the study area include: U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)
quadrangle map (Asheboro), National Wetland Inventory (NWI) Map (Asheboro), and
NCDOT aerial photomosaics of the project area (1:2000).
Water resource information was obtained from publications of the Department of
Environment, and Natural Resources (DEHNR, 1993) and from the NC Center for
Geographic Information and Analysis (Environmental Sensitivity Base Map of Randolph
County, 1995). Information concerning the occurrence of federal and state protected
species in the study area was gathered from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) list
14
of protected species and species of concern, and the N.C. Natural Heritage Program
(NHP) database of rare species and unique habitats.
General field surveys were conducted within the proposed study corridor by an
NCDOT biologist on June 2, 1998. Plant communities and their associated wildlife were
identified and recorded. Wildlife identification involved using one or more of the
following observation techniques: active searching and capture, visual observations
(binoculars) and identification of characteristic signs of wildlife (sounds, scat, tracks and
burrows).
Investigator: Bruce O. Ellis, Environmental Biologist NCDOT, March 1995-present.
Education: BS Agriculture/Environmental Science, Rutgers University
College of Agriculture and Environmental Science.
Certification: Certified Lake Manager (North American Lake Management Society).
Experience: Biologist, Allied Biological, Inc., March 1976-April 1994. Lake and
watershed management, water quality, stream bioassessments, wetland
delineation and natural resources.
Expertise: Aquatic resource management; wetland delineation; Section 7
field investigations; NEPA investigations and documentation.
Soils and availability of water directly influence composition and distribution of
flora and fauna in any biotic community. Soil and water resources, which occur in the
study area, are discussed in detail in following sections.
Randolph County lies in the Piedmont Physiographic Province of North Carolina.
The topography of the project vicinity can be characterized as gently rolling with areas of
steep slopes along larger drainageways. The project study area is located in a highly
urbanized/commercial area within the town of Asheboro. The existing roadway is
situated in a relatively flat location between hills. Elevations within the project study
corridor range between 244 and 260 m (800 and 850 ft) above mean sea level (msl).
a. Soils
Soils within the project study area can be described as urban land. Urban
land is described by the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) as soils
that are "covered with streets, buildings, parking lots, railroad yards and airports.
The natural soils were greatly altered by cutting, filling, grading , and shaping
during the process of urbanization. The original landscape, topography, and
commonly the drainage pattern have been changed." Due the presence of
impermeable surfaces, surface runoff is high
and erosion is a hazard with unprotected soils. Urban land is not listed as a hydric
soil by the NRCS, additionally, no site index for forest productivity has been
assigned to these soils.
1.5
b. Water Resources
Water resources within the project vicinity are located within the Cape
Fear River Drainage Basin. The Cape Fear River drainage basin is the largest
river basin in North Carolina, occupying over 23,000 km2 (9000 mil) in the
piedmont, slate belt, sandhills and coastal plain ecoregions of the state. It is also
one of four river basins that are entirely contained within state boundaries. The
Cape Fear River Drainage Basin extends approximately 320 km (200 mi) in a
northwesterly direction from Cape Fear to north of Greensboro and High Point.
Contained within the Cape Fear River Basin are 27 counties, 114
municipalities, 25 percent of the state's population, and one of the most
concentrated turkey and hog producing regions within the country [Department of
Environmental Management (DEM), 1995]. The DEM, in their "Cape Fear River
Basinwide Water Quality Management Plan" (1995), has identified that
sedimentation is the most widespread cause of water use impairment within the
basin, while other forms of pollution of equal or greater importance include;
nutrients, toxic compounds and oxygen demanding wastes.
The project is located in the Cape Fear River sub basin number 03-06-09.
US 220 Business, within the project area, is situated on a slight ridge where water
draining to the west side of the roadway will eventually enter Haskett Creek,
while water draining east will eventually enter Penwood Branch.
No surface water resources are located within the project area.
However, stormwater runoff through stormwater management systems and sheet
flow from the project area may enter the above mentioned water resources.
Streams have been assigned a best usage classification by the Division of
Water Quality (DWQ). The classification of Haskett Creek and Penwood Branch
Creek are class "C". Class C uses include aquatic life propagation and survival,
fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation and agriculture.
Neither High Quality Waters (HQW), Water Supplies (WS-1:
undeveloped watersheds or WS-II: predominately undeveloped watersheds)
nor Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) occur within 1.6 km (1.0 mile) of
T
project study area.
The DWQ is the state agency responsible for regulating and enforcing
surface water quality rules. To accomplish this task the DWQ collects data on the
biological, chemical and physical condition of North Carolina surface waters.
The Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN) is managed by
the DWQ and is part of an ongoing ambient water quality monitoring program
which addresses long term trends in water quality. The program assesses water
quality by sampling for Benthic macroinvertebrate organisms at fixed monitoring
16
sites. Many benthic macro invertebrates have stages in their life cycle that can last
from six months to a year, therefore, the adverse effects of a toxic spill will not be
overcome until the next generation (DEM, 1995). Different taxa of
macro invertebrates have different tolerances to pollution, thereby, long term
changes in water quality conditions can be identified by population shifts from
pollution sensitive to pollution tolerant organisms (and vice versa). Overall, the
species present, the population diversity and the biomass are reflections of long
term water quality conditions.
"Criteria have been developed to assign bioclassifications ranging from
Poor to Excellent to each benthic sample based on the number of taxa present in
the intolerant groups Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera and Trichoptera (EPT)," (DEM,
1993). A biotic index is also developed for the macro invertebrate samples by
summarizing tolerance data for all species in a given sample. A bloc lassification
is derived from the data generated from the EPT and biotic index metrics.
There is one BMAN station located on Haskett Creek approximately 5.6
km (3.5 mi) upstream of the project area. This station has received
bioclassifications of Fair in 1987, 1988 and 1990. The DWQ states that the Fair
ratings are probably due to the affects of nonpoint source runoff and low flow
(DEM, 1995).
Point source discharge is defined "as any discharge that enters surface
waters through a pipe, ditch or any other well defined point. The term commonly
refers to discharges associated with wastewater treatment plant facilities. In
addition, discharges from stormwater collection systems at industrial sites and in
large urban areas are now considered point source discharges" (DEM, 1995).
Point source dischargers located throughout North Carolina are permitted through
the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program. Any
discharger is required to register for a permit. There are no permitted dischargers
within the project vicinity.
Nonpoint source discharge refers to runoff that enters surface waters
through stormwater or snowmelt (DEM, 1995). "Runoff from urban areas, as a
rule, is more localized but generally more severe than agricultural runoff. The
rate and volume of runoff in urban areas is much greater due both to the high
concentration if impervious surface areas and to storm drainage systems that
rapidly transport stormwater to nearby surface waters. Urban pollutants include
lawn care products such as pesticides and fertilizers; automobile-related pollutants
such as fuel, lubricants, abraded tire and brake linings; lawn and household
wastes, and fecal coliform bacteria. As a result, many urban streams are rated
biologically poor (DEM, 1995)."
It is anticipated that construction of the proposed project will have no
direct impact on surface waters. However, project construction may have indirect
impacts upon water resources within the project vicinity. Project construction
17
may result in the following impacts to surface waters through stormwater
management systems and sheet flow:
1. Increased sedimentation and siltation from construction and/or erosion.
2. Changes in light incidence and water clarity due to increased sedimentation.
3. Increased nutrient loading during construction via runoff from exposed areas.
4. Increased concentration of toxic compounds from highway runoff,
construction, toxic spills, and increased vehicular use.
The proposed project may increase concentrations of toxic compounds
(oil, gas, etc.) from machinery during the construction phase and from increased
post-construction traffic volumes. Post construction water quality impacts are
generally associated with flushing the roadway surface during storm events,
where stormwater runoff eventually reaches surface waters. Compounds normally
associated with roadway runoff include: oil and grease, total suspended solids,
and heavy metals, (Barrett, et. al., 1996). Increased amounts of these compounds
can adversely alter the water quality of the water resources.
Precautions will be taken to minimize impacts to water resources.
NCDOT's Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters
will be strictly enforced during the construction stage of the project.
Provisions to preclude contamination by toxic substances during the
construction interval will also be strictly enforced.
C. Plant Communities
One distinct biotic community was identified in the project study area:
maintained/disturbed. The maintained/disturbed community includes those
habitats altered by human activities, thereby affecting natural succession. Several
habitats, exhibiting similar characteristics are included in this description: road
shoulders, and commercial and residential landscapes. The maintained/disturbed
community is the predominant biotic community within the project study area.
Road shoulders are irregularly maintained, receiving only periodic mowing and
w
herbicide applications.. Residential and business landscapes receive more
frequent mowing and general maintenance.
Road shoulders normally act as buffers between the roadway and
surrounding communities by filtering stormwater run-off. However, road
shoulders within the project area are sparsely vegetated, heavily impacted by
traffic, and are largely composed of concrete, asphalt and gravel. Therefore, little
opportunity exists for stormwater filtration. Vegetation occurring here includes
fescue (Festuca spp.), dandelion (Taraxacum of/icinale), cat's ear (HYpochoeris
18
radicata), clover (TriJoliwn spp.), path rush (Juncos tenuis), and buckhorn
plantain (Plantago lanceolata).
Vegetation associated with residential, institutional and business
landscapes includes: flowering dogwood (Cornus flori(la), azalea (Rhododendron
spp.), red tip (Photinia x fr-aseri), crepe myrtle (Lagerstroemia indica), and
various hybrids of arbor vitae (Thuja spp.), holly (Ilcv spp.) and red cedar
(Juniper-irs spp. ). Lawn areas are dominated by fescue, clover, plantains and
crabgrass (Digitaria spp.).
Small mammals that commonly occur within the maintained/disturbed
community are the Norway rat (Rattus norvegicus), house mouse (Miss musculus),
least shrew (Crtptotis parva) and eastern mole (Scalopus aquaticus). The house
mouse is found in association with human activities where it finds food and
shelter in barns, houses, restaurants and warehouses. It does equally as well in
weedy and overgrown fields. Eastern moles excavate extensive tunnels and feed
upon earthworms, insects and plant material. The Virginia opossum (Didelphis
virginiana) and raccoon (Procyon lotor) are very adaptive mammals that will
frequent this habitat for foraging opportunities.
d. Wildlife Communities
Avian species likely to utilize this habitat for refuge and foraging
opportunities include downy woodpecker (Picoides pubescens), mourning dove*
(Zenaida macroura), and American robin* (Turdus rnigratorius). Carolina
chickadee (Parus carolinensis), Carolina wren (Thr-vothorus ludovicianus) and
house sparrow (Passer domesticus). These species will take advantage of feeders
and nesting sites provided by human settlement. The American kestrel (Falco
sparver•ius) will forage on small birds and mammals in this community.
Eastern garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis) and black racer (Coluber
constrictor) frequent open and disturbed habitats. They will find suitable shelter
and foraging opportunities in proximity with human activities.
e. Summary of Community Impacts
Construction of the project will have various impacts on the biotic
resources described. Any construction related activities in or near these resources
have the potential to impact biological functions.
Approximately 4 ha (10 ac) of maintained/disturbed community will be
impacted by the proposed project. Estimated impacts are derived using the entire
proposed right of way width of 30m (100 ft) minus the width of the existing
roadway [I Im (36 ft)]. Usually, project construction does not require the entire
right of way, therefore, actual impacts may be considerably less.

19
Plant communities found within the proposed project area serve as nesting
and sheltering habitat for various wildlife. Widening US 220 Business and its
associated improvements will reduce habitat for faunal species, thereby
diminishing faunal numbers. However, since the project area is dominated by
disturbed habitats, it is anticipated that impacts to fauna will be minimal.
f. Waters of the United States
Surface waters and wetlands fall under the broad category of "Waters of
the United States," which include lakes, ponds, streams (including intermittent
streams), rivers, creeks springs, wetlands, territorial seas, tidal waters and other
bodies of open water as defined in Section 33 of the Code of Federal Register
(CFR) Part 328.3. Wetlands, defined in 33 CFR 328.3, are those areas that are
inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration
sufficient to support, and under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of'
vegetation typically adapted to life in saturated conditions. Any action that
proposes to place fill into these areas falls under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (COE) under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C.
1344).
No Jurisdictional wetlands or surface waters are present within the
project area. Therefore, no permits to fill jurisdictional surface waters or
wetlands will be necessary according to current roadway design parameters.
However, if roadway design parameters change the project will need to be re-
evaluated.
2. Protected Species
a. Rare and Protected Species
Some populations of fauna and flora have been in, or are in, the process of
decline either due to natural forces or their inability to coexist with man. Federal
law (under the provisions of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended)
requires that any action, likely to adversely affect a species classified as federally-
protected, be subject to review by the FWS.
b. Federally-Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered (E),
Threatened (T), Proposed Endangered (PE) and Proposed Threatened (PT) are
protected under provisions of Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered Species
Act of 1973, as amended. As of January 15, 1999, the FWS lists two federally-
protected species for Randolph County. A brief description and Biological
Conclusion for each species follows:
20
Notropis mekistocholas (Cape Fear shiner) Endangered
Family: Cyprinidae
Date Listed: 26 September 1987
The Cape Fear shiner is a small, moderately stocky minnow. Its body is
flushed with a pale silvery yellow, and a black band runs along its sides (Snelson
1971). The fins are yellowish and somewhat pointed. The upperlip is black and
the lower lip has a black bar along its margin.
Cape Fear shiner habitat occurs in streams with gravel, cobble, or boulder
substrates. It is most often observed inhabiting slow pools, riffles, and slow runs
associated with water willow beds. Juveniles can be found inhabiting slackwater,
among large rock outcrops and in flooded side channels and pools. The Cape
Fear shiner is thought to feed on bottom detritus, diatoms, and other periphytes.
Captive specimens feed readily on plant and animal material.
The Cape Fear shiner is limited to three populations in North Carolina.
The strongest population of the Cape Fear shiner is in Chatham and Lee counties
from the Locksville dam upstream to Rocky River and Bear Creek. Another
population is located above the Rocky River Hydroelectric Dam in Chatham
County, and the third population is found in the Deep River system in Randolph
and Moore counties.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION NO EFFECT
There are no surface waters within the project area and therefore no habitat
is present for the Cape Fear shiner. Additionally, the NC Natural Heritage
Program data base of rare species and unique habitats contains no listing of the
Cape Fear shiner within the project vicinity. Therefore, project construction will
not affect the Cape Fear shiner.
Helianthus schweinitzii (Schweinitz's sunflower) Endangered
Family: Asteraceae
Federally Listed: 06 June 1991
Flowers Present: mid September-early October
Schweinitz's sunflower is a rhizomatous perennial herb that grows 1-2 m
tall from a cluster of carrot-like tubrous roots. The stems are deep red, solitary
and only branch above mid-stem. The leaves are rough feeling above and resin-
dotted and loosely soft-white-hairy beneath. Leaves of the sunflower are opposite
on the lower part of the stem and usually become alternate on the upper stem.
The broad flowers are borne from September until frost. These flowers are yellow
in color and arranged in an open system of upwardly arching heads. The fruit is a
smooth, gray-black achene.
21
Schweinitz's sunflower is endemic to North and South Carolina. These
sunflowers grow best in full sunlight or light shade in clearings and along the
edges of open stands of oak-pine-hickory upland woods. Common soils that this
species is found in are moist to dry clays, clay-loams, or sandy clay-loams, often
with a high gravel content and always moderately podzolized. Natural fires and
large herbivores are considered to be historically important in maintaining open
habitat for these sunflowers.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION NO EFFECT
The project area consists of a highly maintained/disturbed community,
consisting of commercial and residential landscapes, parking lots, driveways and a
sparsely vegetated shoulder. Consequently, habitat for Schweinitz's sunflower is
extremely limited. A search was performed and no Helianthus spp. was observed.
Additionally, the NC Natural Heritage Program data base of rare species and
unique habitats contains no listing of Schweinitz's sunflower within the project
vicinity. Therefore, project construction will not affect Schweinitz's sunflower.
There are four Federal Species of Concern (FSC) listed for Randolph
County. Federal Species of Concern are not afforded federal protection under the
ESA and are not subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7, until they
are formally proposed or listed as Threatened or Endangered. Federal Species of
Concern are defined as those species which may or may not be listed in the
future. These species were formally candidate species, or species under
consideration for listing for which there was insufficient information to support a
listing of Endangered, Threatened, Proposed Endangered and Proposed
Threatened. Organisms which are listed as Endangered (E), Threatened (T),
Significantly Rare (SR) or Special Concern (SC) by the North Carolina Natural
Heritage Program (NCNHP) 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.
Table I lists Federal Species of Concern and State listed species, the
species state status and the existence of suitable habitat for each species in the
study area. This species list is provided for information purposes as the status of
these species may be upgraded in the future.
Table 1. Federal Species of Concern for Randolph County
Scientific Name Common Name State Status Habitat
Alasmidonta varicosa brook floater T no
Dactyloctvthere peedeensis Pee Dee crayfish ostracod SR no
Fusconaia masoni Atlantic pigtoe T no
Villosa vaughaniana Carolina creekshell SC no

Surveys for these species were not conducted during the site visit, nor
were any of these species observed. A review of the N.C. Natural Heritage
Program data base of rare species and unique habitats revealed no records of rare
and/or protected species were reported in or near the project study area.
Air Quality and Traffic Noise
a. Air Quality Analysis
Air pollution originates from various sources. Emissions from industry
and internal combustion engines are the most prevalent sources. The impact
resulting from highway construction ranges from intensifying existing air
pollution problems to improving the ambient air quality. The traffic is the center
of concern when determining the impact of a new highway facility or the
improvement of an existing highway facility. Motor vehicles emit carbon
monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxide (NO), hydrocarbons (HC), particulate matter,
sulfur dioxide (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 at a receptor near a
highway, two concentration components must be used: local and background.
The local concentration is defined as the CO emissions from cars operating on
highways in the near vicinity (i.e., distances within 100 meters) of the receptor
location. The background concentration is defined by the North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources as "the concentration
of a pollutant at a point that is the result of emissions outside the local vicinity;
that is, the concentration at the upwind edge of the local sources."
In this study, the local concentration was determined by the NCDOT
Traffic Noise/Air Quality Staff using line source computer modeling and the
background component 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 area 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.
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. However, regarding area-wide emissions, these technological improvements
maybe offset by the increasing number of cars on the transportation facilities of
the area.
23
The photochemical reactions that form ozone and nitrogen dioxide require
several hours to occur. For this reason, the peak levels of ozone generally occur
10 to 20 kilometers downwind of the source of hydrocarbon emissions. Urban
areas as a whole are regarded as sources of hydrocarbons, not individual streets
and highways. The emissions of all sources in an urban area mix together in the
atmosphere, and in the presence of sunlight, the mixture reacts to form ozone,
nitrogen dioxide, and other photochemical oxidants. The best example of this type
of air pollution is the smog which forms in Los Angeles, California.
Automobiles are not regarded as significant sources of particulate matter
and sulfur dioxide. Nationwide, highway sources account for less than seven
percent of particulate matter emissions and less than two percent of sulfur dioxide
emissions. Particulate matter and sulfur dioxide emissions are predominantly the
result of non-highway sources (e.g., industrial, commercial, and agricultural).
Because emissions of particulate matter and sulfur dioxide from automobiles are
very low, there is no reason to suspect that traffic on the project will cause air
quality standards for particulate matter and sulfur dioxide to be exceeded.
Automobiles without catalytic converters can burn regular gasoline . The
burning of regular gasoline emits lead as a result of regular gasoline containing
tetraethyl lead which is added by refineries to increase the octane rating of the
fuel. Newer cars with catalytic converters burn unleaded gasoline eliminating
lead emissions. Also, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
has required the reduction in the lead content of leaded gasolines. The overall
average lead content of gasoline in 1974 was approximately 0.53 gram per liter.
By 1989, this composite average had dropped to 0.003 gram per liter. In the
future, lead emissions are expected to decrease as more cars use unleaded fuels
and as the lead content of leaded gasoline is reduced. The Clean Air Act
Amendments of 1990 make the sale, supply, or transport of leaded gasoline or
lead additives unlawful after December 31, 1995. Because of these reasons, it is
not expected that traffic on the proposed project will cause the NAAQS for lead
to be exceeded.
A microscale air quality analysis was performed to determine future CO
concentrations resulting from the proposed highway improvements. "CAL3QHC
A Modeling Methodology For Predicting Pollutant Concentrations Near
Roadway Intersections" was used to predict the CO concentration near sensitive
receptors.
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 years 2000 and
2020, using the EPA publication "Mobile Source Emission Factors", the
MOBILESA mobile source emissions computer model.
24
The background CO concentrations for the project area was estimated to
be 1.8 parts per million (ppm). Consultation with the Air Quality Section,
Division of Environmental Management (DEM), North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and Natural Resources indicated that an ambient CO
concentration of 1.8 ppm is suitable for most suburban and rural areas.
The worst-case air quality scenario was determined to be located along the
limits of the right-of=way at 15.25 meters from the centerline of the roadway. The
predicted 1-hour average CO concentrations for the evaluation build years of 2000
and 2020 are 3.3 and 3.7 ppm, respectively. In the evaluation of the no-build
scenario, the predicted average 1-hour CO concentrations are 4.5 ppm and 9.5
ppm for the years 2000 and 2020, respectively.
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 for the build scenario is less than 9 ppm, it can be
concluded that the 8-hour CO level does not exceed the standard. See Tables A 1
through A4 in Appendix C for input data and output.
The project is located in Randolph County, which has been determined to
be in compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. 40 CFR part
51 is not applicable, because the proposed project is located in an attainment area.
This project is not anticipated to create any adverse effects 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 done
will be done in accordance with applicable local laws and ordinances and
regulations of the North Carolina SIP for air quality in compliance with 15 NCAC
2D.0520. Care will be taken to insure burning will be done at the greatest
distance practical from dwellings and not when atmospheric conditions are such
as to create a hazard to the public. Burning will be performed under constant
surveillance. Also during construction, measures will be taken to reduce the dust
generated by construction when the control of dust is necessary for the protection
and comfort of motorists or area residents. This evaluation completes the
assessment requirements for air quality of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments
and the NEPA process, and no additional reports are necessary.
b. Highway Traffic Noise/Construction Noise Analysis
This analysis was performed to determine the effect of the proposed
widening of Fayetteville Street (US 220 Business) from Pritchard Street to Old
Liberty Road (SR 2261), in Randolph County on noise levels in the immediate
project area. This investigation includes an inventory of existing noise sensitive
25
land uses and a field survey of ambient (existing) noise levels in the studv area. It
also includes a comparison of the predicted noise levels and the ambient noise
levels to determine if traffic noise impacts can be expected resulting from the
proposed project. Traffic noise impacts are determined from the current
procedures for the abatement of highway traffic noise and construction noise,
appearing as Part 772 of Title 23 of the Code of Federal Regulations. It' traffic
noise impacts are predicted, examination and evaluation of alternative noise
abatement measures for reducing or eliminating the noise impacts must be
considered.
C. Characteristics of Noise
Noise is basically defined as unwanted sound. It is emitted from many
sources including airplanes, factories, railroads, power generation plants, and
highway vehicles. Highway noise, or traffic noise, is usually a composite of'
noises from engine exhaust, drive train, and tire-roadway interaction.
The magnitude of noise is usually described by its sound pressure. Since
the range of sound pressure varies greatly, a logarithmic scale is used to relate
sound pressures to some common reference level, usually the decibel (dB). Sound
pressures described in decibels are called sound pressure levels and are often
defined in terms of frequency weighted scales (A, B, C, or D).
The weighted-A decibel scale is used almost exclusively in vehicle noise
measurements because it places the most emphasis on the frequency range to
which the human ear is most sensitive (1,000-6,000 Hertz). Sound levels
measured using a weighted-A decibel scale are often expressed as dBA.
Throughout this report, all noise levels will be expressed in dBA's. Several
examples of noise pressure levels in dBA are listed in Table N 1 in Appendix C.
Review of Table NI indicates that most individuals in urbanized areas are
exposed to fairly high noise levels from many sources as they go about their daily
activities. The degree of disturbance or annoyance of unwanted sound depends
essentially on three things:
1) The amount and nature of the intruding noise.
2) The relationship between the background noise and the intruding noise.
3) The type of activity occurring when the noise is heard.
In considering the first of these three factors, it is important to note that
individuals have different sensitivity to noise. Loud noises bother some more
than others and some individuals become upset if an unwanted noise persists. The
time patterns of noise also enter into an individual's judgement of whether or not a
26
noise is offensive. For example, noises occurring during sleeping hours are
usually considered to be more offensive than the same noises in the daytime.
With regard to the second factor, individuals tend to judge the annoyance
of an unwanted noise in terms of its relationship to noise from other sources
(background noise). The blowing of a car horn at night when background noise
levels are approximately 45 dBA would generally be more objectionable than the
blowing of a car horn in the afternoon when background noises might be 55 dBA.
The third factor is related to the interference of noise with activities of
individuals. In a 60 dBA environment, normal conversation would be possible
while sleep might be difficult. Work activities requiring high levels of
concentration may be interrupted by loud noises while activities requiring manual
effort may not be interrupted to the same degree.
Over time, particularly if the noises occur at predicted intervals and are
expected, individuals tend to accept the noises which intrude into their lives.
Attempts have been made to regulate many of these types of noises including
airplane noise, factory noise, railroad noise, and highway traffic noise. In relation
to highway traffic noise, methods of analysis and control have developed rapidly
over the past few years.
Cl. Noise Abatement Criteria
In order to determine whether highway noise levels are or are not
compatible with various land uses, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
has developed noise abatement criteria (NAC) and procedures to be used in the
planning and design of highways. These abatement criteria and procedures are set
forth in the aforementioned Federal reference (Title 23 CFR Part 772). A
summary of the noise abatement criteria for various land uses is presented in
Table N2 (See Appendix Q. 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.
e. Ambient Noise Levels
Ambient noise measurements were taken in the vicinity of the project to
determine ambient (existing) noise levels for the identified land uses. The
purpose of this noise level information was to quantify the existing acoustic
environment and to provide a base for assessing the impact of noise level
increases. The existing Leq noise level in the project area as measured at 15
meters from Fayetteville Street (US 220 Business) was 68.0 dBA. The ambient
measurement location is presented in Figure N 1 (See Appendix C).
27
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
level was 0.4 dBA higher than the measured noise level for the location where
noise measurement was obtained. Hence, the computer model is a reliable tool in
the prediction of noise levels. Differences in dBA levels can be attributed to
"bunching" of vehicles, low traffic volumes, and actual vehicle speeds versus the
computer's "evenly-spaced" vehicles and single vehicular speed.
f. Procedure For Predicting Future Noise Levels
In general, the traffic situation is composed of a large number of variables
which describe different cars driving at different speeds through a continual
changing highway configuration and surrounding terrain. Due to the complexity
of the problem, certain assumptions and simplifications must be made to predict
highway traffic noise. The procedure used to predict future noise levels in this
study was the Noise Barrier Cost Reduction Procedure, STAMINA 2.0 and
OPTIMA (revised March, 1983). The BCR (Barrier Cost Reduction) procedure is
based upon the FHWA Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-RD-77-
108). The BCR traffic noise prediction model uses the number and type of
vehicles on the planned roadway, their speeds, the physical characteristics of the
road (curves, hills, depressed, elevated, etc.), receptor location and height, and, if
applicable, barrier type, barrier ground elevation, and barrier top elevation.
In this regard, it is to be noted that only preliminary alignment was
available for use in this noise analysis. The project proposes to widen
Fayetteville Street (US 220 Business) to a five-lane curb and gutter section from
Pritchard Street to Old Liberty Road (SR 2261). The roadway will be a 20.4 m
(68-ft.) curb and gutter section of roadway. This will provide for a 12-foot (3.6
m) center left turn lane, two 12-foot (3.6 m) wide inside lanes, and two 14-foot
(4.2 m) outside lanes. The outside lanes will accommodate bicycle traffic. Only
those existing natural or man-made barriers were included in setting up the model.
The roadway sections and proposed intersections were assumed to be flat and at-
grade. Thus, this analysis represents the "worst-case" topographical conditions.
The noise predictions made in this report are highway-related noise predictions
for the traffic conditions during the year being analyzed.
Peak hour design and level-of-service (LOS) C volumes were compared,
and the volumes resulting in the noisiest conditions were used with the proposed
posted speed limits. Hence, during all other time periods, the noise levels will be
no greater than those indicated in this report. The STAMINA 2.0 computer model
was utilized in order to determine the number of land uses (by type) which would
be impacted during the peak hour of the design year 2020. A land use is
considered to be impacted when exposed to noise levels approaching or exceeding
the FHWA noise abatement criteria and/or predicted to sustain a substantial noise
increase.
28
The Leq traffic noise exposures associated with this project are listed in
Table N3 (See Appendix C). Information included in these tables consists of
listings of all receptors in close proximity to the project, their ambient and
predicted noise levels, and the estimated noise level increase for each.
g. Traffic Noise Impacts and Noise Contours
Traffic noise impacts occur when the predicted traffic noise levels either:
[a] approach or exceed the FHWA noise abatement criteria (with "approach"
meaning within 1 dBA of the Table N2 value), or [b] substantially exceed the
existing noise levels. The NCDOT definition of substantial increase is shown in
the lower portion of Table N2 (See Appendix C). Consideration for noise
abatement measures must be given to receptors which fall in either category.
In accordance with NCDOT Traffic Noise Abatement Policy, the
Federal/State governments are no longer responsible for providing noise
abatement measures for new development which building permits are issued
within the noise impact area of a proposed highway after the Date of Public
Knowledge. The Date of Public Knowledge of the location of a proposed
highway project will be the approval date of CEs, FONSIs, RODs, or the Design
Public Hearing, whichever comes later. For development occurring after this
public knowledge date, local governing bodies are responsible to insure that noise
compatible designs are utilized along the proposed facility.
The maximum number of receptors in each activity category that are
predicted to become impacted by future traffic noise is shown in Table N4 (See
Appendix C). These are noted in terms of those receptors expected to experience
traffic noise impacts by approaching or exceeding the FHWA NAC or by a
substantial increase in exterior noise levels. Under Title 23 CFR Part 772, there
are 4 impacted residential receptors and 16 impacted business receptors due to
highway traffic noise in the project area. The maximum extent of the 72 and 67
dBA noise level contours are 16.9 and 34.3 meters, respectively, from the center
of the proposed roadway. This information should assist local authorities in
exercising land use control over the remaining undeveloped lands adjacent to the
roadway within local jurisdiction. For example, with the proper information on
noise, the local authorities can prevent further development of incompatible
activities and land uses with the predicted noise levels of an adjacent highway.
Table N5 indicates the exterior traffic noise level increases for the
identified receptors by roadway section (See Appendix C). There are no
receptors that are predicted to be impacted by a substantial increase in exterior
noise levels. The predicted noise level increases for this project range up to +4
dBA. When real-life noises are heard, it is possible barely to detect noise level
changes of 2-3 dBA. A 5 dBA change is more readily noticeable. A 10 dBA
change is judged by most people as a doubling or a halving of the loudness of the
sound.
29
h. Traffic Noise Abatement Measures
If traffic noise impacts are predicted, examination and evaluation of
alternative noise abatement measures for reducing or eliminating the noise
impacts must be considered. Consideration for noise abatement measures must be
given to all impacted receptors. There are 20 impacted receptors due to highway
traffic noise in the project area.
1. Highway Alignment
Highway alignment selection involves the horizontal or vertical
orientation of the proposed improvements in such a way as to minimize
impacts and costs. The selection of alternative alignments for noise
abatement purposes must consider the balance between noise impacts and
other engineering and environmental parameters. For noise abatement,
horizontal alignment selection is primarily a matter of siting the roadway
at a sufficient distance from noise sensitive areas. Changing the highway
alignment is not a viable alternative for noise abatement.
2. Traffic System Management Measures
Traffic management measures which limit vehicle type, speed,
volume and time of operations are often effective noise abatement
measures. For this project, traffic management measures are not
considered appropriate for noise abatement due to their effect on the
capacity and level-of-service on the proposed roadway.
3. Noise Barriers
Physical measures to abate anticipated traffic noise levels can often
be applied with a measurable degree of success by the application of solid
mass, attenuable measures to effectively diffract, absorb, and reflect
highway traffic noise emissions. Solid mass, attenuable measures may
include earth berms or artificial abatement walls.
The project will maintain a non-controlled access facility, meaning
most commercial establishments and residences will have direct access
connections to the proposed roadway, and all intersections will adjoin the
project at grade.
For a noise barrier to provide sufficient noise reduction it must be
high enough and long enough to shield the receptor from significant
sections of the highway. Access openings in the barrier severely reduce
the noise reduction provided by the barrier. It then becomes economically
unreasonable to construct a barrier for a small noise reduction. Safety at
access openings (driveways, crossing streets, etc.) due to restricted sight
30
distance is also a concern. Furthermore, to provide a sufficient reduction,
a barrier's length would normally be 8 times the distance from the barrier
to the receptor. For example, a receptor located 15 meters from the barrier
would normally require a barrier 120 meters long. An access opening of
12 meters (10 percent of the area) would limit its noise reduction to
approximately 4 dBA (FUNDAMENTAL AND ABATEMENT OF
HIGHWAY TRAFFIC NOISE, Report No. FHWA-HHI-HEV-73-7976-
1, USDOT, chapter 5, section 3.2, page 5-27).
In addition, businesses, churches, and other related establishments
located along a particular highway normally require accessibility and high
visibility. Solid mass, attenuable measures for traffic noise abatement
would tend to disallow these two qualities, and thus, would not be
acceptable abatement measures in this case.
"Do Nothing" Alternative
The traffic noise impacts for the "do nothing" or "no-build" alternative
were also considered. If the proposed widening did not occur, 3 residential
receptors would experience traffic noise impacts by approaching or exceeding the
FHWA NAC. Also, the receptors could anticipate experiencing an increase in
exterior noise levels in the range up to +2 dBA. As previously noted, it is barely
possible to detect noise level changes of 2-3 dBA. A 5 dBA change in noise
levels is more readily noticed.
j. Construction Noise
The major construction elements of this project are expected to be earth
removal, hauling, grading, and paving. General construction noise impacts, such
as temporary speech interference for passers-by and those individuals living or
working near the project, can be expected particularly from paving operations and
from the earth moving equipment during grading operations. However,
considering the relatively short-term nature of construction noise and the
limitation of construction to daytime hours, these impacts are not expected to be
substantial. The transmission loss characteristics of nearby natural elements and
man-made structures are believed to be sufficient to moderate the effects of
intrusive construction noise.
k. Summary
Based on these preliminary studies, traffic noise abatement is not
recommended, and no noise abatement measures are proposed. This evaluation
completes the highway traffic noise requirements of Title 23 CFR Part 772, and
unless a major project change develops, no additional noise reports will be
submitted for this project.
31
D. Construction Effects
To minimize potential adverse effects caused by construction of proposed
project, the following measures, along with those already mentioned, will be
enforced during the construction phase:
All possible measures will be taken to insure that the public's health and
safety will not be compromised during the movement of any materials to
and from construction sites along the project and that any inconveniences
imposed on the public will be kept to a minimum.
2. Dust control will be exercised at all times to prevent endangering the
safety and general welfare of the public and to prevent diminishing the
value, utility, or appearance of any public or private properties.
3. The contractor shall be required to observe and comply with all laws,
ordinances, regulations, orders and decrees, including those of the N.C.
State Board of Health, regarding the disposal of solid waste. All solid
waste will be disposed of in accordance with the standard specifications of
the Division of Highways. These specifications have been reviewed and
approved by the Solid Waste Vector Control Section of the Division of
Health Services, N.C. Department of Human Resources.
4. Waste and debris will be disposed of in areas outside of the right of way
and provided by the contractor, unless otherwise required by the plans or
special provisions or unless disposal within the right of way is permitted
by the Engineer. Disposal of waste and debris in active public waste or
disposal areas will not be permitted without prior approval by the
Engineer. Such approval will not be permitted when, in the opinion of the
Engineer, it will result in excessive siltation or pollution.
5. The construction of the project is not expected to cause any serious
disruptions in service to any of the utilities serving the area. Before
construction is started, a preconstruction conference involving the
contractor, pertinent local officials, and the Division of Highways will be
held to discuss various steps to be taken during the time of construction
that will minimize interruptions of service.
6. During final design, a determination will be made regarding the need to
relocate or adjust any existing utilities in the project area. A determination
of whether the NCDOT or the utility owner will be responsible for this
work will be made at that time.
7. During construction of the proposed project, all materials resulting from
clearing and grubbing, demolition, or other operations will be disposed of
by the contractor. The contractor will be encouraged to sell timber rather
32
than burning to minimize the need for piling and burning during
construction. If any burning is needed, this activity will be done in
accordance with applicable local laws and ordinances and regulations of
the North Carolina SIP for Air Quality. Care will be taken to insure
burning will be done at the greatest distance practicable from dwellings
and not when atmospheric conditions are such as to create a hazard to the
public. Burning will be performed under constant surveillance.
8. An erosion control schedule will be devised by the contractor before work
is started. The schedule will show the time relationship between phases of
the work which must be coordinated to reduce erosion control measures
which will be used to minimize erosion. In conjunction with the erosion
control schedule, the contractor will be required to follow those provisions
of the plans and specifications which pertain to erosion and siltation.
These contract provisions are in accordance with the strict erosion control
measures a outlined in the Department of Transportation's FAPG, section
23CFR 650 Subpart B. Temporary erosion control measures such as the
use of berms, dikes, dams, silt basins, etc. will be used as needed.
9. Prior to the approval of any borrow source developed for use on this
project, the contractor shall obtain a certification from the North Carolina
Department of Cultural Resources certifying that the removal of material
from the borrow source will have no effect on any known district, site,
building, structure, or object that is included or eligible for inclusion in the
National Register of Historic Places. A copy of this certification shall be
furnished to the Engineer prior to performing any work on the proposed
borrow source.
10. Traffic service in the immediate project area may be subjected to brief
disruption during construction of the project. Every effort will be made to
insure that the transportation needs of the public will be met both during
and after construction.
E. Hazardous Materials
A geology and hazardous material evaluation was conducted by investigation of
the project area to determine if any hazards such as underground storage tanks, hazardous
waste sites, dumps, landfills, or other similar sites which may impact construction of the
project, cause delays, or create other liabilities. A field reconnaissance survey was
conducted along existing Fayetteville Street (US 220 Business) from just south of
Pritchard Street to north of the Old Liberty Road (SR 2261) intersection by the
Geotechnical Unit of NCDOT. Twelve potential sites for underground storage tanks
(UST's) were identified in the project vicinity (See Appendix D for listing). As a result
of this study, this project was considered to have a low risk for hazardous materials
involvement.
31
F. Geodetic Survey Markers
This project will not impact geodetic survey markers.
V. COMMENTS AND COORDINATION
A. Government Response
Comments on the proposed improvements to Fayetteville Street (US 220
Business) were requested from the following federal, state, and local agencies. An
asterisk indicates that a written response was received. Responses are included in the
Appendix.
*City of Asheboro
Mayor of Asheboro
*Randolph County Commissioners
Randolph County Schools
N.C. Department of Public Instruction
*N.C. Department of Cultural Resources
*N.C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
N.C. Department of Human Resources
*N.C. State Clearinghouse
*N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission
Region J Planning Agency
*U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - Wilmington
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Atlanta
U.S. Department of Transportation - FHWA
*U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service - Raleigh
In addition to the above comments, the project was further coordinated with local
government and NCDOT officials. The City of Asheboro expressed an interest in
construction of sidewalks along the project where they do not currently exist.
B. Public Response
In addition to the written requests for input from appropriate agencies and
governmental bodies, a citizens informational workshop was held on December 3, 1997
at the Asheboro City Hall's Council Chambers to discuss the subject road improvement.
The meeting was advertised by the major local media prior to its being held.
Approximately 7 persons attended the informal gathering including representatives of the
NCDOT. The residents were generally interested in how their individual properties
would be affected by the proposed improvements. They expressed strong support for a
5-lane curb and gutter section and sidewalks throughout the project length.
34
Prior to the workshop, a local officials' meeting was held to inform the local city
officials of the project scope and purpose. Approximately 20 city officials attended the
meeting. The overall response to the proposed project was favorable. There was a
unanimous request to have sidewalks added to the scope of the project.
MLJ/plr
LIST OF PREPARERS
This Environmental Assessment was prepared by the North Carolina Department
of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration. The following personnel
were instrumental in the preparation of this document.
A. North Carolina Department of Transportation
Mr. William D. Gilmore, P. E., Manager. Planning and Environmental
Branch
Engineer responsible for highway planning and environmental impact
analyses, 25 years of experience.
2. Mr. Richard B. Davis, P. E., Assistant Manager, Planning and
Environmental Branch
Engineer responsible for managing highway planning and environmentatl
impact analyses, 27 years of experience.
3. Mrs. Teresa A. Hart, Project Planning Engineer Unit Head, Planning and
Environmental Branch
Engineer responsible for managing highway planning and environmental
impact analyses, 12 years of experience.
4. Ms. Michele L. James, Project Planning Engineer, Planning and
Environmental Branch
Engineer responsible for conducting highway planning and environmental
impact analyses, 11 years of experience.
5. Mr. John E. Alford, P. E., Assistant State Roadway Design Engineer,
Roadway Design Unit
Engineer responsible for managing the preliminary highway design
preparation, 29 years of experience.
6. Mr. James Speer, P. E., Project Engineer, Roadway Design Unit
Engineer responsible for the preliminary highway design preparation, 15
years of experience.
7. Mr. John Lansford, P. E., Project Design Engineer, Roadway Design Unit
Engineer responsible for preparing the preliminary highway design, 14
years of experience.
8. Mr. Bruce O. Ellis, Environmental Biologist, Planning and Environmental
Branch
Biologist responsible for assessing the potential impacts to Natural
Resources, 21 years of experience.
9. Mr. Stephen Walker, Transportation Engineer, Planning and
Environmental Branch
Engineer responsible for preparing the Traffic Noise and Air Quality
Assessments, 24 years of experience.
10. Mr. Ed Davis, Architectural Historian, Planning and Environmental
Branch
Historian responsible for assessing potential impacts to Historic
Architectural Resources, 18 years of experience.
11. Mr. Tom Padgett, Archaeology Supervisor, Planning and Environmental
Branch
Archaeologist responsible for assessing potential impacts to archaeological
resources, 28 years of experience.
12. Mr. Harrison Marshall, Community Planner, Planning and Environmental
Branch
Planner responsible for preparing the Community Impact Assessment,
7 years of experience in local government planning.
B. Federal Highway Administration
1. Mr. Roy C. Shelton., Operations Engineer
Engineer responsible for Federal-Aid projects in the state of North
Carolina, 30 years of experience.
2. Mr. Felix Davila, Area Engineer
Area Engineer responsible for Federal-Aid projects in Randolph County,
10 years of experience.
? 1
130+
lu7
I uoq?
701\
?IS6
?0 1737 n
2500 O!S
O
r 1]02
l 15+ 2157
03.08
715]
o,
1506
2]3] 1
7161 0 1
.I2 OJ 2160
° I /l e
2170 01
7167
I5c .07 `2163
.13 2167 y
p1 O 2161
E. aoile St r
19 15 _.Od ab .O
1601 p b 2163 /
213+
,+ 21115 '1Q t1 45 "'?
o 2176
1+96 .10 .07 .07 `} leg
leel 05.1
c ''s
,3e 2177 END PROJECT I 226,
gg I+vs
l a)b ,Y ? f, Il_
a
p
7 1 ?' nev / 77v3
21
•01 1217 `2110 ? 7
10 ]7]
0?73 t ?l"1-x" 2262 i' 1?
77 r .. .... .. .. .. .. .1 -.I }}e9 r. .032]]1
111 .$?I { '. ? i
t 0 .13 0 7292
t?. f
I r 1521 o E. 2115 _i ?.
fiAli ? a 12
W 11 n , .16
„!7 b 3• 1 O 2230 110
l uva
1 p

n 2247

? 1679 .15 2719

l!
1

468
, ?`? U
JI° 2721

.IS 3?66
21a+-

1167
a / 11 1 167
!
1 .?.. 03 06 03 `. !!
2760
203
0 1+?9 1?}
1
e y
'
?'

1
u

n
6_? t
J 1679 ryY F .
o7 os
i 2156 , I
lend 061
e

' - r1
a
1
z
l / fQ
!.
7 t
al .09 0 2231
. q ' `4
"
; BEGIN PROJECT .
buS.
1197 f 114e0 1%tl sw ?'? 6 ryq 770 --
. 11
1 1162 S1.
loo
/ ASHEBORO
° 'Op. 15,252
• 7716 0 01
«-- ---?--•? MOO .e5 ?5.tid
y l' 'la ,r 0,6 Sell.bvey ad, 10
as
_° lest \\1 Eop e7
76 1 ,_ 7191
i' ` thd-ae r~ G11ma
.1' Glenola I evel Cross r f
5... 5 1108 2 Llbert
8 "N
s
'~ 1 16 O Rendlema
Sol; Crays Chapel'
-
Worthvill Staley
1 R A N D L` P YH
or f rankh nv11 16
I ? ` Ed
ells a Ramseur
Ih
Asheb r e E '
1 I 'A
Farmer yy S Mount
Col
on ',l(fi?= a e / le en
'nas a Uw ARRIF 7 2
.s I(?" F' INI Seagrove
?4 n?Y1 Whyn01 _ _ L 1
L

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
FAVETTEVILLE STREET (US 220 BUSINESS)
FROM PRITCHARD STREET
TO OLD LIBERTY ROAD (SR 2261)
ASHEBORO,RANDOLPH COUNTY
TIP NO. 1-1-2200
0 kilometers om
0 miles 0.50 FIGURE 1
W Y Z
J
m Q
H
E o ?0?
M
fA J
Z o
0°
N
?.. N
V W =
U
0
WZ
F- _0
0 V
p W
Z (1)
MQ V)
00
ii
V U
W G
Z U)
O
G.
W 0
> w
LL Q,
E
E N I N
v
Z ?
Q W
m
U
E
O
M
o EE
O O
N
E N
(O ?
ri
(0 O (V
0 (E
M
E N
M
N
N I (V
E o
M_
0
Z W
m L
m F
W J Z
mQ0
H
UWU
a0v-i
CD 0
zz
cc
o 0
FIGURE 3
1500 BALFOUR ^ ,? 2165 /
IBAPT cH. 1500
' 4
BAiIEr STY ? E BAILEr $T G L9,lf
N O 5 L 22 5 9 rr ._
e ¢ 2173 S
01 ° a 21T 2254 r m - - IT - -
L4 9 9 1496 NDER < M000 O
T RE
$ 2173
S =
1496 =
f /
w BEASLEr . ST OF 261 2177
of
CE m
0 o C / /
1496 1497 BARBER a 1667
ST ° HUGHES
Z _
All z 2 ° LO SHI Er ST. /
an ¢ ` /
?A, 1494 Z TREMONT /
ncusH $r Sr
y? 0 0° L URIN 1494 /
1495 r 1694 D.
/ Loop Ro.
0170 C SAUNDEFIS IDE4
0 2180 If 2293
1493
2 ="
ART Up S T A, 2259
_?? J A HT S ?N
j 1492
/ .7NOSOR Da
-*lEr
wo00YuRr ?.a?.? R0. / 2258 = W
sT llj BI / °i 2257
? VERNO OR wEST MINSTER
ST
ll?w I 2289 2272 DR
CITY LIMIT I r
i t u
O W
11100 x
I I
I 0 229
" I 2272
I 1491 ST ? ? << E 2182 V `?
"o I Z
I '" 1 I 182
u sr I
/ sT. 2254 ".
RD. 2 i
WOOOCREST SCENIC 2250
/ ^ .T. OR 2247
' C 1490 _ OR. I fERN
I D _ j 224
I N LIMIT Q CRAVEN DR 2249
I N CITY °
L O TWAIN OR
47
: 224
2
0
?.y LEGEND PARK }
0 1 l METHODIST CH.
m I ?lOOKw00D - -DR _
OITY _ LIMIT
1483 - 1687 0 1
?O
I Oft Ty A 1 2184
r taT'J? I
° 1489
9 / Ian n ?
A/\ P (4 R r
r4)
l IU R °f MCMASERS 1487 a I
I I FAIRFAX 1736 1 a o 1488 I I 5 /
1 a
?T 1 ° MC i > I ??I f
1489 NEAL O /
MOUNTAIN J ST _ 1 I / O
PLUM MER ST' /
(, VIEW RAPT
1 CH z I 1486 c I 2260
111642 FAYETTEVILLE ST rr IRUNGI ST
H
RAPT CH --AM?7ON RD Y? I 2231
EM ° \ y I 1485 i `?-' ` 4C MCRARV //`
x O O iP
CAROLINA AVE. ST v
12 REET /
483 1 `----?? N PR1TCHARD 11 s
- W.'RITCN.RU ><,. E?
REST 91 FIGURE 4
I 2
RD s A CHURCH o
1 n = OF TABOR = t 21'
•482
_ w S T. =CHRIST a
UBERIT an °
CT. F ?¦
r
-0 It
Appendix A - Figures

US 220
(Bus)
0
,o
44 ? C,6200
0
2500 ' 100
SR 2201 7800 7000 SR 2261
(Vision Dr.) PM PM (Old Liberty Rd.)
60 © 10 3000 4800 10 -? 60
(3' 2) (3, 2)
21200
-100 100
SR 1492 600 400 SR 2180
70 Q PM 10 500. 200 10 PMT 60
(1, 1J (i 1)
21900
00
Woodberrv Street inn
PM
60 a- 10 100-
.
(1, 1)
21900
100-
V
100
alley Drive

100- 10 -Fs 60
(1, 1)
21900
100
200 Rainbow Drive
PM (SR 2181)
100 10 -ta 60
(1, 1)
Vernon Street inn
21900
100-
PM
60.4- 10
(1, 1)
SR 1491 300
100- ,
21900
200 2700
3600
SR 2182
60 Ca PM 10 100 900 10 PM- 60 (Allred St.)

0000
100-
Legend 100 Nance Street
10 PMT 60 (SR 2232)
XXX VPD Vehicle/Day 100•
(1, 1J
DHV Design Hourly Volume (Y.) Estimated 1996 ADT Volumes
D Directional Flow (Y.) 20000
US 220 Business
PM PM Peak
Widen to a five lane curb and gutter
(0,0) Duals
TTST (Y.) Match-71ne A--A
,
US 220 (Bus) facility from Pritchard Street to
Note: DHV-0D SR 2261 (Old Liberty Rd.)
Indicates the direction D Count : Randolph Division 8
Reverse flow direction for AM Peak TIP # U-2200 Date: March, 96
Drawing not to scale Work Order # 8.1571301 -
FIGURE 5A
_c
US 220
(BUS)
Match line A-A -
20000
100-
Woodcrest Road 100
60 10 100-
cF PM
(1, 1)
20000
100-
5700
100-
20000
SR 1489 300 100
60 PM 10 200
(1, 1)
200
SR 1486 900
PM
60 a 10 700
(1, 1)
Fairfield Street
PM
10 --? 60
(1, 1)
20600
100
200 Sterling Street
10-PMT 60 (SR 2231)
100 (1, 1)
20600

SR 14
5 300
8
900
60 ©PM 10 600
(2, 1)
20900
100
?- 100 Carolina Avenue
PM
t o0 10 -D- 60
(1, 1)
Legend
XXX VPD Vehlcle/Day
DHV Design Hourly Volume (Y.)
D Directional Flow (%)
PM PM Peak
(0,0) Duals, TTST (Y.)
Note: DHV -® D
Indicates the direction D
Reverse flow direction for AM Peak
Drawing not to scale
20900
4100
5700 Pritchard Street

1600 60 -0- 10
o
m (2, 1)
?Q? Estimated 1996 ADT Volumes
a I 18400 US 220 Business
Widen to a five lane curb and gutti
facility from Pritchard Street to
US 220 SR 2261 (Old Liberty Rd.)
(Bus) County: Randolph Division
FIGURE 5B

US 220
(B
0 us)
b
a4
30000

0

SR 2261 12 4100 200
800 9000 SR 2261
(Vision Dr.) PM
60 © 10
4900
5000
PM (Old Liberty Rd.)

(3, 2) 10
60
(3, 2)
35600

SR 1492 100 200
900 600 SR 2180
70 CI-PM 10 800. 400 M

(2, 1) 10-
© 60
(2 1)
36500

W 100
oodberry Street 200
60 - 10 100
(1, 1)
36500
100
100
Valley Drive
100 10 PM
>
60
(1, !)
36500
100
400 Rainbow Drive
300
10 PM- 3 80 (SR 2181)
(1, 1)
36700
100
Vernon Street 200
60 ©PM 10
(t. 1) 100
36700
900 4400
SR 1491 400 5900 SR 2182
60 o- M 10 100 1500 10 PP 60 (Allred St.)
(2, 1) (2, 1)
3600
100
Legend 200 Nance Street

XXX VPD Vehicle/Day

1 10- PM
-,? 60 (SR 2232)

DHV Design Hourly Volume (%) 00 (1 1)
Estimated 2020 ADT Volumes
D Directional Flow (%) 33600

PM PM Peak US 220 Business

(0,0) Duals, TTST (%)
Match-ire A-ZA Widen to a five lane curb and g

Note: DHV->D
US 220 (Bus) facility from Pritchard Street 1
SR 2261 (Old Liberty Rd.)
Indicates the direction D Count : Randolph Divisi
Reverse flow direction for AM Peak

Drawing not to scale TIP # U-2200 Date: March, 91
Work Order # 8.1571301
FIGURE 5C

US 220
(Bus)
Match line A-A
33600
100 '
Woodcrest Road 200
60 PM 10 100
(1, 1)
33600
100
100
33600
SR 1489 100
400
60 ©PM 10 300
(2, 1)
300
1486 1300
60 a PM 10 1000
(2, 1)
34500
100
34700
400
SR 1485 1300
60 ©PM 10 900
(2, 1)
35200
100
100
35200
5900
Legend 2400
XXX VPD Vehicle/Day
DHV Design Hourly Volume (Ye) Q N
D Directional Flow (%) I 31700
a
PM PM Peak c
(0,0) Duals, TTST (Ye) ^
Note: DHV- 0 D US 220
Indicates the direction D (Bus)
Reverse flow direction for AM Peak
Drawing not to scale
200 Fairfield Street
PM
10 60
( 1)
400 Sterling Street
10 Pte" 60 (SR 2231)
(1, 1)
200 Carolina Avenue
PM
10 -® 60
(1, 1)
8300 Pritchard S
80 .4 M 10
(2, 1)
Estimated 2020 ADT Volumes
US 220 Business
Widen to a five lane curb and gutter
facility from Pritchard Street to
SR 2261 (Old Liberty Rd.)
County: Randolph Division 8
T/P # U-2200 Date: March,96
Work Order # 8.1571301
FIGURE 5D
Appendix B - Letters
CONCURRENCE FORM FOR PROPERTIES NOT ELIGIBLE FOR
THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES
Brief Project Description
O
On representatives of the
L/ North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
Fcd al Highway Administration (FHNvA)
: orth Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)
Other
a
revlcN%cd the subject project at
A scoping meeting
?storic architectural resources pitotoer.iplt rcvic«' scssiorn/consultat ion
Other
Ill panics present acrccd
there arc no propcrtics over fife years old within the proicct s area of potential effects.
there arc no properties less than fifty %cars old x0lch arc considcrcd to meet Criterion
Consideration G wahin the projcct's area of potential effects.
-Zthere arc properties over fits years old (list attached) mthin the projcct's area of potential
but based on the historical information available and the photographs of each propcm, properties
identified as PlEbWAT- R1/ MM I? ???aa 1?1jNjFj arc considcrcd not ciigicie
for National Register and no further evaluation of them is ncccssan .
there arc no National Register-listed properties within the project's area of potential effects.

R,:6 cscntat:vc. `,VCDOT
FH vA, for tlic i
Representative, S
State Historic Prc

o .?L
vision Administrator, or other Federal Agency
H 0
scrvation Officer i

Date '
ri 2- . I
Date
1 S/y d
--,--
Date
Wa surwy report is prepared, a final coo}• of this fornt and the attached list MII be included.
B-1
4 J ? = jvt
??ssf
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT. JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS R. SAMUEL HUNT I I I
GOVERNOR P.O. BOY 25201. RALEIGH. N.C. 27611-5201 SECRETAR)
June 14, 1996
TIP Project: U-2200
County: Randolph
Description: Widening of US 220 Business (Fayetteville Street) in Asheboro, from Pritchard Street
to Old Liberty Road (SR 2261)
MEMORANDUM:
TO: H. Franklin Vick. P.E.. Manauer
Plannina and Environmental Branch
Attention: Derrick Weaver, Project Planning Engineer
From: y? G. C. Faulkner. Design Review Engineer
I Congestion Management Section Vv
Subject: Review of Capacity Analysis for TIP Project U-2200
As requested, the Plan Review Group of the Traffic Engineering and Safety Systems Branch has
completed a preliminary revieNv of the subject project. Capacity Analyses were performed utilizing the
2020 design year traffic projections for all three intersections in order to determine operational levels of
service (LOS). Based on our review and discussions with the Area Traffic Engineering staff, we would
like to offer the following traffic related comments that should enhance the safety and operations of this
facility.
US 220 (Business) / SR 2261 (Old Libertv Rd. and Vision Dr.)
A traffic signal currently exists at the US 220 Business / SR 2261 (Old Liberty Rd. and Vision Dr.)
intersection. Considering the volume of through traffic on US 220 business at this intersection, we
recommend that the proposed multilane improvements be provided through this intersection. We also
recommend that exclusive right turn lanes be provided on both US 220 Business approaches. If these
improvements are provided (See Figure 1), we expect this intersection to function at a "D" LOS in the
2020 design year. However, we do expect queue problems to develop on some of the left turn
approaches. Therefore, consideration should be given to providing dual left turn lanes on the westbound
SR 2261 approach and on northbound US 220 Business. If these improvements are provided, we expect
this intersection to function at a "C" LOS in the 2020 design vear (See Figure 2).
B-2
H. Fr,,nklin Vick, P.E.
June 14, 1996
Page 2
US 220 (Business) 'SR 1401-SR 21S' (Allred St.)
The US 220 (Business) / SR 1491-SR 21S2 (Allred St.) intersection is currently signalized. We have
concerns with the existing offset intersection condition at this location. Therefore. we recommend
realigning SR 1491 - SR 21 S2 to eliminate this condition and improve the overall safety and operations
of the intersection. We expect this intersection to function at a "B" LOS in the .AM and at a "C" LOS in
the P1vl peak hour of the 2020 design year.
US 220 (Business) / PHichard St
.A traffic signal currently exists at the US 220 Business / Pritchard St. intersection. We recommend that
an exclusive right turn lane be provided on northbound US 220 Business to accommodate tile larae
volume of right turn vehicles. In order to improve traffic operations and safety, an exclusive left and
right turn lane on the Pritchard Street approach is recommended. If the intersection geometry shown in
Figure 3 is provided, we expect this intersection to function at a "B" LOS in the 2020 design vear. It
would, however, be desirable to provide dual southbound left turn lanes on US 220 Business to reduce
the expected queue length at this intersection. It should also be noted that we have concerns with the
adjacent street intersection on US 220 (approximately 200 feet) north of the Pritchard St. intersection.
We recommend that this street either be restricted to right irt/right out movements or removed altoeether.
th r
The remaining intersections within the project limits are currently unsignalized. No new traffic signals
are currently recommended as part of this project. Consideration should be Given to realigning all
skewed intersections to provide a more desirable angle with US 220 to improve sight distances and
overall safety of the intersections.
If any additional information is required. please contact Derrick Lewis or mvself at 250-4151.
GCF/DWL:tsf
Attachments
cc: G. T. Shearin. P.E. (Attention
F. E. Whitesell, P.E.
N. C. Crowe. P.E. (Attention:
T. A. Peoples. P.E. (Attention
R. Canales, P.E.
T. M. Hopkins. P.E.
Sandra Stepney, P.E.)
D. W. Privette P.E.)
E. Y. Stafford)

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
March 13, 1996
MEMORANDUM
TO: H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
Department of Transp.prtation
FROM: David Brook i"?' (. L
Deputy State is ervation Officer
SUBJECT: Improvements to US 220 in Asheboro from
Pritchard Street to Old Liberty Road (SR 2261),
Randolph County, U-2200, Federal Aid Project
STP-2206(1), State Project 8.1571301, 96-E-
4220-0565
Division of Archives and History
Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
We have received information concerning the above project from the State
Clearinghouse.
We have conducted a search of our maps and files and have located the following
structures of historical or architectural importance within the general area of the
project:
Randolph Dairy, 920 North Fayetteville Street
Piedmont Electric Machine & Welding Company, 1 100 North Fayetteville
Street
Both of these properties were recorded during the 1978 inventory of historic
architectural resources in Asheboro and were included in The Architectural History
of Randolph County, N.C., published in 1985. We recommend that an architectural
historian with the North Carolina Department of Transportation evaluate these
buildings for National Register of Historic Places eligibility, survey the area of
potential effect for buildings over fifty years old, and report the findings to us.
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.
109 East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807
g0'
B-3
H. F. Vick
March 13, 1996, Page 2
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations
for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental
review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
DB:slw. .
cc: 'z
State Clearinghouse
N. Graf
B. Church
T. Padgett
II • RELOCATION REPORT II
North Carolina Department of Transportation
AREA RELOCATION OFFICE
El E.I.S. [-] CORRIDOR F-1 DESIGN
PROJECT: 8.1571301 COUNTY Randol ph Altemate 1 of 1 Alternate
I.D. NO.: U-2200 F.A. PROJECT STP-2203 1
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Fayetteville St. (US 220 Bus.), Asheboro

ESTIMATED DISPLACEES INCOME LEVEL
Type of
Dis lacees Owners Tenants Total Minorities 0-15M 15-25M 25-35M 35-50M 50 UP
Residential 1 2 3 1 1 2 0 0 0
Businesses 2 5 7 1 VALUE OF DWELLING DS8 DWELLING AVAILABLE
Farms 0 0 0 0 Owners Tenants For Sale For R ent
Non-Pmflt 0 0 0 0 0,20M 0 $0-150 0 0.20M 0 $ 0-150 0
ANSWE R ALL QUESTIONS 2040M 0 150-250 0 2040M 0 150-250 0
Yes No Explain all "YES" answers. 40-70M 1 250400 2 40-70M 12 25000 6
X 1. Will special relocation services be necessary? 70-100m 0 400400 0 70-100M 22 400.500 9
X 2. Will schools or churches be affect by 100 up 0 500 UP 0 100 UP 15 50o UP 10
displacement? TOTAL 1 2 49 25
X 3. Will business services still be available after REMARKS (Respond b dumber
project? 3. Location is downtown Asheboro, so all services will
X 4. Will any business be displaced? If so, still be available.
indicate size, type, estimated number of 4. (A) Faun Credit - 4 to 6 employees.
employees, minorities, etc. (B) Vanco Repair - 2 to 4 employees.
X 5. Will relocation cause a housing shortage? (C) Piedmont Electric - 8 to 12 employees.
6. Source for available housing (list). (D) Northgate (obscured) - unknown
X 7. Will additional housing programs be needed? (E) Nasty's Military Outlet - 3 to 5 employees.
X 8. Should Last Resort Housing be considered? (F) La Princita - 2 to 4 employees.
X 9. Are there large, disabled, elderly, etc. (G) Vacant business - no employees at present
families? 6. MLS, brokers
X 10 . Will public housing be needed for project? 8. Dwellings are old, replacements will likely cost much
X 11. Is public housing available? more. Rents would be higher also.
X 12 . Is it felt there will be adequate DSS housing 9. This is always possible.
housing available during relocation period? 11. Limited availability, but this is seldom chosen by
X 13. Will there be a problem of housing within displacees.
financial means? 12. Asheboro has much housing available.
X 14. Are suitable business sites available (list 13. See #8 above.
source). 14. Commercial brokers advise that properties are available
15. Number months estimated to complete all over Asheboro.
mmocAmm? Ei hteen 18 ' ?:
NOTE: Aerial photographs do not reveal enough certain
information to be precise In the count of probable
displacees. This is an estimate only.
A. M. Simpson 8-21-98 2Q
Relocation Agent Date Approved b Date
Forth 13.4 kov"M 02193 d
Original 8 1 Copy: State Relocerion Agent
2 Copy Arse Relocation Office
.B-"
Citp of Ztzbeboro
146 -Oortb Cburtb btreet
30. ®. isox 1106
Msbpboro, .0. C. 27204 -1 1 06
February 9, 1998
Mr. H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611
Dear Mr. Vick,
'Met: 910-626-1200
JFax: 910 -626 -1218

The purpose of this letter is to request the status of NCDOT project No. U2200
which involves the widening of North Fayetteville Street from Pritchard Street
to Old Liberty Road and to request that this project be expanded to include bicycle
lanes on both sides of North Fayetteville Street.
It is my understanding that there is currently enough right-of-way to include
the bicycle lanes along with the proposed five lanes with sidewalks, curb and
gutter. The City of Asheboro is extremely interested in improving our pedestrian
facilities including bicycle trails.
Please consider this letter as an official request to include the bicycle lanes and
the sidewalks on both sides of North Fayetteville Street. I understand that the
sidewalks will be on a participating basis with the City of Asheboro sharing in the
cost. I would appreciate an estimate of the City's cost for the sidewalk
construction for budget purposes.
Thank you for your help in this project. If you have questions, please give me
a call.
DBL/jbc
cc: Tom Norman
incerely,
David B. Leonard
City Manager
= of W T Xuningjral ILA
Ir. Mo'? ti?
RANDOLPH COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
Randolph County Office Building • 725 McDowell Road • P. O. Box 771
Asheboro, North Carolina 27204-0771
March 8, 1996
H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Department of Transportation
P O Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611-5201
SUBJECT: US 220 Business, From Pritchard Street, to Old Liberty Road
(SR2261), Asheboro, Randolph County, Federal Aid Project
No. STP-220B(1), State Project No. 8.1571301, TIP Project
No. U-2200
Dear Mr. Vick:
[phone]
FAX: [phone]

r
°'- ?" 194
County Commissioner Chairman Phil Kemp has asked me to respond to your letter
of February 27, 1996, relative to the above referenced project.
The County supports this much needed improvement to US 220 Business in
Asheboro. The entire project will fall within the planning and regulating jurisdiction of the
City of Asheboro. As such, there are no Randolph County permits or approvals required as
a result of this project.
If you have any further questions, please contact me.
Sincerely,

Hal Johnson, Director
Planning and Development
cc: Phil Kemp, Chairman
Board of County Commissioners
HJ/lpw
- TOLL FREE NUMBERS -
Greensboro-Liberty Area: 218-4555 / Archdale-Trinity Area: 819-3555
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, _
Health and Natural Resources ffl?A •
Legislative & Intergovernmental Affairs
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary pEHNFR
Henry M. Lancaster II, Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Chrys Baggett
State Clearinghouse
FROM: Melba McGee
Environmental Review Coordinator
RE: 96-0565 SR 2261 to Pritchard Street in Asheboro, Randolph County
DATE: April 2, 1996
The Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources has reviewed
the proposed information. The attached comments.are for your consideration.
Thank you for the opportunity to review.
attachments
REcavED
APR P_ m,
N.C. STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
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
?EHNR
March 26, 1996
HEMORANDUX
TO: Melba McGee, Legislative & Intergovernmental Affairs
FROM: Monica Swihar?', Water Quality Planning
SUBJECT: Project Review #96-0565; Scoping Comments - NC DOT
Proposed Improvements to US 220 Business in Asheboro,
TIP#U-220 , Cape Fear Subbasin 03-06-09
The Water Quality Section of the Division of Environmental
Management requests that the following topics be discussed in the
environmental documents prepared on the subject project:
A. Identify the streams potentially impacted by the project.
The stream classifications should be current.
B. Identify the linear feet of stream channelizations/
relocations. If the original stream banks were vegetated,
it is requested that the channelized/relocated stream banks
be revegetated.
C. Number of stream crossings.
D. Will permanent spill catch basins be utilized? DEM requests
that these catch basins be placed at all water supply stream
crossings. Identify the responsible party for maintenance.
E. Identify the stormwater controls (permanent and temporary)
to be employed. DEM recommends that no weep holes be
installed in bridges that drain directly into surface
waters.
F. Please ensure that sediment and erosion and control measures
are not placed in wetlands.
G. Wetland Impacts
1) Identify the federal manual used for identifying and
delineating jurisdictional wetlands.
2) Have wetlands been avoided as much as possible?
3) Have wetland impacts been minimized?
4) Discuss wetland impacts by plant communities affected.
5) Discuss the quality of wetlands impacted.
6) Summarize the total wetland impacts.
7) List the 401 General Certification numbers requested
from DEM.
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
March 26, 1996
Page 2
H. Will borrow locations be in wetlands? Borrow/waste areas
should avoid wetlands to the maximum extent practicable.
Prior to approval of any borrow/waste site in a wetland, the
contractor shall obtain a 401 Certification from DEM.
I. Did NCDOT utilize the existing road alignments as much as
possible? Why not (if applicable)?
J. To what extent can traffic congestion management techniques
alleviate the traffic problems in the study area?
K. Please provide a conceptual mitigation plan to help the
environmental review. The mitigation plan may state the
following:
1. Compensatory mitigation will be considered only after
wetland impacts have been avoided and minimized to the
maximum extent possible.
2. On-site, in-kind mitigation is the preferred method of
mitigation. In-kind mitigation within the same
watershed is preferred over out-of-kind mitigation.
3. Mitigation should be in the following order:
restoration, creation, enhancement, and lastly banking.
Please note that a 401 Water Quality Certification cannot be
issued until the conditions of NCAC 15A: 01C.0402 (Limitations on
Actions During NCEPA Process) are met. This regulation prevents
DEM from issuing the 401 Certification until a FONSI or Record of
Decision (ROD) has been issued by the Department requiring the
document. If the 401 Certification application is submitted for
review prior to issuance of the FONSI or ROD, it is recommended
that the applicant state that the 401 will not be issued until
the applicant informs DEM that the FONSI or ROD has been signed
by the Department.
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 or water impacts have not
been avoided and minimized to the maximum extent practicable.
11203.mem
cc: Eric Galamb
NORTH CAROLINA STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
FM209 OFDARTMENT OF A')MINISTRATION
116 WEST JONFS STREET
RALEIGH NORTH CAROLINA 27603-8001
04-02-96
INTFR!,OVFRNMFNTAL REVIEW COMMENTS
MAILED T0: F40M:
N.C. DEPT. IF TRANSPORTATION MRS. CHRYS BAGGFTT
FRANK VICK nTRFCTOR
PLANN'. E FNV. PRANCH N C STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
TRANSDORTATION RL7G./I^!TFR-0FF
PROJECT OFSCR IOTICIN:
SCOPI'VG - PPOPrF=n IMPROV_MGNTS TO US 220 BUSINESS IN ASHr9OR0?
FROM DRITCHARn STPGGT TO OLD LIBERTY on, (SR ?261); TIP #U-2200
SAT NO 96F422On565 PROGRAM TITLE - SCORING,
THE A?OVA" PROJECT HAS RFFN SUPMTTTFD TO THE NORTH CAROLINA
INTER ^VFRNMENTAL RFVTEW OR7CFSS. AS A RFSULT OE THE REVIEW TH= FOLLOWING
IS SU9MITTFn= ( ) NO COMMENTS WERE RFCFIVFC
( X) COMMENTS ATTACHED
SHOULD YOU HAVE ANY 01JESTIONSp PLEASE CALL THIS OFFICE [phone].
C. C. R=G TON n G E 1
APR 0 4 1996
UiViSIGN OF
HIGHWAYS

® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission 0
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188,919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee
Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs, DEHNR
FROM: David Cox, Highway Project C r
I iabitat Conservation Program
DATE: March 29, 1996
SUBJECT: Request for information from the N. C. Department of Transportation
(NCDOT) regarding fish and wildlife concerns for US 220 Business, from
SR 2261 (Old Liberty Road) to Pritchard Street in Asheboro, Randolph
County, North Carolina, TIP No. U-2200, SCH Project No. 96-0565.
This memorandum responds to a request from Mr. H. Franklin Vick of the
NCDOT for our concerns regarding impacts on fish and wildlife resources resulting from
the subject project. Biologists on the staff of the N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission
(NCWRC} have reviewed the proposed improvements, and our comments are provided in
accordance with provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C.
4332(2)(c)) and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16
U.S.C. 661-667d).
At this time the NCWRC has no specific recommendations or concerns regarding
the sut?ject project. However, to help facilitate document preparation and the review
process, our general informational needs are outlined below:
I . Description of fishery and wildlife resources within the project area,
including a listing of federally or state designated threatened, endangered,
or special concern species. Potential borrow areas to be used for project
construction should be included in the inventories. A listing of designated
plant species can be developed through consultation with:
The Natural Heritage Program
N. C. Division of Parks and Recreation
P. O. Box 27687
Raleigh, N. C. 27611
[phone]
and,
I4I,Wr m_r rrnLLO LMNL ILL fly-?1G-y J.? rldt' Ly ?b 1b:2"' NO.UlU F.05
Memo 2 _ March 29, 1996
NCDA Plant Conservation Program
P. O. Box 27647
Raleigh, N. C. 27611
[phone]
2. Description of any streams or wetlands affected by the project. The need for
channelizing or relocating portions of streams crossed and the extent of
such activities.
3. Cover type maps showing wetland acreages impacted by the project.
Wetland acreages should include all project-related areas that may undergo
hydrologic change as a result of ditching, other drainage, or filling for
project construction. Wetland identification may be accomplished through
coordination with the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE), If the COE
is not consulted, the person delineating wetlands should be identified and
criteria listed.
4. Cover type maps showing acreages of upland wildlife habitat impacted by the
proposed project. Potential borrow sites should be included.
5. The extent to which the project will result in loss, degradation, or
fragmentation of wildlife habitat (wetlands or uplands).
6. Mitigation fbr avoiding, minimizing or compensating for direct and indirect
degradation in habitat quality as well as quantitative losses.
7. A cumulative impact assessment section which analyzes the environmental
effects of highway construction and quantifies the contribution of this
individual project to environmental degradation.
8. A discussion of the probable impacts on natural resources which will result
from secondary development facilitated by the improved road access.
9. If construction of this facility is to be coordinated with other state, municipal,
or private development projects, a description of these projects should be
included in the environmental document, and all project sponsors should
be identified.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide input in the early planning stages for
this project. If we can further assist your office, please contact David Cox, Highway
Project Coordinator, at [phone].
cc: U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Raleigh
State of North Carolina
hopzirtment of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW - PROJECT COMMENTS
I Reviewing Office. GAS P_ t) 1
Project Number: Due Date:
4e, - D Se. 5 3141 c)
After review of this project it has been determined that the EHNR permit(s) and/or approvals indicated may need to be obtained in
order for this project to comply with North Carolina Law.
Questions regarding these permits should be addressed to the Regional Office indicated on the reverse of the form.
All applications. information and guidelines relative to these plans and permits are available from the same
Regional Office. Normal Process
Time
PERMITS SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REQUIREMENTS (statutory time
limit)
I Permit to construct b operate wastewater treatment
? facilities, sewer system extensions. d sewer
systems not discharging into state surface waters
Z DES - permit to discharge into surface water and/or
ermit to operate and construct wastewater facilities
discharging into state surface waters
Application 90 days before begin construction or award of
construction contracts On-site inspection. Post-application
technical conference usual
Application 180 days before begin activity. On-site inspection
Pre-application conference usual Additionally. obtain permit to
construct wastewater treatment facility-granted after NPDES Reply
time. 30 days after receipt of plans or issue of NPDES
permit-whichever is later.
30 days
(90 days)
90.120 days
(N'AI
? Water use Permit
? Well Construction Permit
r7 Dredge and Fill Permit
? Permit to construct 3 operate Air Pollution Abatement
facilities and/or Emission Sources as per 15A NCAC 21
Any-.open burning associated with subject proposal
Q --must be in compliance with 15A NCAC 2D.0520
Demohuon-bi renovations of structures containing
esbeslos material must be in compliance with 15A
CAC 2D.0525 which requires notification and removal
prior to demolition. Contact Asbestos Control Group
?I Complex Source Permit required under 15A NCAC 2D.0800.
Pre-application technical conference usually necessary
Complete application must be received and permit issued
prior to the installation of a well
Application copy must be served on each adjacent riparian property
owner. On-site inspection. Pre.application conference usual Filling
may require Easement to Fill from N.C. Department of
Administration and Federal Dredge and Fill Permit.
N/A
N/A
30 days
(N,Ai
7 days
(15 days)
55 days
(90 days)
60 days
(90 days)
68 days
196 days)
29 days
(30 daysi
(39 days)
3e days
164 days)
1 day
(N/A)
The Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 must be properly addressed for any land disturbing activity An erosion & sedimentaui
control plan will be required if one or more acres to be disturbed. Plan filed with proper Regional Office (Land Quality Secl.) at least 30
days before be innin activity A fee of $30 for the first acre and $20.00 for each additional acre or art must accompany the plan
? The Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 must be addressed with respect to the referrenced Local Ordinance:
?I Mining Permit
?I North Carolina Burning permit
On-site inspection usual. Surety bond filed with EHNR. Bond amount
varies with type mine and number of acres of affected land Any area
mined greater than one acre must be permiled. The appropriate bond
must be received before the permit can be issued
On-site inspection by N.C. Division Forest Resources if permit
exceeds 4 days
? Special Ground Clearance Burning Permit • 22 On-site inspection by N.D. Division Forest Resources required "if more
counties in coastal N.C. with organic soils than live acres of ground clearing activities are involved. Inspections
should be requested at least ten days before actual burn is planned."
?I Oil Refining Facilities
?I Dam Safety Permit
1 day
(N/A)
N/A
90.120 days
(NIA)

If permit required. application 60 days before begin construction
Applicant must hire N.C. qualified engineer to: prepare plans

inspect construction. certify construction Is according to EHNR approv. 30 days
ed plans. May also require permit under mosquito control program. And (60 days)
a 404 permit from Corps of Engineers. An inspection of site is neces-
sary to verily Hazard Classification. A minimum fee of 9200.00 must ac.
company the application. An additional processing lee based on a
percentage or the total project cost will be required upon completion
Continued on reverse
Norma Pro, st
Tim

El-
El.
•

PERMITS SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REQUIREMENTS (st 7u.. ne
limit)
File surety bond of $5,000 with EHNR running to State of N.C 10 days
Permit to drill exploratory oil or gas well conditional that any well opened by drill operator shall, upon (N/A)
abandonment, be plugged according to EHNR rules and regulations
Geophysical Exploration Permit Application filed with EHNR at least 10 days prior to issue of permit 10 days
Application by letter. No standard application form. (NIA)
State Lakes Construction Permit Application fee based on structure size is charged. Must include 15.20 clays
descriptions b drawings of structure d proof of ownership (N/A)
of riparian property.

_40-1Water Ouality Certification
N/A 60 days
(130 days)

CAMA Permit for MAJOR development
5250.00 fee must accompany application 55 clays
(150 days)

CAMA Permit for MINOR development
$50.00 fee must accompany application 22 days
(25 clays)
Several geodetic monuments are located in or near the project area If any monuments need to be moved or destroyed. please notify
N.C Geodetic Survey, Box 27687. Raleigh. N.C 27611
Abandonment of any wells. if required, must be in accordance with Title 15A, Subchapter 2C.0100
Notification of the proper regional office is requested if "orphan" underground storage tanks (USTS) are discovered during any excavation operation
Compliance with 15A NCAC 2H.1000 (Coastal Stormwater Rules) is required. 45 days
(N!A)
Other comments (attach
additional pages as necessary, being certain to cite comment authority).
/
?
?
?
?
REGIONAL OFFICES
Questions regarding these permits should be addressed to the Regional Office marked below.
? Asheville Regional Office ? Fayetteville Regional Office
59 Woodfin Place Suite 714 Wachovia Building
Asheville, NC 28801 Fayetteville, INC 28301
[phone] [phone]
? Mooresville Regional Office
919 North Main Street, P.O. Box 950
Mooresville, INC 28115
[phone]
? Washington Regional Office
1424 Carolina Avenue
Washington, NC 27889
(919) 9466481
XWinston•Salem Regional Office
8
025 North Point Blvd.
Suite 100
Winston-Salem, NC 27106
[phone]
? Raleigh Regional Office
3800 Barrett Drive, Suite 101
Raleigh, NC 27609
[phone]
? Wilmington Regional Office
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, INC 28405
[phone]
r ?
I
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
- P.O. BOX 1890 50"
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890 ?:••
REPLY TO
ATTENTION OF May 23, 1996 ---- -
Special Studies and
Flood Plain Services Section
Mr. H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
North Carolina Division of Highways
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Vick:
MAY 3 0 1996 r
avlslav of
HIGHWAYS
This is in response to your letter of February 27, 1996, requesting our comments
on "US 220 Business, From Pritchard Street to Old Liberty Road (SR 2261), Asheboro,
Randolph County, Federal Aid Project No. STP-22013(1), State Project No. 8.1571301,
TIP Project No. U-2200" (Regulatory Branch Action I.D. No. 199602208).
Our comments involve impacts to flood plains and jurisdictional resources, which
include waters, wetlands, and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers projects. The proposed
roadway improvements would not cross any Corps-constructed flood control or
navigation project. Enclosed are our comments on the other issues.
We appreciate the opportunity to comment on this project. If we can be of further
assistance, please contact us.
Sincerely,
C. E. , Jr., P.E.
Acting Chief, Engineering and
Planning Division
Sh ord
Enclosure
May 23, 1996
Page 1 of 1
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS. WILMINGTON DISTRICT, COMMENTS ON:
"US 220 Business, From Pritchard Street to Old Liberty Road (SR 2261), Asheboro,
Randolph County, Federal Aid Project No. STP-22013(1), State Project No. 8.1571301,
TIP Project No. U-2200" (Regulatory Branch Action I.D. No. 199602208)
1. FLOOD PLAINS: POC - Mr. Bobby L. Willis, Special Studies and Flood Plain
Services Section, at [phone]
The proposed project is located in the city of Asheboro which participates in the
National Flood Insurance Program. From a review of Panels 6 and 12 of the July 1981
City of Asheboro, North Carolina Flood Insurance Rate Map, the roadway is not
indicated as being within an identified flood hazard area. However, based on a review
of the pertinent United States Geological Survey 1:24000 scale topographic map,
"Asheboro, N.C.", photorevised in 1981, the southern half of the roadway project runs
very close to an unnamed tributary to Hasketts Creek and could encroach on the flood
plain. But due to the lack of drainage area (approximately 0.3 square mile or less) and
the topography of the area, we do not believe that there would be a significant flood
plain to be impacted at this location.
2. WATERS AND WETLANDS: POC - Ms. Jean B. Manuele. Raleigh Field Office.
Reaulatory Branch, at [phone], Extension 24
Our Regulatory Branch has reviewed your letter and provided the following
comments. A review of the information provided and available maps indicate that there
may be impacts to an unnamed tributary of Hasketts Creek that runs parallel to the
existing road, as well as several of its feeder streams. Any discharge of excavated or
fill material into these creeks and/or any adjacent wetlands that may be present will
require Department of the Army (DA) permit authorization, which may include various
Nationwide Permits (Numbers 14, 18, and/or 26), depending upon the amount of
jurisdictional waters of the U.S. and their associated wetlands to be impacted, and the
type of construction techniques to be employed.
Due to the limited information provided regarding the extent of jurisdictional
impacts associated with the proposed project, we will be unable to provide specific
comments concerning DA permit requirements until additional data is furnished. This
data should include the number of wetland crossings and the amount of jurisdictional
impacts for each creek crossing along the corridor. When this information becomes
available, it should be forwarded to our office for review and comment, as well as a
determination of DA nationwide permit eligibility.
Any questions related to DA permits for this project should be addressed to
Mrs. Manuele.
stM ??
'J ° ? r 3 F
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR.
GOVERNOR
P.O. BOX 25201. RALEIGH. N.C. 27611-5201
February 23, 1999
MEMORANDUM TO:
FROM:
Teresa Hart, Unit Head
Project Planning Unit
Jim Hauser` A
E. NORRIS TOLSON
SECRETARY
SUBJET: Water resource permits for proposed widening of US 220
Business from Pritchard Street (SR 3590) to Old Liberty
Road (SR 2261), Asheboro, Randolf County, Federal Aid
Project No. STP-22013(1), State Project No. 8.1571301, TIP
No. U-2200.
ATTENTION: Michele James, Project Manager
Project Planning Unit
No jurisdictional surface waters or wetlands will be impacted by the proposed project TIP
U-2200, as per the Natural Resources Technical Report. Therefore, no water resources
permits are required for construction.
cc: V. Charles Bruton
Hal Bain
File: U-2200
Z•
Appendix C
Table Al
CAL30HC: LINE SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL - VERSION 2.0, JANUARY 1992
JOB: U-2200: US 220, Randolph County RUN: US 220, Build, Year 2000
SITE & METEOROLOGICAL VARIABLES
-------------------------------
VS = .0 CM/S VD = .0 CM/S ZO = 108. CM
U - 1.0 M/S CLAS - 4 (D) ATIM = 60. MINUTES M1XH = 1000. M AMB = 1.8 PPM
LINK VARIABLES
--------------
LINK DESCRIPTION * LINK COORDINATES (M)
* X1 Y1 X2
------------------------ -----------------------------
1. Far Lane Link * 10.8 -805.0 10.8
2. Near Lane Link * .0 805.0 .0
*
Y2
----------
805.0
-805.0
LENGTH BRG TYPE
(M) (DEG)
----------------
1610. 360. AG
1610. 180. AG
VPH EF H W V/C QUEUE
(G/MI) (M) (M) (VEH)
----------------------------------
1165. 17.8 .0 13.2
1165. 17.8 .0 13.2
RECEPTOR LOCATIONS
------------------
* COORDINATES (M)
RECEPTOR * X Y Z
------------------------- *-------------------------------------*
1. R/W, 15.25m From CL * -9.9 .0 1.8
MODEL RESULTS
-------------
REMARKS : In search of the angle corresponding to
the maximum concentration, only the first
angle, of the angles with same maximum
concentrations, is indicated as maximum.
WIND ANGLE RANGE: 0.-360.
WIND * CONCENTRATION
ANGLE * (PPM)
(DEGR)* REC1
MAX * 3.3
DEGR. * 8
THE HIGHEST CONCENTRATION IS 3.30 PPM AT 8 DEGREES FROM REC1 .
Table A2:
CAL30HC: LINE SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL - VERSION 2.0, JANUARY 1992
JOB: U-2200: US 220, Randolph County RUN: US 220, Build, Year 2020
SITE 8 METEOROLOGICAL VARIABLES
-------------------------------
VS - .0 CM/S VD - .0 CM/S ZO = 108. CM
U = 1.0 M/S CLAS = 4 (D) ATIM = 60. MINUTES MIXH = 1000. M AMB = 1.8 PPM
LINK VARIABLES
--------------
LINK DESCRIPTION * LINK COORDINATES (M)
* X1 Y1 X2
------------------------ -----------------------------
1. Far Lane Link * 10.8 -805.0 10.8
2. Near Lane Link * .0 805.0 .0
*
Y2
-----------
805.0
-805.0
LENGTH BRG TYPE
(M) (DEG)
----------------
1610. 360. AG
1610. 180. AG
VPH EF H W V/C QUEUE
(G/MI) (M) (M) (VEH)
----------------------------------
1760. 14.8 .0 13.2
1760. 14.8 .0 13.2
RECEPTOR LOCATIONS
------------------
* COORDINATES (M)
RECEPTOR * X Y 2
-------------------------*-------------------------------------*
1. R/W, 15.25m From CL * -9.9 .0 1.8
MODEL RESULTS
-------------
REMARKS : In search of the angle corresponding to
the maximum concentration, only the first
angle, of the angles with same maximum
concentrations, is indicated as maximum.
WIND ANGLE RANGE: 0.-360.
WIND * CONCENTRATION
ANGLE * (PPM)
(DEGR)* REC1
MAX * 3.7
DEGR. * 8
THE HIGHEST CONCENTRATION IS 3.70 PPM AT 8 DEGREES FROM REC1
Table A3
CAL30HC: LINE SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL - VERSION 2.0, JANUARY 1992
JOB: U-2200: US 220, Randolph County RUN: US 220, No-Build, Year 2000
SITE & METEOROLOGICAL VARIABLES
-------------------------------
VS = .0 CM/S VD = .0 CM/S 20 = 108. CM
U - 1.0 M/S CLAS = 4 (D) ATIM = 60. MINUTES MIXH = 1000. M AMB = 1.8 PPM
LINK VARIABLES
--------------
LINK DESCRIPTION * LINK COORDINATES (M)
* X1 Y1 X2 Y2
------------------------ *-- -1 ------------------------------------
1. Far Lane Link * 7.2 -805.0 7.2 805.0
2. Near Lane Link * .0 805.0 .0 -805.0
LENGTH BRG TYPE
(M) (DEG)
----------------
1610. 360. AG
1610. 180. AG
VPH EF H W V/C QUEUE
(G/MI) (M) (M) (VEH)
----------------------------------
1165. 38.3 .0 9.2
1165. 38.3 .0 9.2
RECEPTOR LOCATIONS
------------------
* COORDINATES (M)
RECEPTOR • X Y 2 •
-------------------------•-------------------------------------*
1. R/W, 15.25m From CL * -11.7 .0 1.8
MODEL RESULTS
-------------
REMARKS : In search of the angle corresponding to
the maximum concentration, only the first
angle, of the angles with same maximum
concentrations, is indicated as maximum.
WIND ANGLE RANGE: 0.-360.
WIND * CONCENTRATION
ANGLE * (PPM)
(DEGR)* REC1
MAX * 4.5
DEGR. * 9
THE HIGHEST CONCENTRATION IS 4.50 PPM AT 9 DEGREES FROM REC1 .
Table A4
CAL30HC: LINE SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL - VERSION 2.0, JANUARY 1992
JOB: U-2200: US 220, Randolph County RUN: US 220, No-Build, Year 2020
SITE & METEOROLOGICAL VARIABLES
-------------------------------
VS - .0 CM/S VD - .0 CM/S 20 = 108. CM
U = 1.0 M/S CLAS = 4 (D) AT1M = 60. MINUTES MIXH = 1000. M AMB = 1.8 PPM
LINK VARIABLES
--------------
LINK DESCRIPTION * LINK COORDINATES (M)
* X1 Y1 X2 Y2
------------------------ *----------------------------------------*
1. Far Lane Link * 7.2 -805.0 7.2 805.0
2. Near Lane Link * .0 805.0 .0 -805.0
LENGTH BRG TYPE
(M) (DEG)
----------------
1610. 360. AG
1610. 180. AG
VPH EF H M V/C QUEUE
(G/MI) (M) (M) (VEH)
----------------------------------
1760. 71.8 .0 9.2
1760. 71.8 .0 9.2
RECEPTOR LOCATIONS
------------------
* COORDINATES (M)
RECEPTOR * X Y 2
------------------------- *-------------------------------------*
1. R/W, 15.25m From CL * -11.7 .0 1.8 "
MODEL RESULTS
-------------
REMARKS : In search of the angle corresponding to
the maximum concentration, only the first
angle, of the angles with same maximum
concentrations, is indicated as maximum.
WIND ANGLE RANGE: 0.-360.
WIND * CONCENTRATION
ANGLE * (PPM)
(DEGR)* REC1
MAX * 9.5
DEGR. * 10
THE HIGHEST CONCENTRATION IS 9.50 PPM AT 10 DEGREES FROM REC1
FIGURE N1
PROJECT LOCATION & AMBIENT MEASUREMENT SITES
US 220 (FAYETTEVILLE ST.)
FROM PRITCHARD ST. TO OLD LIBERTY RD.
RANDOLPH COUNTY
TIP# U-2200 State Project # 8.1571301
\ M. C•, x•.07 ,l• I,J7
.I I ! IL
70 10 73 iM. *I .1!
/ .,
1u to _ Ilia as CAs
eL e'
117 O .I. IJU •li!' ful'p 7:
m .07 It a OJ )IY
J
LJ! .10 llu .OO 11.,
.. •f f,?l a o- _ ^"•er
spas 00 rl.. p -Ile 'o
.IOO .IJ Ilo.07 I,.J
1 : /? I7 7,.I 1
.ln aw. of SI ^d "0
lit• 1 O )fl
UZI
I LtN. .10 Op .07 o u.y ...I
IW .oJ ..of.u r.
END PROJECT
7 ? ? n.. _? r 7f,
? :r to ' nf.
Z 04 111,
I
s
. I r p 17
,
1,81
^ , 4 if -s
J: ,JN , o
Q I f:: Al Y
1\ \ 2 -J
1 ;tt1 u1. y0?." _.. t -? ?, ,11 pal! IL!
oas i
?: u u 1L1
.r.
0.07 0.03 -- --_.?
.04 070!` '?I • , ''J'
••. .. .I ?? Q a. o, 'ro
I lit,
oll
Ore-
.. o °. ...: ..
I? p BEGIN PROJECT
-kii Irr a . Jfo
,.,w ..:.
a
• , tie,
LIZ
i 2 CIO, y ! NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ASHEBORO TRANSPORTATION
ror. 15,151 DIVISION OF HIGHT"'AYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
.J '70 r BRANCH
.i.' = "L ' °.., •7 US 220 BUSINESS, FROM PRITCHARD
s. ,.. " a I STREET TO SR 2281 (OLD LIBERTY ROAD)
IN ASHEBORO, RANDOLPH COUNTY,
STATE PROJECT NO. 8.1571301,
FEDERAL PROJECT NO. STP-220B(1),
TIP NC. U-2200
TABLE NI
HEARING: SOUNDS BOMBARDING US DAILY
140 Shotgun blast, jet 30m away at takeoff PAIN
Motor test chamber HUMAN EAR PAIN THRESHOLD
130 -

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

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

D Diesel truck 65 kmph at 15m away
E 80 Crowded restaurant, garbage disposal
C Average factory, vacuum cleaner
I Passenger car 80 kmph at 15m away MODERATELY LOUD
B 70-

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

Household refrigerator
Quiet office VERY QUIET
40 ---

Average home
30 Dripping faucet
Whisper at 1.5m away
20 Light rainfall, node of leaves
AVERAGE PERSONS THRESHOLD OF HEARING
Whisper JUST AUDIBLE
10 ---

0 THRESHOLD FOR ACUTE HEARING
Sources: World Book, Rand McNally Atlas of the Human Body, Encyclopedia
America, "Industrial Noise and Hearing Conversation" by J. B. Olishifski
and E. R. Hanford (Researched by N. Jane Hunt and published in the
Chicago Tribune in an illustrated graphic by Tom Heinz.)
TABLE N2
NOISE ABATEMENT CRITERIA
CRITERIA FOR EACH FHWA ACTIVITY CATEGORY
HOURLY A-WEIGHTED SOUND LEVEL - DECIBELS (dBA)
Activity
Category (h) Description of Activity Category
A 57 Lands on which serenity and quiet are of extraordinary significance
(Exterior) and serve an important public need and where the preservation of
those qualities are essential if the area is to continue to serve its
intended purpose.
B 67 Picnic areas, recreation areas, playgrounds, active sports areas
(Exterior) parks, residences, motels, hotels, schools, churches, libraries, and
hospitals.
C 72 Developed lands, properties, or activities not included in Categories
(Exterior) A or B above.
D - Undeveloped lands.
E 52 Residences, motels, hotels, public meeting rooms, schools,
(Interior) churches, libraries, hospitals, and auditoriums.
Source: Title 23 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 772, U. S. Department of Transportation,
Federal Highway Administration.
CRITERIA FOR 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 Policy.
Z
O
m
cn

m
cn
M
rn
cn
rn

N
Z
O
A
m
O
N
O
cn
m r
O
n

C D

N O
Z
a
U)
M
.P
cn
c v
m
?
m
a N
?

O
Z
a r z
oo < O
0)
co Dr-
m
D
N
W
N Z
Z D
00 C/) co
m m
00
r Z
D M w
d m
3 r
m cn
M
M m
?
n --
O
c
Z
s I
* J.
3 I
m m
:3 :3
O O
rt rt
M m
w ro
O O
r•
m m
a
? K
10 0
IV Im
n G.
r+ s
w
ID ?
m
h '
m
N
W '.1
O
'AiJ m
711 m
ro r
rt, m
r
J
-4 0
N O
O
01 rt
O tr
w rG*
to 0
:j
rOi a
? a
of
FI
O
r•
m
1~D 0
r+
C m
m m`
r
m 0
O
m• rt
t I..
p t7
G
w rr
m H.
x m
m M
N O
O 9
r? rt
m 1mt
w h
O O
M In
a
ago K
? m
ID
o
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N ~ N N N N ?M
%D 07 J Q• 0 A W N N O ?O O) J Q% l!1 A W N N O ?D OJ J O? lf? A W N F+ 0
"D
CO oo O W W W W W W to A 00 0o w ao 0o w w w w w w w w rn w w w w to H
C G G G G G G G G G O• G G G G G G G G G G G G G 0 G G G G m O
m m m m m m m m m m G m m m m m m m m m m m m m = m m m m 0
r• r• r r• r• r• r• r• r r K r r• r• r• w r r w r• w w r• r• O w r r• w r+ d
0 7 0 0 p a 7 p O O r1 0 p 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 r• H
m m m m m m m m m m ? m m m m m m m m m m m m m r m m m m O C x
m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m D fn m
m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m th O
1
C i
to
H
A A A A A A A A A A w A A A A A A A A A A A A A tit A A A A N y z
O
?
K
00
G

W ti O
. H
O
3 3 3 3 2 7 3 3 3 s 3 i 1 3 a 3 3 3 3 3 N m
N m M
to
O K
x
H
? O
K
f N Di 0 m W O? ON CA m CA ON ON DA ON ai m 0% T J T O? m Di ? til O w
ON
J Di
U1 Om
J M
N o
N O
V1 m
U1 CA %O J N J J J J N O W .P In In J W Ci N N In ro C
W N N r tv y
.
rr

I

I

? n
.'7
I W
? i a
x ro
I 7d
7 1 3 3 S i 2 7 a ] i 7 3 7 1 2 a 3 i i 3 7 7 3 a 3 i r
1 c Oro
O
m

rr ?
o
E

N N W p N O r O H
N N /- W W N N N N N W A w N N N o. w w W N N N W
N tJ1 ?O ?D OD Ct OD N V1 F+ Uf O w O O O O O+ A N F to O W N W OD O OD O

6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
a O
H
x
y
,
r r r r r r r r z r r z r r r r a? 7a r a1 7o r z x r 7d r r z rr..
?
m
K
rrt
7d
l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l w -
I l i l t ro
a 1
m H
O C7

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I K
m ? t7
1
0

O U)
?
» s * * » rt r '? m I

J
O
0
?O
J
F+
0
{n
0
01
M
%0
0
Co
J
O
J
N
J
O
0?
at
01
In
J
N
J
N
J
1•+
J
N
0
Ln
J
N
0
J
M
J
01
M
0
%D
J
N
M
J
J
O
J
O
01
0%
Q•
UI
01
CD rt
W
m
H I tv
s
r
O N

T ?

H

+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 0 c p

dJ W
P A W A W W W W p p p p W A A W W P i+ A W A O. W W :00 r o0
W P 4>• W
W
C
En
N
N
O
od
C
m
r•
m H
m 'y
ro
ro
H
n
H
:3 z
O ?
en
ro ? r
:r x
tKj
A DC A
0 IV
O N
rr C
N
H
H
ro
C
I
N
N
O
O
ro
w
w
m
r
a I
» r
s I
ty d
m (D
O O
rt rt
m m
w b
o ??°y
r• O
m •m
m m
9 r1
10 0
n a
rt E
a
m
?s -
m
W O
A r•
ro 1--'
P) m
rt ((D
r
J
N O
p
n h
a
a rOt
10 p
n w
a
tat
0 K
r•
n 91
f~D rt
e m
m ml?
r
m ?
O
? rt
pl*
l7
a rt
m r-
k m
rt
n n
o 9
O
r rt
m m
K
O O
n w
a
.•. X
o
O •
c C
? m
A
m
H I
?p
UI to W V1 U1 U1 VI U1 A A A A A A A A A ko W W W W W W W W W W %
J a, rn P W N 1-• O %D co J 0 UI 0. W N r O p1 kD 00 J ON t!? P W N H O 0

w w 03 w w tit w w w w 90 w w w w w N ? A tD to A to W t0 w w tO w to t"4 H
G G C G C 0 G r. r. r m (D C G 0 0 m pri ]• 0 0 0• 0 G 0 C G 0 0 m 0
m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m p) G m m a m m m m m m m o qD
r r r• r• r r• r• r r- r• r• r- r• r• w w w rt K r r ?t r r w r• r r• r• rt t7
a s ° ° ° o a ° ° a
m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m 9 ? m m a• m m m m m m m O C x
m m to m m m m m m m 0 0 m m m m O m m m m m m m m m m p En Im
m m m m m m m m m m m 0 m m m m 0 rt m m m m m m m m m tal O
l
C i
rn y y

A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
W
W
A
A
A
A
W
W
t=1
A
A
W
A
A
A
A
A
A
A

N tm

Ay
O
O
z x
FC
DD
c
m
N M O

:
S
a
a
s
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
s

.
7
a
7
a
m y
t7 to
H

I N
m
1-3
, ? KZy
ro O
hi
0% at m 0 rn o+ o+ m m m cn m 0 ON rn m 10) m 0) ON Cl rn m mm rn m O w
to to J J J w 0? J J J Vt J W %0 A N W U1 T J OD N ? C H H
r O W r
til
y
ct
Q
w

a z ro

l I
= s s :I : l a _ _ _ _ _ : a a s a
a
n
r
O 0
O
I ro
O
(D En z
rt o

rt A
° r
N N W N N N N N N F+ N N N N N N W 1••• A W W N W N W N N P. 11) H
T J OD A 1+ C% O O 1-+ O% W 0 0 D U1 F•• Ul (71 O OD O 0 01 W O N OD O P O
0 0 0 0 o °
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a r
-I y
rn
r ?l z z r r r z r x x r r z z r ? ? r r r r z z ?l r r z r r y
m ?

F(
rt
ad
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l l l l l l l l l l l l l a y
t ro
a 1 x!
m O
rt
y

I
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l K
m 1
fC d
I x
10 O

o
as

»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
» m
rt

?
r
01
w O1
OD m
(n m
w J
O 01
%D J
F+ J
W J
O J
N J
O J
1-• J
N J
F+ 0%
%D J
O 0%
0% J
N 0+
W 01
0 01
CO 0%
%D 01
0 m
%D 0%
OD J
O J
F+ o+
W m
%D p. H I °n?d
N
O .P

M
t t + + t + t t t + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + t + + O A m O
?
rt t
w
P W A W W A A P W A. &1 .P 0. A A W W W W Is A .P W .P A W w w w • r t=1
N
o A ?
C
N
f`
O
00
°
m
r-
m y
m
m
ro
ro
H
w A
CL 0
O H C
?rn?
z
A LC .P
O m
rt C
txj
rn
y
H
ro
C
I
N
N
O
O
ro
w
w
m
N
r
v v
D =
O O
rt rt
mm mm
a to
O O
O
w
m •m
m a
M
10 0
n a
rt
>c
a
m
ID ?
M
m
N
W a
A O
tin m
w m
ro r
a m
rt,
r
J
N O
O
a
a n
a r•
tT
a rt
rt P.
W •3
ti P)
k a
CL
t=1
K
O m a
ID a
m r°r
C ?
m m,
m o
O
? rt
E r•
O Cr
G
a rt
m w
O
x m
rr
m M
M M
w 0
O H
O
:j :r
m ?mM1
w M
O O
M Al
a
OD k<
m
A

v
m rn rn ON at m Ln to w
to A W N r 0 tD OD 0
tai
C W G C G G
m
O
m m m m m to m m yp
P.- w r- w w w w r- c
rt v
H
m m m m m m m M O C z
m m m m m m m m ? O
m m m m m m m m t? p
1
C:
N
H H

A
A
n
n
A
A
0
n

^N'

? H
O

O z
?
K
oD
c
O
?
! M

s
a
s
=
s
s
=
N
N
O
?
m
O fn
W
M W
K z ?i

t
A M
m
0
O%
tD C
A Cy'
OD M
r M
A T
to CA
to
N
ro
A w
M N
M t? m z
rt
Q

a
M
a z ro

o

I It
m

t z tKi
r Cl
rt n
r W r A W N N N o r o H
M O M N r to m to O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 pr ? ?
, to K
7tt ty 7D 7D t" ?1 ? ty rr,. H
? 9
f
D
M
rt
0
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

O1
rt M
y
d
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ?
1 Z
?
M
O N
?c tq
* * I I
t
J
N Ot
Ib J
F. M
to O%
J Ot
tD O%
tD A
N 0-
m I pQ-Q
[9
r

+ + + + + + + + O 0
? O
K p
??
ti N
W A W A W A A O N tt W

tv
C
V'
N
N
O
m
G
m
(D H
m
m
ro
?i
w 0
N
O 0 t0
z
0 to
G O
In
K
En
H
M
ro
a
I
N
N
O
O
b
a
to
m
W
N
v
N Cn
a 3
CD
D
m 3
a-
rn °i
o.
CL Cn
Co 0
3
c a
7 y
0?
a m
y DI
01 W
7
3
y cu
d y
? C
3 c
CD
fu 1
y O
C 3
C
a ?
- CD
O CL
3 ?
s ?
R
0 o
CD Oy7
m
Ow y
o <
o (D
maw
CD
o
m
CL
-n
O
3
1
0
s
cu
a
cn
CD
CD
0
0 0
m
a
r
Q' (7
7D
CD
? O
Z
O
IV
CL
v
0 CJt r
D
3 CD x
?
z
_ C
rn d a

3 cn
D m
m
M
v_
C) m
°° cn o
v
N
M aao °_o>
co D DZX

C
n C
CA)
A 0) M M 3
CL (1)

4 n
m
O
m :? x
ca
0 D

-n D m
n 7onse
O
0
0 -n
4vr.
m
0 0
-4 z D

O

o
m m
?
? -n
c D
N z
QN C
O Cp
m
C D
N D
N
o K D
M CD
z r
y m
y Cn
y ?
m
m ?
? D
o Cn
C
o y
c ?
a a
N ?
a a
D D
y y
CL a
m 1D
ama
170
0 7
0 07
y
C
N
d .y
7 7
D °-'
o ?.
M
z
N m
N
m
1D
Q
0
O
3
0
D
W
r
m
z
t:?
T
O
3
1
0
S
o?
CL
N
1

O
O
a o
m
in
r

O O
z
o?
CL
A
II
0

O

P O
m
m
q
m
i
m
p o O
A z
O

O cn

:.
in
r
co m
m
r

O N
N
C)
D
V m
p II
N
tr
z
n m
p m r- D
D m 2
mm1
r D
r

n p D
?

O C)
O
r
m
t
i)
D = C
m
'II
C D
N T
N T
0 1-)
oz
O
C Fn
U) m
N r
N m -i
o <
cr*°-°
Z m
z
?n
N
m
a rn
o C
V 3
S 3
n D
c ?
7
Appendix D
UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK FACILITIES
NAME LOCATION
Furniture Factory Sore Southeastern quadrant of the N. Fayetteville
664 N. Fayetteville St. Street/Pritchard Street intersection.
Asheboro, NC 27203
2
3
4.
5
6.
7
8
9
10
12
Telephone Communications Eastern side of N. Fayetteville Street approximately
900 N. Fayetteville St. 200 feet north of Carolina Avenue.
Asheboro, NC 27203
Sunbeam Bakery Thrift Shop Northeastern quadrant of the N. Fayetteville
908 N. Fayetteville St. Street/Sterling Street intersection.
Asheboro, NC 27203
Triad Heating & Cooling Eastern side of N. Fayetteville Street approximately
916 N. Fayetteville St. 200 feet north of Sterling Avenue.
Asheboro, NC 27203
Vanco Repair Southwestern quadrant of the N. Fayetteville
917 N. Fayetteville St. Street/SR 1486 (Plummer St.) intersection.
Asheboro, NC 27203
Havoline X-press Lube Northwestern quadrant of the N. Fayetteville
1001 N. Fayetteville St. Street/SR 1486 (Plummer St.) intersection.
Asheboro, NC 27203
Steel Supply & Erection Co. Woodcrest Road just west of N. Fayetteville Street.
1237 N. Fayetteville St.
Asheboro, NC 27203
Save More #45 Northeastern quadrant of the N. Fayetteville
1424 N. Fayetteville St. Street/Rainbow Drive intersection.
Asheboro, NC 27203
Car Graphics Northwestern quadrant of the N. Fayetteville
1441 N. Fayetteville St. Street/Woodbury Street intersection.
Asheboro, NC 27203
Northgate Texaco Northeastern quadrant of the N. Fayetteville
1448 N. Fayetteville St. Street/Brittain Street intersection.
Asheboro, NC 27203
Tank & Tummy #2 Northeastern quadrant of the N. Fayetteville
1526 N. Fayetteville St. Street/SR 2261 (Old Liberty Road) intersection.
Asheboro, NC 27203
Mr. C's Car Wash Southwestern quadrant of the N. Fayetteville
N. Fayetteville St. Street/Tremont Street intersection.
Asheboro, NC 27203
1
US 220 Business (Favetteyille Street )
From Pritchard Street to Old Liberty Road (SR -1261 )
Asheboro. Randolph County
Federal-Aid Project No. STP-22013(1)
State Project No. 8.1571301
T.I.P. No. U-2200
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
August, 1999
Documentation Prepared in Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
By:
Mie ele L. James
Project Planning Engineer
Teresa Hart
Project Planning Unit Head
• CAR
,•.•??R?H .,....••,Oliy •..
+ = SEAL
Richard . Davis, P. E., Ass ant Manager 6944 =
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Braid :: f? ??•;
..,CINt,•PJ??•
?,q?,0 •....••
lop
•,,
141
TABLE OF CONTEN
PAGE:
•r
?r
1. TYPE OF ACTION ............................................................................................1
IT. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION .............................................. l
III. PROJECT STATUS AND COSTS .................................................................... l
IV. ACTIONS REQUIRED BY OTHER AGENCIES ............................................2
V. COORDINATION AND COMMENTS .............................................................2
A. Circulation of the Environmental Assessment ........................................2
B. Comments Received on the Environmental Assessment ........................2
C. Public Hearing ........................................................................................4
VI. REVISIONS TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ..........................4
VII. BASIS FOR FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ................................4
APPENDIX A
Figure 1 - Vicinity Map
Figure 2 - Aerial Mosaic
APPENDIX B
Comments Received From Review Agencies on the Environmental Assessment
Public Hearing Notice
Public Hearing Transcript
US 220 Business (Fayetteville Street )
From Pritchard Street to Old Liberty Road (SR 2261 )
Asheboro, Randolph County
Federal-Aid Project No. STP-22013(1)
State Project No. 8.1571301
T.I.P. No. U-2200
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS
Precautions will be taken to minimize impacts to water resources. NCDOT's Best
Management Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters will be strictly enforced
during the construction stage of the project. Provisions to preclude contamination by
toxic substances during the construction interval will also be strictly enforced.
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Prepared by the
Project Development and Environmental Analvsis Branch
Division of Highways
North Carolina Department of Transportation
in consultation with the
Federal Highway Administration
1. TYPE OF ACTION
This is a Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) administrative action, Finding
of No Significant Impact (FONSI).
The FHWA has determined this project will not have any significant impacts on
the human environment. This FONSI is based on the Environmental Assessment which
has been independently evaluated by the FHWA and determined to adequately and
accurately discuss the environmental issues and impacts of the proposed project. The
Environmental Assessment provides sufficient evidence and analysis for determining that
an Environmental Impact Statement is not required. The FHWA takes full responsibility
for the accuracy, scope, and content of the Environmental Assessment.
II. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), Division of
Highways, in consultation with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) proposes
to widen Fayetteville Street (US 220 Business) in Randolph County from Pritchard Street
to Old Liberty Road (SR 2261) (See Appendix A, Figure 1). The project is
approximately 1.5 miles in length and will provide a five-lane, 68-foot face to face,
roadway with curb and gutter. The outside travel lanes will be 14 feet wide to
accommodate bicycle traffic. Improvements will also include sidewalks. The current
total estimated cost of this improvement project is-$6,533,125. The estimated cost in the
Draft 2000-2006 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) is $4,450,000.
III. PROJECT STATUS AND COSTS
The widening of Fayetteville Street (US 220 Business) is included in the Draft
2000-2006 NCDOT TIP. Right-of-way acquisition is scheduled to begin in fiscal year
1999. Construction is scheduled to begin in fiscal year 2001. The current TIP includes a
total funding of $4,450,000 for the project, consisting of $250,000 for prior year costs,
$1,400,000 for right-of-way, and $2,800,000 for construction. The project is currently
estimated to cost $6,533,125.
IV. ACTIONS REQUIRED BY OTHER AGENCIES
Prior to the approval of any borrow source developed for use on this project, the
contractor shall obtain a certification from the N. C. Cultural Resources certifvina that
the removal of material from the borrow source will have no effect on any known district,
site, building, structure, or object that is included or eligible for inclusion in the National
Register of Historic Places. A copy of this certification shall be furnished to the Engineer
prior to performing any work.
V. COORDINATION AND COMMENTS
A. Circulation of the Environmental Assessment
The Environmental Assessment was approved by the North Carolina Department
of Transportation, Division of Highways, on March 30, 1999, and by the Federal
Highway Administration on March 31, 1999. The approved Environmental Assessment
was circulated to the following federal, state, and local agencies for review and
comments. An asterisk (*) indicates a response was received from that agency. Copies
of the correspondence received are included in the Appendix B of this document.
U. S. Department of Transportation - FHWA
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers - Wilmington
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency - Atlanta
*U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service - Raleigh
N. C. State Clearinghouse
N. C. Department of Cultural Resources, Division of Archives and History
N. C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
N. C. Department of Human Resources
N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission
Region J Planning Agency
Randolph County Commissioners
City of Asheboro
Randolph County Schools
N. C. Department of Public Instruction
B. Comments Received on the Environmental Assessment
Written comments on the Environmental Assessment (EA) were received from
the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service-Raleigh. The following are excerpts of the
substantive comments with responses where appropriate:
U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFVI'S)
Comment:
"The EA states that the project will improve traffic flow and reduce the
existing accident rate, which is currently more than double the state-wide
average for US routes. The Service concurs that the purpose and need
have been adequately stated and supported by tabular data."
Response: This comment has been noted.
b. Comment:
"In addition to the "No Build" and "Alternative Modes of Transportation"
alternatives, only the preferred alternative, widening on existing
alignment, was considered. The Service concurs with this decision.
However, the Service retains the right to recommend other alternatives if
data not contained in this EA become available and to provide comments
on the final alignment of the highway within the corridor selected."
Response: This comment has been noted.
Comment:
"As required by the 404(b)(1) guidelines of the Environmental Protection
agency, the NCDOT should first endeavor to avoid, then minimize, and
finally compensate for wetland losses that would occur if the project were
implemented. However, due to the highly urbanized and commercial
nature of the project area, there are no jurisdictional wetlands or surface
water sources that would be impacted by this project. The Service concurs
with this determination."
Response: This comment has been noted.
d. Comment:
"NCDOT states that, as of January 15, 1999, the Service lists two
federally-protected species for Randolph County. These are the Cape Fear
shiner (Notropis mekistocholas) and Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus
schweinitzii). The NCDOT has concluded that the project will have "No
Effect" on either species. The Service concurs with this determination.
However, this decision would be reconsidered if additional information on
listed species that could be impacted by this project comes to light, or if
there is a significant change in project plans."
Response: This comment has been noted.
Comment:
"This document lacks a 4(f) declaration for this project. However, based
on available information, there are no 40) lands under our jurisdiction that
would be affected by this project."
Response: This comment has been noted and was discussed on page 10 of
the Environmental Assessment.
C. Public Hearing
Following circulation of the Environmental Assessment, a combined location and
design public hearing was held May 11, 1999 (see Appendix for a copy of the public
hearing notice). Approximately 39 citizens and 14 NCDOT personnel attended the
public hearing. All of the questions and concerns raised dealt with individual property
concerns, as well as questions about the typical cross section, construction easements,
right of way, relocation assistance, and the project schedule. All these questions and
comments were adequately answered at the hearing. Written comments were received
and answered in the official commenting period following the bearing. A transcript of
the hearing is on file with the N.C. Division of Highways.
VI. REVISIONS TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
No revisions to the scope or design of the project have occurred since publication
of the Environmental Assessment. Additionally, no changes have occurred in the status
of federally protected species. The most current list for threatened and Endangered
Species is dated May 13, 1999.
VII. BASIS FOR FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Based upon a study of the impacts of the proposed project as documented in the
Environmental Assessment, and upon comments from federal, state, and local agencies, it
is the finding of the North Carolina Department of Transportation and the Federal
Highway Administration the project will not have a significant impact upon the quality of
the human or natural environment. No significant impacts on natural, ecological,
cultural, or scenic resources are expected. Adequate replacement property will be
available for the eight residences and one business which will be relocated. No
significant impact on air or water quality or on ambient noise levels is expected. The
project is consistent with local plans and will not divide or disrupt a community. The
project will have no effect on any historic properties listed in or eligible for the National
Register of Historic Places. No known Section 4 (f) properties will be impacted by the
project. The proposed improvements will have no effect on federally-listed threatened or
endangered species. Therefore. it is determined that a Finding ol'No Significant Impact
is applicable for this project. An Environmental Impact Statement or further
environmental analysis will not be required.
MJ/plr
APPENDIX -- A

J c E..07 if. 71v
11. 70 IO ,) UOi •."'ol Are. IS .03.0, n
7131 Oe
1307 J° 1303 10 33 ^ o
.i 130.
u7 ]7f, 7233 'J
o 13 3171 7111 0
'JO to 07 .11 O] 1160
Oj r 11 71.
?
71.•° .10 1170 0
b 7)?; ° _ _ °° llq CMIp
1300. 0 .OZOS 01 1 } '7 _U!S Jo
/ Isk7 _ oe -10o ,IS° .07 X71.]
. C
.13 71.7 y
? In. N N, o? 0 7)u
.
asl.y .1731..07 .I9 E. 9.1? Fa. 0 10
oe
1,01• J. Let} C 5 71.3
.e 1L n ?rL, 173,
d o
c- N L7.
Ine .10 07h.07 0 1.•
7 7 •.03.1
n b e
END PROJECT p a77, =1n
1174 7
11 7]R \ / 17!7
I-IN 2'.. ,o ? 10
1.73 1 t'riz 71.1 , 773.
le
OS - ']... ; 37., 1777 03 7757
1071
O
l
7 ,?? ?'d .u 1 ? 1 3v7
- 4.1 i ua E. ° Tub , >i
i 1? c a ,17
f. !1 , '1? 7717 J lO Jim 0l
7
.10
1 1 ..:. J 0 . .
J ~ Iar 3i _ e. i ` i 1 .Is 77..
f 01,3 J>g
° / - - 114 7 1N. I ` 710, .1] .IS .7776
.1 7 ?' ov 0] 0, 05 ` ) 77.0
/ 1i r ). I.1•. .I ?/
0. M1Ii.Y3 I.?• - 11 ) '.1 a
.01,
. r 1 .07.03a'
I !Z
. ...
.'01, u v J 117.1 .v ..r 3 I l?lE Q}.7°. Oe 0
Ov
0 i73. J aq » r?Y
o• I 14,71. 1.11.. -
W, BEGIN PROJECT
17,7 0 07 ?.? 770 ?..??
0 06 P'..MO .e7 play`
= 1..a 177 so ,
f 3s ?l iLt? . oe
If ASHEBORO
J,' e POP. 15,257
.L 17,-ill-O
,orr .7
71.1
t? t ti rChda EE
62 GlenoU ~mo
- ever Crss ??.
l?
Del t

Randlema
SoOnu O Grsys Chattel'
^ 1 Staley
Worth4dl e

R A N D n ?1
0
r

6au Fnn,
lnrll 1
hat

16 64 / Ill. --- Ramseur
v
I Ashe6or
x ]
I -
Farmer
, s 9 Mount
^a y a 42 Colend
ion'
Ines rUW{IARRIE a
" C 7o°'°v22 I
At e°rl ,

ve Seagrove
. „ 1
whrnoi

0
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
FAYETTEVILLE STREET (US 220 BUSINESS)
FROM PRITCHARD STREET
TO OLD LIBERTY ROAD (SR 2261)
ASHEBORO. RANDOLPH COUNTY
TIP NO. U-2200
0 kilometers 0.80
0 miles 0.50 FIGURE I
.
•
r?
} F 7k

rol

PRESNELLSTRE[`
L
?d
APPENDIX -- B
L?
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
May 14, 1999
J
? r 111
\'hALY`??` P1.
Mr. William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
N.C. Division of Highways
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611
Dear Mr. Gilmore:
Thank you for your letter of April 14, 1999, requesting comments from the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service) on the Environmental Assessment (EA), dated March 1999, for the
improvement of Fayetteville Street (US 220 Business) from Pritchard Street to Old Liberty Road
(SR 2261) in the City of Asheboro, Randolph County, North Carolina (TIP No.U-2200). This
report is provided in accordance with provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16
U.S.C. 661-667d) and Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C.
1531-1543).
According to the EA, the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to
widen the existing multi-lane roadway to a five-lane, 68-foot face to face, curb and gutter
facility. The total length of the project is 1.6 miles.
Purpose and Need
The EA states that the project will improve traffic flow and reduce the existing accident rate,
which is currently more than double the state-wide average for US routes. The Service concurs
that the purpose and need have been adequately stated and supported by tabular data.
Alternatives Analysis
In addition to the "No Build" and "Alternative Modes of Transportation" alternatives, only the
preferred alternative, widening on existing alignment, was considered. The Service concurs with
this decision. However, the Service retains the right to recommend other alternatives if data not
contained in this EA become available and to provide comments on the final alignment of the
highway within the corridor selected.
Wetlands
As required by the 404(b)(1) guidelines of the Environmental Protection agency, the NCDOT
should first endeavor to avoid, then minimize, and finally compensate for wetland losses that
would occur if the project were implemented. However, due to the highly urbanized and
commercial nature of the project area, there are no jurisdictional wetlands or surface water
sources that would be impacted by this project. The Service concurs with this determination.
Endangered Species
The Service notes that the EA provides a discussion (pgs. 19-22) of the potential project related
impacts on federally-listed threatened and endangered, and candidate, species.' NCDOT states
that, as of January 15, 1999, the Service lists two federally-protected species for Randolph
County. These are the Crape Fear shiner (Notropis nzekistocholas) and Schweinitz's sunflower
(Helianthus schweinitzii). The NCDOT has concluded that the project will have "No Effect" on
either species. The Service concurs with this determination. However, this decision would be
reconsidered if additional information on listed species that could be impacted by this project
comes to light, or if there is a significant change in project plans.'
Section 4(f)
Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966 specifies that the Secretary of
Transportation may not approve the use of land from any publicly owned park, recreational area,
wildlife and waterfowl refuge, or other designated area, purchased all, or in part, with Federal
funds unless a determination has been made that: (1) there is no feasible and prudent alternative
to the use of the land from the property and (2), the action includes all possible planning to
minimize harm to the property from such use.
This document lacks a 4(f) declaration for this project. However, based on available information,
there are no 4(f) lands under our jurisdiction that would be affected by this project. -
Summary
The Service considers that this EA adequately addresses the existing fish and wildlife resources
and the potential impacts of this proposed project on these resources. Based on the information
provided, the Service concludes that this project, implemented as described, will not have
significant impact on resources under our jurisdiction.
2
The Service appreciates the opportunity to comment on the project. Please advise us of any
changes in project plans. If you have any questions regarding these comments, contact Tom
McCartney at [phone], ext. 32.
Sincerely,
Yoh
n M. H f n e r
Ecological Services Supervisor
cc:
COE, Raleigh, NC (Eric Alsmeyer)
DWQ, Raleigh, NC (John Hennessey)
WRC, Creedmoor, NC (David Cox)
FHWA, Raleigh, NC (Nicholas Graf)
EPA, Atlanta, GA (Ted Bisterfield)
FWS/R4:TMcCartney:TM:05/13/99:919/856-4520 extension 32:\U-2200.tip
3

North Carolina
Department of Administration
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor Katie G. Dorsett, Secretary
August 5, 1999
Mr. David Smith
N.C. Department of Transportation
Project Management Unit
Transportation Building
Raleigh, NC 27603
Dear Mr. Smith:
Re: SCH File # 00-E-4220-0008; Environmental Assessment Proposed Widening of a 1.6 Mile
Section of Fayetteville Street from Pritchard Street to Old Liberty Road in Asheboro, NC; TIP
#U-2200
The above referenced project has been reviewed through the State Clearinghouse Intergovernmental
Review Process. Attached to this letter are comments made by agencies reviewing this document.
Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Ms. Chrys Bagge
Environmental Policy Act- Coordinator
Attachments
cc: Region G
?Michelle James, Project Dev. & Env. Analysis
116 West Jones Street Raleigh, North Carolina 27603-8003 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity / AfTirtnative Action Employcr
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
e0A
NCDENR
JAMES B. HUNTJR.
GOVERNOR
WAYNE MCDEVITT
SECRETARY
MEMORANDUM
TO: Chrys Baggett
State Clearinghouse
FROM: Melba McGee V
Environmental Review Coordinator
RE: 00-0008 EA for the Widening of Fayetteville Street
from Pritchard Street to old Liberty Road in
Randoloh County
DATE: August 5, 1999
The Department of Environment and Natural Resources has
reviewed the proposed information. The attached comments are
for the applicant's information and consideration.
Thank you for the opportunity to review.
attachments
RECEIVED
IAN' 51999
N.C. STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
P.O. BOX 27687, RALEIGH NC 27611-7687 / 312 NORTH SALISBURY STREET, RALEIGH NC 27604
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone] WWW.EHNR.STATE.Nc.us/EHNR/
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - 30% RECYCLED/1 Oq POST-CONSUMER PAPER
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
July 28, 1999
MEMORANDUM
NCDENR
To: Melba McGee -?
Through: John Dornev,
From: John Henness?v
Subject: Comments on the EA for the widening of Fayetteville Street (US 220 Business) from
Pritchard Street to Old Liberty Road (SR 2261) in Randolph County (U-2200), Federal
Aid Project No. STP-22013(1), State Project No. 8.1571301, TIP Project No. U-2200,
DENR Project Number OOE-0008.
This office has reviewed the referenced document. The Division of Water Quality (DWQ) is responsible
for the issuance of the Section 401 Water Quality Certification for activities that impact Waters of the U.S.,
including wetlands. It is our understanding that the preferred alternative, as presented in the EA, will
probably not result in any impacts to jurisdictional wetlands or streams. However, should the project result
in any impacts to jurisdictional waters, the DWQ offers the following comments based on review of the
aforementioned document:
A) After the selection of the preferred alternative and prior to an issuance of the 401 Water Quality
Certification, the NCDOT is respectfully reminded that they will need to demonstrate the
avoidance and minimization of impacts to wetlands (and streams) to the maximum extent practical.
Based on the impacts described in the document, wetland mitigation may not required for this
project. Should the impacts to jurisdictional wetlands exceed 1.0 acres, mitigation may be
required in accordance with NCDWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H.0506 (h)(2)).
B) In accordance with the NCDWQ Wetlands Rules { 15A NCAC 2H.0506(b)(6) ), mitigation will be
required for impacts of greater than 150 linear feet to any single perennial stream. In the event that
mitigation is required, the mitigation plan should be designed to replace appropriate lost functions
and values. In accordance with the NCDWQ Wetlands Rules { 15A NCAC 2H.0506 (h)(3) ), the
Wetland Restoration Program may be available for use as stream mitigation.
C) Where streams must be crossed, the DWQ prefers bridges be used in lieu of culverts. However,
we realize that economic considerations often require the use of culverts. Please be advised that
culverts should be countersunk to allow unimpeded passage by fish and other aquatic organisms.
Moreover, in areas where high quality wetlands or streams are impacted, a bridge may prove
preferable. When applicable, DOT should not install the bridge bents in the creek, to the
maximum extent practicable.
D) Sediment and erosion control measures should not be 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
hir, William D Gilmore memo
07/28/99
Pa3c
E) Borrow/waste areas should avoid wetlands to the maximum extent practicable. Impacts to
wetlands in borrow/waste areas could precipitate compensatory mitigation.
F) The 401 Water Quality Certification application will need to specifically address the proposed
methods for stormwater management. More specifically, stormwater should not be permitted to
discharge directly into the creek. Instead, stormwater should be designed to drain to a properly
designed stormwater detention facility/apparatus.
G) There should be a discussion on mitigation plans for unavoidable impacts. If mitigation is
required, it is preferable to present a conceptual (if not finalized) mitigation plan with the
environmental documentation. While the NCDWQ realizes that this may not always be practical,
it should be noted that for projects requiring mitigation, appropriate mitigation plans will be
required in conjunction with the issuance of a 401 Water Quality Certification.
H) Future documentation should include an itemized listing of the proposed wetland and stream
impacts with corresponding mapping.
I) Based on the information presented in the document, the magnitude of impacts to wetlands and
streams will not require an application to the Corps of Engineers or the Division of Water Quality.
However, should subsequent analysis reveal the presence of jurisdictional waters, please be
advised that a 401 Water Quality Certification requires satisfactory protection of water quality to
ensure that water quality standards are met and no wetland or stream uses are lost. Final permit
authorization will require the submittal of a formal application by the NCDOT and written
concurrence from the NCDWQ. Please be aware that any approval will be contingent on
appropriate avoidance and minimization of wetland and stream impacts to the maximum extent
practical, the development of an acceptable stormwater management plan, and the inclusion of
appropriate mitigation plans where appropriate.
The NCDWQ appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on your project. Should you have any
questions or require any additional information, please contact John Hennessy at [phone].
cc: Eric Alsmeyer, Corps of Engineers
Tom Mccartney, USFWS
David Cox, NCWRC
Ron Linville, NCDWQ Regional Office
C:\ncdot\TIP U-2200\comments\ U-2200 comments.doc

North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission t'
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604.1188, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee
Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs, DENR
FROM: David Cox, Highway Project Coo nato
Habitat Conservation Program
DA'Z'E: July 27, 1999
SUBJECT: North C:aiolina Dcpartmont of Transportation (NCDOT) Environmental Assessment
(FA) for Fayetteville Street (US 220 Business) Improvements, from Pritchard Street to
Old Liberty Road (SR 2261), Randolph County, North Carolina. TIP No. U-2200, SCH
Protect No. 00-E-0008.
Staff biologists with the N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission have reviewed the subject EA and
are familiar with habitat values in the project area. The purpose of this review was to assess project
impacts to fish and wildlife resources. Our comments are provided in accordance with certain provisions
of the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2xc)) and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination
Act (48 Stat. 401, its amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d).
NCDOT proposes to widen existing Fayetteville Street to a five-lane, curb and gutter section from
Pritchard Street to Old Liberty Road. The project is to increase traffic capacity and to improve the safety
of the prcliect area. The project length is approximately 1.6 miles. No impacts to jurisdictional wetlands
or surface waters are expected.
We have reviewed the data contained in the EA. We have no objection to the project as proposed.
NCDOT Should use Best Management Practices for the protection of Surface Waters to protect offsitc
resource. At this time, we concur with the EA for this project.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this EA. If we can be of any further assistance please
call me at [phone].
cc: U.S. FiOi and Wildlife Service, Raleigh
NORTH CAROLINA STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW
Ms. Renee Gledhill-Earley
Clearinghouse Coordinator
Dept. of Cultural Resources
Archives-History Bldg.
Raleigh NC
REVIEW DISTRIBUTION
Dept. of Cultural Resources
Dept. of Environment & Natural Res
Piedmont Triad COG
STATE--NUMBER: 00-5_-ri 20-0008 F02
--DATE RECEIVED-07/-O/
AGENCY RESPONSE: 08/03/1999\"
REVIEW CLOSED: 08/08/1999 1'N
145 14 i?
?'
JUL
;9

PROJECT INFORMATION
APPLICANT: N.C. Department of Transportation
TYPE: National Environmental Policy Act
ERD: Environmental Assessment
DESC: Proposed Widening of a 1.6 Mile Section of Fayetteville Street from Pritchard
Street to Old Liberty Road in Asheboro, NC; TIP #U-2200
x ?V- * 96 - C -a sG 5-
The attached project has been submitted to the N. C. State Clearinghouse for
intergovernmental review. Please review and submit your response by the above
indicated date. If additional review time is needed, please-contact this office
at [phone].
AS A RESULT OF THIS REVIEW THE FOLLOWING IS SUBMITTED:
UL
py NO COMMENT
F? COMMENTS ATTACHED
SIGNED BY:
DATE: ?Z-2'/ l y q
J UL 15 1999'
l,Q-1-s A
7/116
RECEIVED
. ?I II. 26 19M
N.C. STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
JUL 16 1999 B
NOTICE OF A PRE-HEARING OPEN HOUSE
AND A PUBLIC HEARING
ON THE PROPOSED WIDENING/IMPROVEMENTS
OF US 220 BUSINESS (NORTH FAYETTEVILLE STRE
FROM SOUTH OF EAST PRITCHARD STREET
TO NORTH OF OLD LIBERTY ROAD
ET) ,,7F; (o
&77- rl Ck'?
Mr. gat(
Project 8.1571301 U-2200 Randolph County'
The North Carolina Department of Transportation will hold the above pre-hearing
open house on Tuesday, May 11, 1999 from 5:00 p.m. to 6:30 p.m. in the North Asheboro
Middle School Cafeteria located at 1861 North Asheboro School Road in Asheboro.
Interested individuals may attend the open house at their convenience between the above
stated hours to become familiar with the proposed design. A FORMAL PUBLIC HEARING
FOR THIS PROJECT WILL BE CONDUCTED IN THE CAFETERIA BEGINNING AT
7:00 P.M.
The hearing will consist of an explanation of the proposed location and design, right
of way requirements and procedures, and relocation advisory assistance. The hearing will
be open to those present for statements, questions, comments, and/or submittal of material
pertaining to the proposed project. Additional material may be submitted for a period of 10
days from the date of the hearing to: Len Hendricks, P. 0. Box, 25201, Raleigh, NC 27611.
The project proposes to widen the existing US 220 Business (North Fayetteville
Street) from south of East Pritchard Street to north of Old Liberty Road (SR 2261) - a
distance of approximately 1.59 miles. The existing roadway will be widened to a five-lane
facility with curb and gutter. The new facility will consist of two travel lanes in each
direction and a continuous center left turn lane. The outside lanes will have additional
width for "share the road" bicycle traffic. Sidewalks are proposed along both sides of the
widened roadway. Additional right of way and the relocation of homes and businesses will
be required for this project.
A map setting forth the location and design and a copy of the environmental
document - Environmental Assessment - are available for public review in the City of
Asheboro's Government Center - City Manager's Office - Located at 146 North Church
Street in Asheboro.
Anyone desiring additional information concerning the Pre-Hearing Open House or
the Public Hearing may contact Mr. Hendricks at the above address; by telephone at
[phone]; by FAX at [phone]; or by Email at [e-mail].
NCDOT - in compliance with the American's With Disabilities Act - will provide
auxiliary aids and services for disabled citizens who wish to participate in the hearing. To
receive special services, please call Mr. Hendricks at the above number to give adequate
notice prior to the date of the hearing.
i OFFICIAL PUBLIC HEARING TRANSCRIPT
2 Combined Public Hearing
3 US 220 Business North Fayetteville Street
4 From East Pritchard Street To Old Liberty Road
5 Randolph County
6 North Asheboro Middle School
7 March 11, 1999
8 # U-2200
10
12 Good evening ladies and gentlemen. I would like to welcome each of you to
13 tonight's Public Hearing on the proposed widening of North Fayetteville Street;
14 beginning at East Pritchard Street, which would be on the left-hand side of the
15 map here, in this area. Then we are proceeding in a northerly direction until we
16 get to Old Liberty Road, back in this area here. The distant there is about a mile
17 and six tenths, about one and six tenths miles. The accident rate along this
18 particular stretch of highway is double that of similar type roads around the state.
19 A lot of these accidents are rear-in collisions and side swipings and those types
20 of accidents. Projected traffic along this route - first let me give you the current
21 traffic. Around the Old Liberty Road area, it is approximately 16,200. The
22 section between Allred and Arthur, which is down around Old Liberty again
23 coming in a southerly direction there, currently that is around 21,900 vehicles a
24 day. The thirty (30) year projection or twenty (20) year projection, I sorry, for this
25 particular same areas around Old Liberty, we are looking at 31,700. Around the
26 Allred / Arthur area, they are around 36,700. Taking it down to the very southern
27 end around Pritchard Street, it is currently around 18,400 in that area. The
28 twenty (20) year projections are 31,700 around the Pritchard Street area. So as
29 you can see, the projections for this particular segment of road are certainly
30 going to increase the volume of traffic through this particular area.
31
32 My name is Len Hendricks. I am a Public Hearing Officer with the Department of
33 Transportation. I will be the moderator for tonight's proceedings. In addition to
34 myself, we have several other Department representatives in attendance; and 1
35 would like to take just a moment to introduce those to you, before we get into the
36 actual hearing. Representing the Board of Transportation, represents Randolph
37 County on highway matters, we have Mr. G. R. Kindley. From Rockingham, over
38 to my right, representing the Division Office we have our Division Engineer,
39 Mr. Bill Rosser, who represents Randolph, as well as, about six (6) or seven (7)
40 other counties in this particular vicinity. Representing our Division Construction
41 Office, we have a Division Construction Engineer, Mr. Tim Johnson, in
42 attendance this evening. We have Mr. John McDonald, who is a Resident
43 Engineer out of the Aberdeen office. We have Mr. Wayne Wharton, who is out
44 of our District Office. We have Mr. Benny Sloan, who is the Assistant District
45 Engineer out of the Asheboro office here. Representing our Right of Way office,
46 we have Mr. Larry White and representing our Location and Surveys office, out
47 of Asheboro, we have Mr. Harold Boles. Then from our Raleigh office, where the
48 actual design and planning has taken place, we have Mr. Jim Speer, who is the
U-2200.hrg 1 05/14/99
49 Project Engineer, in the very back of the room. We have Mr. John Lansford who
50 is the Project Design Engineer, also in the back. We have Mr. Clint Morgan and
51 we have Ms. Kanchana Noland from our Roadway Design Unit. Representing
52 our Planning & Environmental Branch, who developed the Environmental
53 Document for this particular project, we have Ms. Michelle James, who is in the
54 very back of the room.
55
56 We would like to take just a moment to go through the handout that you received
57 as you came in. We will just go through some of this information before we open
58 it for your comments. As we said, this is the US 220 Business or North
59 Fayetteville Street widening, beginning at East Pritchard and terminating at Old
6o Liberty Road, in that area. Again, it is about a mile and a half. The back of the
61 cover sheet is an agenda that I will attempt to follow this evening.
62
63 At the bottom of the page is a 1-877-number, but it is like a 1-800 number that
64 the citizens of the State can call toll free with any transportation concerns or
65 questions that you may have. As I said, it is toll free.
66
67 The primary purpose of this particular project is to improve the traffic flow and
68 improve the safety of this particular segment of highway. The purpose of a
69 public hearing is it is one step in the Department of Transportation's planning
70 process. It gives you the opportunity, as citizens of the area, to have input into
71 the final design of a project. What you are seeing this evening is classified as a
72 preliminary design, so changes can still be made to it at this point. We will go
73 back and go over the comments that we hear this evening or any of the written
74 comments that we receive as a result of this evening. We will review those and
75 make determinations if we can incorporate those into the final design of the
76 project. I do want to emphasize to you that what you are seeing is preliminary
77 and, as I said, changes can be made to it. For about the last month or so, we
78 have had a copy of the map in the City Hall Complex here in Asheboro. We also
79 had a copy of the Environmental Document there and hope that you maybe have
8o had the chance to go by and take a look at it, get somewhat familiar with what
81 you are seeing this evening. Also the segment from 5:00 to 6:30, we hope that
82 those of you who participated in that found it beneficial in terms of getting some
8,1 explanations as to what may be happening or what is being planned for this
84 particular segment of highway.
85
86 Now that the opportunity is here, you can participate in a public hearing in one
87 (1) of three (3) ways. You can make a verbal statement in the room this evening.
88 You can make a written statement and mail it to me within the next ten (10) days
89 and that written statement is treated in the same way as a verbal statement that
9o you may make in the room tonight. If you so desire to save a stamp, if you want
91 to fill it out, the comment sheet, and give it to me before you leave today, I will be
92 glad to take that back. Before I get too deep, the comment sheet is the last page
93 of the handout. So, it has three (3) or four (4) different ways that you can get in
94 touch with me or can get information to me, either fax it, or E-Mail it, or just US
95 mail it. We will review those comments and try to incorporate that as best we
96 can into the final design.
U-2200.hrg 2 05/ 14/99
97
98 There are a couple of ground rules that I need to touch on at every hearing.
99 Number 1, we are not here to debate each other. I would ask you to respect
100 each other's opinions, as well as, the opinions of those of the Department. We
101 are certainly here to hear your comments and hear your concerns. This give us
102 a chance to determine the public opinion of the project and give us an
103 opportunity to go back and make some determinations as to whether or not we
104 can incorporate some of those comments into the final design. So just as it is
105 not a debate, it is not a vote. We are not really here to vote to do this or not to
106 do this. Certainly with the traffic counts being what they are, the accident rate
107 being what it is; it is certainly a needed project or all the criteria would indicate
108 that it is a needed project for this particular area.
109
11o The next page is 'What is Done With the Input?' We will have what we call a
III Post Hearing Meeting in Raleigh sometime within the next probably six (6)
112 weeks, just as an estimated time frame, to go over what comments we do
113 receive from you. We give you ten (10) days to comment. I would like to get
114 them within that period, so we can organize this and be ready for this Post
115 Hearing Meeting. So the written comments that we receive and the transcript
116 that will be prepared from the verbal comments that you will make this evening
117 will be what will be considered at this particular meeting.
118
119 This particular project is classified at this point as a State/Federal type of project.
12o That simply means that 80% of the funding would be Federal funds and 20%
121 would be State funds.
122
123 The next page gives you a location map, certainly not in detail of what the public
124 hearing map that you are seeing this evening, but it does give you the beginning
125 and ending points and again as we said that mile, one and six tenths mile length.
126
127 The next page gives you some information about this particular project. Again
128 one and six tenths miles is the length. The basic typical section that we are
129 looking at would be a five (5) lane curb and cutter facility. Behind the curbing on
IN each side of the street would be a berm. That is simply a flat portion in which
131 utilities are placed or sidewalks can be placed. On this particular project,
132 sidewalks are planned on both sides of the street. The City has requested that
133 and is willing to participate in a momentary fashion in order to make this a reality.
134 In addition to that, the outside lanes of this particular project will be fourteen (14)
135 feet wide to represent 'share the road bicycle traffic' would allow this particular
136 segment to be used for bicycles as well as ..... So we are looking very much at
137 the pedestrian movements through here, as we present this, this evening.
138
139 The right of way that would be required is a hundred (100) feet. In addition to
140 that, there would be some easements over and above the right of way line. As 1
141 go around the State describing what an easement is, to make it very simple, it is
142 usually hauling dirt in or hauling dirt out. If you have got a low spot, you have got
143 to haul dirt in to make the road bed level. If it is a high spot, it will have to be cut
144 down to make it level. So you are either hauling material in or taking it out to
U-2200.hrg 3 05/ 14/99
145 make that road bed level. So what happens, it usually is a temporary type of
146 right of way agreement and when the project is completed, those easements are
147 generally given back to the property owner. But we need to be on that particular
148 segment of land while the project is under construction.
149
150 We look at the number of relocatees. We are looking at three (3) residences
151 and six (6) businesses. At this, as I am speaking, I was told that at least three
152 (3) of these are abandoned. So it kind of drops it back to about six (6), that are
153 being occupied at the present time, that would have to be relocated as part of
154 this particular project.
155
156 We look at the estimated cost. Right of Way cost is a little over two (2) million
157 dollars. We look at the construction cost, it is a little less than four and a half
158 (41/2) million dollars. That gives us a total of a little over six and half (6 '/2) million
159 dollars to do what we are presenting this evening.
160
161 Looking at the schedule, the right of way date, we are looking at July of 1999,
162 which is just a couple of months away. These would be beginning dates. That is
163 when the process would begin, when we would start acquiring the land to do this.
164 We look at the construction date. We are looking at March of 2001 and that
165 again would be the beginning date of when you would see earth begin to be
166 moved and so forth in terms of constructing this particular project.
167
168 The next page is a cross section of what the project would look like upon
169 completion. Again we said, the right of way is about a hundred feet;
170 approximately a hundred feet would be required to do this. We would have five
171 (5) lanes, would be two (2) lanes in each direction, north and south. The outside
172 lanes would be fourteen (14) feet wide with the inside lanes being twelve (12)
173 feet wide. Again that extra width is for bicycles traffic. So we are proposing
174 'share the road bicycle traffic' for this particular project. There would be curb and
175 gutter; and then behind the curb and gutter, there would be the berm that we
176 talked about a minute ago. Inside of that berm, which is ten (10) feet wide, there
177 would be a sidewalk placed on each side of the street, which would be five (5)
178 feet wide, the standard width of a sidewalk.
179
18o The next page simply gives you some idea of the steps that the Department of
181 Transportation goes through in order to construct a highway project, or how we
182 get to where we are before we do construct, is really what this is. Roman 1
183 simply indicates the local government level. Most projects that we undertake
184 begin at some point at the local government level, either the County, or the City.
185 There are various public meetings conducted at the local level in order to
186 develop a thoroughfare plan for the area. That is where many of the projects
187 that we undertake, that is where they are created at the local level. The second
188 phase of this is the Transportation Improvement Program, where we are able to
189 prioritize some of these projects on the local level. The cities and the counties
19o bring them forth to our Board of Transportation and approval is given to those
191 projects for funding to be issued or allocated. The project then gets to the point
192 that we are able to begin the planning of it, the environmental plans and conduct
U-2200.hrg 4 05/ 14/99
193 the public meetings that we conduct dealing with the design of that particular
194 project. This evening we are basically at the last black dot in the second column.
195 We have gone through most of these steps. We had a Citizens Information
196 Workshop here about a year and a half ago. I believe it was in the Town Hall,
197 City Hall, rather than the school, but we have had public meetings regarding
198 what we are showing this evening.
199
Zoo The last page is a comment sheet. Again that is what you can fill out and leave
201 with us, or mail to us, if you don't wish to make a verbal statement in the room. It
202 gives you two (2) options there of a way you can participate in the public hearing
203 process, whether you make the verbal statement or the written statement.
204
205 1 am going to take just a moment. I am going to go to the map and kind of walk
206 through it and explain some of the colors you are looking at and then basically
207 what the plan is as we get ready to begin. (Pause) I hope this is working. Can
208 you hear that? Okay? Okay I will go through some of the colors that you are
209 seeing. I may not go through all of them, but I will go through the most
210 predominant ones. We look at the orange that you see through here, it would
211 represent the existing road that is out there now. That is the existing Fayetteville
212 Street, North Fayetteville Street. Any yellow that you see would represent new
213 pavement that would be placed to make this five (5) lanes wide. For the most
214 part, it is a symmetrical widening, which simply means, it is the same amount
215 from the existing center of the road in each direction. There are a couple of
216 points along here that is not true. A segment from East Pritchard to Hampton, in
217 this area right here, all of the widening is on the westside. Then we have
218 another end down at Old Liberty Road, that I will get to in a minute, but it is all on
219 the east side for just a small segment in that particular area. There are some
22o additional turn lanes being put in and it would require a little more width than the
221 five (5) lanes that we are talking about. There would be certain areas where you
222 may have six (6) lanes and you may have seven (7) lanes even, depending
223 where they are dual lefts or that type of situation. But the light green that you
224 see, the solid light green represents right of way that the State will have to
225 acquire in order to construct this. The light green and the crosshatching
226 represents those construction easements, that I was talking about while ago,
227 where we may have to haul dirt in or take some dirt out to make a level roadbed
228 through there. The dark green, that you see, represents right of way, that we
229 feel that we already have, but this will not be confirmed until we go to the
230 courthouse to review all of the records and see how everything is recorded. But
231 at this point, we feel like we have a hundred feet and that is what the design is
232 based on. If that is not the case, then of course we will have to negotiate the
233 right of way settlements, and so forth, with some property owners through here.
234 As I am talking this evening, there is nothing final at this point, so we are just
235 talking from the best information that we have at this point and then proceed
236 from there. The brown that you see represents buildings of some type. It could
237 be churches, or manufacturing plants, homes, but that is what that would
238 represent. We have - the silver that you see represents the existing roads,
239 intersecting streets, that are tying in currently with 220. It doesn't necessarily
240 mean that anything is being done to those, it is just a point of origin that we can
U-2200.hrg 5 05/14/99
241 locate ourselves. I do want to point out one (1) area here at West Pritchard
242 Street, before I forget it. That will be cul-de-saced. It would not have access at
243 that point into 220. That is this one right here. This is East Pritchard here and
244 that is West Pritchard, I believe, and so it will be cul-de-saced right there. But
245 the basic project would begin just to the south of East Pritchard, would proceed
246 in a northerly direction and as we said five (5) lane curb and cutter with sidewalks
247 on each side. There was - we intended to realign Allred Street, at this point, to
248 make Allred more of a ninety (90) degree type intersection. We understand that
249 we are getting in some City property here, so I don't know exactly what the final
250 outcome of this will be. But at the present time, we are showing it to be
251 realigned to make a safer intersection there, without having these off set streets
252 at that point. We would proceed in a northerly direction till we get to Old Liberty.
253 The project then would begin to taper back to tie into the existing Fayetteville
254 Street, I guess. I don't know what you refer to it down here, but that is North
255 Fayetteville Street is what we are looking at this evening. I don't know what
256 happens when it goes further north, if that is still North Fayetteville Street or not.
257 But that is basically what the project would entail.
258
259 There are a couple of other items that I need to touch on before we open it up for
260 your comments. Number 1, 1 need to discuss Right of Way just a little, of what
261 you might expect when the Right of Way Agent begins his work, or the Right of
262 Way Department. There would be final surveys made of the project and there
263 would be stakes placed in the ground so that each property owner could see
264 exactly how he is being effected by the project. You would be contacted by a
265 Right of Way Agent. He would have plans with him and he would ask you
266 questions about your property. At the same time, you can ask him questions
267 about the project and what you would expect from the construction of this
268 particular project. But there would ultimately be an appraisal made of the
269 properties and there would be an offer made to you for the amount of right of
270 way that would be needed from your property. We have several responsibilities
271 that we have to except. Number 1 - we have to treat all owners and tenants
272 equally. We have to fully explain an owner's rights to him. We have to pay just
273 compensation in exchange for any property that we have to acquire to construct
274 a new road. For those businesses or homes that is relocated because of the
275 widening project, we have to offer Relocation Assistance. That is also part of the
276 right of way responsibility. For a home that is being relocated or business, there
277 are additional momentary amounts over and above what you are paid for the
278 value of the current market value of that property. That extra, those extra funds
279 could be used to help locate additional housing within the area or extra mortgage
280 payments that you have may incur. So there are - I just want to emphasize to
281 you, there is extra money over and above the current market value of the
282 property to help those that need to be finding new quarters to live, or new
283 facilities in which to work. I wanted to touch on that.
284
285 At this point, I am going to open the floor for your comments. I just want to ask
286 you to come forward and use the microphone, because really that is the only way
287 1 can guarantee that you will be recorded. We had one speaker, I believe, that
288 pre-registered. Mr. Talmadge Baker. If you will, please come forward.
U-2200.hrg 6 05/14/99
289
290 Mr. Talmadge Baker: Thank you, Mr. Hendricks. Mr. Board
291 Member, Kindley, it is nice to see you tonight too. Glad to have you with us. My
292 name is Talmadge Baker and I am a member of the Asheboro City Council. I am
293 representing the city here tonight as the Chairman of the Transportation
294 Committee. My presence, I guess, says that we concur with the planning at this
295 point and time and would also say that the City of Asheboro will be willing to
296 cooperate or want to cooperate with you in the realignment of Allred Street. Also
297 we are pleased that bikeways are planned, sidewalks are scheduled and also
298 curb and gutter. I am pleased to say that on Thursday evening of last week,
299 May 6, the City of Asheboro approved their portion of the money for the
300 sidewalks. So we are ready to move on that and quite frankly, we can't wait until
301 March of 2001. And if there are projects that are speeded up, we would like to
302 see you speed this one up. It is a pleasure to be here tonight. It is nice to have
303 you. By the way, thanks very much for the Pre-Hearing Meeting this afternoon at
304 5:00. 1 think it provided the opportunity for people to come and see the maps
305
and to learn more about it and we appreciate your being here.
306
307 Moderator: Thank you, Sir. Okay. Mr. Baker was
309 the only pre-registered speaker. At this point, I will open it for anyone else who
309 wishes to make a comment for the public record. I would just ask that you come
310 forward and use the podium. So who would be next? (Pause) Let's not all
311 speak at once now. Does anyone wish to speak for the record? If not, .... yes
312 Sir.
313
314 Mr. C. F. Cagel: I am C. F. Cagel and my brother and 1
315 own some property on North Fayetteville at Allred Street. I have a concern about
316 the right of way. I have written it down and I do plan on giving it to you, but I do
317 want to get it on record. The right of way on this property, in my opinion, is only
318 thirty (30) foot, either side of the old two (2) lane highway, 220. Now can that be
319 located?
320
321 Moderator: (Inaudible)
322
323 Mr. C. F. Cagel: The old 220, which was two (2) lanes,
324 the existing right of way at the time it was widened was sixty (60) feet, thirty (30)
325 foot on either side.
326
327 Moderator: They would just have to do research.
328 That is all I can tell you.
329
330 Mr. C. F. Cagel: And another concern is that when the
331 third lane was added, the right of way used, was it equally taken off of each side
332 or in this particular incidence at our property, I think it all come off the west side?
333 That can be determined, I guess?
334
335 Moderator: I hope we can. I don't know, I am
336 hoping we will be able to find it.
U-2200.hrg 7 05/ 14/99
3, 7
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
Mr. C. F. Cagel: Well I had - Mr. White was a lot of help
in the last meeting. He went back to Albemarle and looked up the acquisition in
the 40's. He could not find where my father or my mother had sold or signed
over any right of way. But the map still has a hundred foot right of way, plus
easement is going to be required. So that is about all I have to say, except that I
would - the house too is on the purple part back there to be relocated and some
of the questions that I had I have got written down and I just want to let you have
it.
Moderator:
Mr. C. F. Cagel:
Moderator:
Mr. C. F. Cagel:
Moderator:
or questions? (Pause) Yes Sir.
Yes Sir.
Get it on record anyway. I appreciate it.
Okay. I appreciate it.
Thank you, man.
Thank you. Are there other comments
358 Mr. Rich Jergensen: I am Rich Jergensen. I am representing
359 First National Bank and Trust. I would just like to know when we will be able to
360 get some information, with regard to the utility right of ways that would impact our
361 signage for our businesses, as to where they can be placed. You know,
362 because I know, that it has an impact, as you can't put signage within certain
363 right of ways for utilities. In both of the parcels, that are going to be affected, in
364 our case, we have signage on both of those parcels.
365
366 Moderator: The right of way is scheduled to begin in
367 July and that would incorporate all the right of ways, such as utilities and the
368 whole bit. That is the beginning date. So it would be some time after July before
369 someone could really get with you and let you know that. I don't think we could
370 tell you this evening from what we have up here, because it is a possibility that
371 there could be some changes made before we get to that point.
372
373 Mr. Rich Jergensen: We dealt with the DOT on one (1)
374 project. The utility right of way came in as an after thought, when the rest of it
375 was already done and I just don't want to get ....
376
377 Moderator: tied up again. I understand. Are there
378 other comments or questions this evening? (Pause) Ya'll are a quiet bunch
379 here. I will ask one (1) more time if you have any other comments or questions
38o and if not I will adjourn the meeting. I appreciate you coming and good luck to all
381 of you and I hope that it all works out well for you. We will be here a while at the
382 end of the meeting to talk to you one on one. If you have additional questions,
383 we will be glad to do the best we can with that. Have a safe trip home and thank
384 you for coming.
U-2200.hrg 8 05/ 14/99
385
386 L. L. Hendricks
387 Moderator
388 Citizens Participation Unit
• 389
390
391 LLH:plt
392 May 14, 1999
U-2200.hrg 9 05/14/99

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Bill Holman, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
November 1, 1999
00 l (1_f 1_i
MENIORANDUNI
To: INIelba %IcGee
Through: John Dorney
From: John Hennessv"
T
?
rL-'If1?01o 0
i 4. p ?f
'Olt
Subject: Comments on the FONSI for the improvements to US 220 Business (Fayetteville Street)
from Pritchard Street to Old Liberty Road (SR 2261) in Asheboro, North Carolina in
Randolph County, Federal-Aid Project No. STP-22013(1), State Project No. 5.1571301,
TIP Project No. U-2200, DENR Project Number OOE-0181.
This office has reviewed the referenced document. The Division of Water Quality (DWQ) is responsible
for the issuance of the Section 101 Water Quality Certification for activities that impact Waters of the U.S.,
including wetlands. It is our understanding that the preferred alternative, as presented in the FONSI, will
result no impacts to jurisdictional waters and wetlands. In the event that further investigation reveals the
presence of jurisdictional areas, the DWQ submits the following comments. The DWQ offers the following
comments based on review of the aforementioned document:
A) At this time, the DWQ concurs with the Finding of No Significant Impact. The proposed impacts
are not of a magnitude and nature to preclude the construction of the project.
B) Prior to an issuance of the 401 Water Quality Certification, the NCDOT is respectfully reminded
that they will need to demonstrate the avoidance and minimization of impacts to wetlands (and
streams) to the maximum extent practical. Should the impacts to jurisdictional wetlands exceed
1.0 acres, mitigation may be required in accordance with NCDWQ Wetland Rules ( I5A NCAC
2H.0506 (h)(2)1. Based on the impacts described in the document, wetland mitigation will be
required for this project.
C) In accordance with the NCDWQ Wetlands Rules (15A NCAC 2H.0506(b)(6) ), mitigation will be
required for impacts of greater than 150 linear feet to any single perennial stream. In the event that
mitigation is required, the mitigation plan should be designed to replace appropriate lost functions
and values. In accordance with the NCDWQ Wetlands Rules ( 15A NCAC 2H.0506 (h)(3)1, the
Wetland Restoration Pro-ram may be available for use as stream miti_ation.
D) Where streams must be crossed, the DWQ prefers bridges be used in lieu of culverts. However,
we realize that economic considerations often require the use of culverts. Please be advised that
culverts should be countersunk to allow unimpeded passage by fish and other aquatic organisms.
INIoreover, in areas where high quality wetlands or streams are impacted, a bridge may prove
preferable. When applicable, DOT should not install the bridge bents in the creek, to the
maximum extent practicable.
1621 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 109a post-consumer paper

Mr. William D. Gilmore memo
11/01/99
Pave 2
E) Sediment and erosion control measures should not be placed in wetlands.
F) Borrow/waste areas should avoid wetlands to the maximum extent practicable. Impacts to
wetlands in borrow/waste areas could precipitate compensatory mitigation.
G) The 401 Water Quality Certification application will need to specifically address the proposed
methods for stormwater management. More specifically, stormwater should not be permitted to
discharge directly into the creek. Instead, stormwater should be designed to drain to a properly
designed stormwater detention facility/apparatus.
H) There should be a discussion on mitigation plans for unavoidable impacts. If mitigation is
required, it is preferable to present a conceptual (if not finalized) mitigation plan with the
environmental documentation. While the NCDWQ realizes that this may not always be practical,
it should be noted that for projects requiring mitigation, appropriate mitigation plans will be
required in conjunction with the issuance of a 401 Water Quality Certification.
I) Future documentation should include an itemized listing of the proposed wetland and stream
impacts with corresponding mapping.
J) Based on the information presented in the document, the magnitude of impacts to wetlands and
streams will not require an Individual Permit application to the Corps of Engineers and
corresponding 401 Water Quality Certification. Please be advised that a 401 Water Quality
Certification requires satisfactory protection of water quality to ensure that water quality standards
are met and no wetland or stream uses are lost. Final permit authorization will require the
submittal of a formal application by the NCDOT and written concurrence from the NCDWQ.
Please be aware that any approval will be contingent on appropriate avoidance and minimization
of wetland and stream impacts to the maximum extent practical, the development of an acceptable
stormwater management plan, and the inclusion of appropriate mitigation plans where appropriate.
The NCDWQ appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on your project. Should you have any
questions or require any additional information, please contact John Hennessy at [phone].
cc: Eric Alsmever, Corps of Engineers
Tom McCartney, USFWS
David Cox, NCWRC
Steve Mitchell, NCDWQ Regional Office
C.\ncdot\TIP U-2200\comments\U-2200 FONSI comments.doc
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
May 14, 1999
Mr. William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
N.C. Division of Highways
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611
Dear Mr. Gilmore:

oG? CP t

Thank you for your letter of April 14, 1999, requesting comments from the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service) on the Environmental Assessment (EA), dated March 1999, for the
improvement of Fayetteville Street (US 220 Business) from Pritchard Street to Old Liberty Road
(SR 2261) in the City of Asheboro, Randolph County, North Carolina (TIP No.U-2200). This
report is provided in accordance with provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16
U.S.C. 661-667d) and Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C.
1531-1543).
According to the EA, the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to
widen the existing multi-lane roadway to a five-lane, 68-foot face to face, curb and gutter
facility. The total length of the project is 1.6 miles.
Purpose and Need
The EA states that the project will improve traffic flow and reduce the existing accident rate, .
which is currently more than double the state-wide average for US routes. The Service concurs
that the purpose and need have been adequately stated and supported by tabular data.
Alternatives Analysis
In addition to the "No Build" and "Alternative Modes of Transportation" alternatives, only the
preferred alternative, widening on existing alignment, was considered. The Service concurs with
this decision. However, the Service retains the right to recommend other alternatives if data not
contained in this EA become available and to provide comments on the final alignment of the
highway within the corridor selected.
Wetlands
As required by the 404(b)(1) guidelines of the Environmental Protection agency, the NCDOT
should first endeavor to avoid, then minimize, and finally compensate for wetland losses that
would occur if the project were implemented. However, due to the highly urbanized and
commercial nature of the project area, there are no jurisdictional wetlands or surface water
sources that would be impacted by this project. The Service concurs with this determination.
Endangered Species
The Service notes that the EA provides a discussion (pgs. 19-22) of the potential project related
impacts on federally-listed threatened and endangered, and candidate, species. NCDOT states
that, as of January 15, 1999, the Service lists two federally-protected species for Randolph
County. These are the Cape Fear shiner (Alotropis niekistocholas) and Schweinitz's sunflower
(Helianthus schiveinitzii). The NCDOT has concluded that the project will have "No Effect" on
either species. The Service concurs with this determination. However, this decision would be
reconsidered if additional information on listed species that could be impacted by this project
comes to light, or if there is a significant change in project plans.
Section 4(f)
Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966 specifies that the Secretary of
Transportation may not approve the use of land from any publicly owned park, recreational area,
wildlife and waterfowl refuge, or other designated area, purchased all, or in part, with Federal
funds unless a determination has been made that: (1) there is no feasible and prudent alternative
to the use of the land from the property and (2), the action includes all possible planning to
minimize harm to the property from such use.
This document lacks a 4(f) declaration for this project. However, based on available information,
there are no 4(0 lands under our jurisdiction that would be affected by this project.
Summary
The Service considers that this EA adequately addresses the existing fish and wildlife resources
and the potential impacts of this proposed project on these resources. Based on the information
provided, the Service concludes that this project, implemented as described, will not have
significant impact on resources under our jurisdiction.
2
Y
The Service appreciates the opportunity to comment on the project. Please advise us of any
changes in project plans. If you have any questions regarding these comments, contact Tom
McCartney at [phone], ext. 32.
Sincerely,
ohn M. H fner
Ecological Services Supervisor
cc:
COE, Raleigh, NC (Eric Alsmeyer)
DWQ, Raleigh, NC (John Hennessey)
WRC, Creedmoor, NC (David Cox)
FHWA, Raleigh, NC (Nicholas Graf)
EPA, Atlanta, GA (Ted Bisterfield)
FWS/R4:TMcCartney:TM:05/13/99:919/856-4520 extension 32:\U-2200.tip
3

Melba McGee
March 26, 1996
Page 2
`,?jQR2619g
ht„Ycr ?.. 6
V k fh,T?? VC,?rJ
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.
Please note that a 401 Water Quality Certification cannot be
issued until the conditions of NCAC 15A: 01C.0402 (Limitations on
Actions During NCEPA Process) are met. This regulation prevents
DEM from issuing the 401 Certification until a FONSI or Record of
Decision (ROD) has been issued by the Department requiring the
document. If the 401 Certification application is submitted for
review prior to issuance of the FONSI or ROD, it is recommended
that the applicant state that the 401 will not be issued until
the applicant informs DEM that the FONSI or ROD has been signed
by the Department.
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 or water impacts have not
been avoided and minimized to the maximum extent practicable.
11203.mem
cc: Eric Galamb
UL Ati?

. STA7j
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS GARLAND B. GARRETT JIZ
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 2$201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-$201 SECRETARY
February 27, 1996
MEMORANDUM TO: Mrs. Chrys Baggett, Director
State Clearinghouse
Dept. of Administration
FROM: H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
SUBJECT: US 220 Business, From Pritchard Street to Old Liberty
Road (SR 2261), Asheboro, Randolph County, Federal Aid
Project No. STP-2206(1), State Project No. 8.1571301,
TIP Project No. U-2200
The Planning and Environmental Branch of the Division of Highways has
begun studying the proposed improvements to US 220 Business in Asheboro. The
project is included in the 1996-2002 North Carolina Transportation
Improvement Program and is scheduled for right of way in fiscal year 1999 and
construction in fiscal year 2001.
The proposed project consist of widening US 220 Business from Pritchard
Street to Old Liberty Road (SR 2261) in Asheboro, please see attached map).
US 220 Business will be widened to a five lane 19.5 meter (64-foot) curb and
gutter section.
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 federally funded
Categorical Exclusion. This document will be prepared in accordance with the
National Environmental Policy Act. It is desirable that your agency respond
by April 29, 1996 so that your comments can be used in the preparation of
this document.
If you have any questions concerning the project, please contact Derrick
Weaver, Project Planning Engineer, of this Branch at [phone],
Ext. 234.
HFV/plr
RECEIVED
Attachment
FEB 2 `l lyya
N.C. STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
W
X 1171
11_71
04
0
.11
1171
4 e1 ' Li
1
1
X147
°aa
N/J
0 on
d
v
70 .10 15 ' 1504 W .nbo/ A.•. 1 E 07 134 7137
q 7133 OJ
1301 JO d 170] I3o..
IM .u1kJ 731
? ^v41
)0 ° .10 07 .I] 03.2 o
I? ° 1u
/ JII) -.10 71]0 0/ ` .
4 4d 22 ,j.. I •' 1161
_ 1500 .03 0701 .de 7141 ° l0 _?}6-l -Jp
i ... 4 c 1j 0
% 15.01 .104 IS. 07 "i 163
.17o7?e7 y
-L7L, W, - E. °•? 0 7164
34 '.M D°il•y ,1731, aOJer Sr
.07F .19 11c° .p6 Pb 0 '10 /
t
I.. : Ie01 14?? Ca ? 7101
--- g E - ]1L]15 2734 ?
- d o
07 ? n ~ ]114 !?.-•-_'
??? ? 1494_ ,10 O7 07 o r4.e ?5
114) .01 ..05.11 J`
END PROJECT I in
- 1?•3 ns noo / /
, ]7e•
7 } 70
110]LIZ 7110 / 1 7
1 J
`? }111 II }151•
C 11
2111 717} 037}1/
1 I
p ? 1
13
1 t. 14.1_ E. 40 2197
2 1 ( ?11 11.1111?yJ f0
g 1 ?. .1410 1230 10
Il r -,y
11fI1?i 41/ J/ _.? t: _.t 1 I .IS 15 7741
oe
/ loll 1441 ?; 1 i 7114~ 17° 1]11 IS T711
13 o. 1210
f 1,14 1.. :I']? - Q 1..•.. i ,...1-?
'` rl] 141. f 17: I :i
oe omosr r 6 ?
, '... i, 111 '1 Ir
?. ? , 1 11.OD 07< 1771 y A
1 el;^ 111 ._ ? _"
BUS BEGIN PROJECT
° 01 120 j?
' 0,1jn1/y .bl ]ill
• 1410 LJ Sr. '", 7716
L .7s 7711 } 0, Mb
C;ry vii. Sr. t
ASHEBORO "
POP. 15,252 °
1111 .45 ?S Gn1
,,,.y sr. 7? I e
l) ]] 016 $ul:lbwy Rd. .Ip
1413 \ HI fou 42
76 }I
?-v k _ rchdaa e 73
1
Glenola r- C ima 'S ?I

1 evel cross 1 1

4S a l of 311 5 220 2 Lihert c 1
6
?
12 0
Randlemar
I
soon o V Grays Chapel

-, Staley
Worthvillr D
0
' R'` A N D O ?L kl
H

I Fill nklmvlo•
„
feu }
16 f 4 f ails 60 Ramseur I
'
I Ashehur

1 ! 73 D I
1
_
Farmer 22CI 6 59 ,1 3 Wunt
b 42 Colend
Ion
m¢s 'IUWAARRIE r I
'aay Z-922 1

I
' r 1 •? 5
p\
'?
? -- `? I NAT. / \1t Ia1?'?Sea¢rove 1 I
?I?11TtiWhYna1
S
1
w
_ -s
h
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF IIIGIIWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
US 220 BUSINESS, FROM PRITCHARD
STREET TO SR 2261 (OLD LIBERTY ROAD)
IN ASHEBORO, RANDOLPH COUNTY,
STATE PROJECT NO. 8.1571301,
FEDERAL PROJECT NO. STP-220B(l),
TIP NO. U-2200
a KILOMETER! 7
0 MILES a FIGbRE 1
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
March 4, 1996
Mr. H. Franklin Vick
Planning and Environmental Branch
N.C. Division of Highways
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611
Subject: US 220 Business Widening from Pritchard St. to Old Liberty Rd.
Randolph County, North Carolina (TIP No. U-2200)
Dear Mr. Vick:
This responds to your letter of February 27, 1996 requesting information from the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) on evaluating the potential
environmental impacts of the above-referenced project. This report provides
sccping information and is provided in accordance with provisions of the Fish and
Wildlife Coordination Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 661-667d) and Section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543). This report also serves
as comments to federal and state resource agencies in their permitting and/or
certification processes for this project.
Preliminary planning by the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
calls for the widening of US 220 Business to a five lane, 64-foot, curb and
gutter section from Pritchard St. to Old Liberty Road.
The service's mission is to provide the leadership to conserve, protect, and
enhance fish and wildlife and their habitats for the continuing benefit of all
people. Due to staffing limitations, we are unable to provide you with site-
specific comments at this time. However, the following general recommendations
should help guide the planning process and facilitate our review of the project.
Generally, the Service recommends that wetland impacts be avoided and minimized
to the maximum extent practicable as outlined in the Clean Water Act Section
404(b)(1) Guidelines. If unavoidable wetland impacts are proposed, we recommend
that every effort be made to identify compensatory mitigation sites in advance.
Opportunities to protect target areas in perpetuity, preferably via conservation
easement, should be explored at the outset.
Regarding avoidance and minimization of impacts, we generally recommend that
proposed highway projects be aligned along or adjacent to existing roadways,
utility corridors, or previously developed areas in order to minimize habitat
fragmentation and encroachment. Areas exhibiting high biodiversity or ecological
value important to the watershed and/or region should be avoided. Crossings of
streams and associated wetland systems should utilize existing crossings and/or
occur on structure wherever feasible. Where appropriate, culvert structures that
maintain natural water flows and circulation regimes without scouring or impeding
fish and wildlife passage should be employed. Highway shoulder and median width
should be reduced through wetland areas. Roadway embankments and fill areas
should be stabilized by utilizing appropriate erosion control devices and/or
techniques. Wherever possible, construction in sensitive areas should occur
outside of anadromous fish spawning and migratory bird nesting seasons.
We reserve the right to review any required federal or state permits at the time
of public notice issuance. Resource agency coordination should occur early in
the planning process to resolve land use conflicts and minimize delays.
In addition to the above guidance, we recommend that the environmental
documentation for this project include the following (the level of detail should
be commensurate with the degree of environmental impacts):
1. A clearly defined purpose and need for the proposed project including a
discussion of the project's independent utility;
2. An analysis of the alternatives to the proposed project that were
considered, including a no action alternative;
3. A description of the fishery and wildlife resources within the action
area of the proposed project which may be affected directly or
indirectly;
4. The extent and acreage of waters of the U.S., including wetlands and
borrow areas, that are to be impacted by filling, dredging, clearing,
ditching, and/or draining. Wetland impact acreages should be
differentiated by habitat type based on the wetland classification
scheme of the National Wetlands Inventory. Wetland boundaries should be
determined by using the 1987 corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation
Manual and verified by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers;
5. The anticipated environmental impacts, both temporary and permanent,
that would be likely to occur as a direct result of the proposed
project. Also, an assessment should be included regarding the extent to
which the proposed project would result in secondary impacts to natural
resources and how this and similar projects contribute to cumulative
adverse effects;
6. Techniques which would be employed to design and construct wetland
crossings, relocate stream channels, and restore, enhance, or create
wetlands for compensatory mitigation;
7. Mitigation measures which would be employed to avoid, minimize, rectify,
reduce, or compensate for habitat value losses associated with the
project. These measures should include a detailed compensatory
mitigation plan for offsetting unavoidable wetland impacts.
The attached page identifies the Federally-listed endangered, threatened, and
candidate species that are known to occur in Randolph County. Habitat
requirements for the Federally-listed species in the project area should be
compared with the available habitat at the project site. If suitable habitat is
present within the action area of the project, field surveys for the species
should be performed, and survey methodologies and results included in the
environmental documentation for this project. In addition to this guidance, the
following information should be included in the environmental document regarding
protected species (the level of detail should be commensurate with the degree of
environmental impacts):
1. A specific description of the proposed action to be considered;
2. A description and accompanying map of the specific area used in the
analysis of direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts;
3. A description of the biology and status of the listed species and of the
associated habitat that may be affected by the action, including the
results of an onsite inspection;
4. An analysis of the "effects of the action" on the listed species and
associated habitat:
a. Direct and indirect impacts of the project on listed species.
Indirect effects are those that are caused by the proposed action
and are later in time but are still reasonably certain to occur;
b. A discussion of the environmental baseline which includes
interrelated, interdependent, past and present impacts of Federal,
State, and private activities in the project and cumulative
effects area;
C. Interrelated actions are those that are part of a larger action
and depend on the larger action for their justification;
d. Cumulative impacts of future State and private activities (not
requiring Federal agency involvement, that will be considered as
part of future Section 7 consultation);
5. Summary of evaluation criteria used as a measurement of potential
effects;
6. A description of the manner in which the action may affect any listed
species or associated habitat including project proposals to
reduce/eliminate adverse effects;
7. Based on evaluation criteria, a determination of whether the project is
not likely to adversely affect or may affect threatened and endangered
species.
Candidate species refer to any species being considered by the Service for
listing as endangered or threatened but not yet the subject of a proposed rule.
These species are not legally protected under the Act or subject to its
provisions, including Section 7, until formally proposed or listed as threatened
or endangered. New data could result in the formal listing of a candidate
species. This change would place the species under the full protection of the
Endangered Species Act, and necessitate a new survey if its status in the project
corridor is unknown. Therefore, it would be prudent for the project to avoid any
adverse impact to candidate species or their habitat. The North Carolina Natural
Heritage Program should be contacted for information on species under State
protection.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to comment on this project. Please'
continue to advise us of the progress made in the planning process, including
your official determination of the impacts of this project.
Sincerely yours,
4V441? &?
Katherine Doak
Wildlife Biologist
Attachment
cc: NCDEHNR-DEM
NCWRC
NMFS
FHWA
USACE
EPA
FWS/R4/KDoak/KHD:3-1-96/919-856-4520 ext 19/wp:U2200.SCP
REVISED APRIL 19, 1995
Randolph County
.Fishes
Cape Fear shiner (Notroois mekistocholas) - E
Plants
Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii) - E
There are species which, although not now listed or officially proposed for listing as endangered or
threatened, are under status review by the Service. These "Candidate"(C1 and C2) species are not legally
protected under the Act, and are not subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7, until they are
formally proposed or listed as threatened or endangered. We are providing the below list of candidate
species which may occur within the project area for the purpose of giving you advance notification. These
species may be listed in the future, at which time they will be protected under the Act. In the meantime,
we would appreciate anything you might do for them.
Clams
Atlantic pigtoe (Fusconaia masoni) - C2
Brook floater (Alasmidonta varicosa) - C2
Crustaceans
Pee Dee crayfish ostracod (Dactylothere peedeensis) - C2
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DATE
TRANSMITTAL SLIP
TO : REF. NO. OR ROOM, OLDG.

MK - Fee, LALAM6 221 -PS-1m)e,- c_,IL/ Uu
FROM: REF. NO. OR ROOM, OLDG.

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 ADOUT THIS ? FOR YOUR INFORMATION
? PLEASE ANSWER ? FOR YOUR COMMENTS
? PREPARE REPLY FOR MY SIGNATURE ? SIGNATURE
? TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION 1:1 INVESTIGATE AND REPORT
COMMENTS:
J
4 1995
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF 1PANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS GARLAND B. GARRETT J R.
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH. N.C. 27611-5201 SECRETARY
November 30, 1995
MEMORANDUM TO: Mr. Eric Galamb
DEM - DEHNR - Water Quality Section
FROM: H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager /
Planning and Environmental Branch
SUBJECT: Review of Scoping Sheets for Widening US220 Business
(Fayetteville Street) in Asheboro, From Pritchard
Street to Old Liberty Road (SR 2261), Randolph County,
Federal-Aid Project No. STP-220B(l), State Project No.
8.1571301, TIP #U-2200
Attached for your review and comments are the scoping sheets for the
subject project (See attached map-.for project location). The purpose of
these sheets and the related review procedure is to have an early "meeting
of the minds" as to the scope of work that should be performed and thereby
enable us to better implement the project. A scoping meeting for this
project is scheduled for December 19, 1995 at 10:30 A. M. in the Planning
and Environmental Branch Conference Room (Room 434). You may provide us
with your comments at the meeting or mail them to us prior to that date.
Thank you for your assistance in this part of our planning process.
If there are any questions about the meeting or the scoping sheets, please
call Derrick Weaver, Project Planning Engineer, at 733-3141, Ext. 234.
DW/pl r )C
Attachment / a,;2 te--/ S I- F
4wi 4r_ i
t

PROTECT SCOPING SHEET
Date 11/15/95
Revision Date
Project Development Stage
Programming
Planning X
Design
TIP # U-2200
Project # 8.1571301
F.A. Project # STP-220B(1)
Division 8
County Randolph
Route US 220 business (Favetteville Street)
Functional Classification
Length 2.1 km 0.3 miles)
Purpose of Project:
To widen the existing US 220 Business (Fayetteville Street) to multi-lanes to
accommodate future projected traffic volumes and improve safety.
Description of project (including specific limits) and major elements of work:
The project consist of widening US 220 Business (Fayetteville Street) to a five-
lane, 64 foot, curb and gutter facility from Pritchard Street to Old Liberty Road (SR
2261)(see attached map).
Type of environmental document to be prepared: EA
Environmental study schedule: EA Oct 95 - Jan 97
Will there be special funding participation by municipality, developers, or other?
Yes No X
If yes, by whom and amount:
10
or (0 )
How and when will this be paid?
PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
Type of Facility: Other Principal Arterial
Type of Access Control: Full Partial None X
Type of Roadway: The existing facility is a three to four lane, 10.0-meter (33-foot) to
14.4-meter (48-foot) roadway. Generally the facility has 1.2- meter (2-foot) paved
shoulders, however there are some curb and gutter sections.
Interchanges Grade Separations Stream Crossings
Typical Section of Roadway: The proposed cross section is a five-lane, 64 foot, curb and
gutter facility.
Traffic: Current 21,900 Design Year 36,500 % Trucks 5
Design Standards Applicable: AASHTO X 3R
Design Speed: 45 mph
Preliminary Resurfacing Design:
Preliminary Pavement Design:
Current Cost Estimate:
Construction Cost (including engineering and contingencies).... S 2,800,000.00
Right of Way Cost (including rel., util., and acquisition)....... S 1,400,000.00
Force Account Items ................................. S
Preliminary Engineering .............................. S 150,000.00
Total Cost ........................................ S 4,350,000.00
TIP Cost Estimate:
Construction ........................................ S 1,800,000.00
Right of Way ...................................... S 1,400,000.00
Prior Year ........................................ S 150,000.00
Total Cost ........................................ S 3,350,000.00
PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
List any special features, such as railroad involvement, which could affect cost or
schedule of project:
ITEMS REQUIRED ( X ) COMMENTS COST
Estimated Costs of Improvements:
X Pavement
X Surface ...................................... 5 612,700.00
Resufacing ................................... 5
Milling & Recycling (Removal) .................... S
Turnouts....... ........................... $
Shoulders: Paved ............................ $
Earth ............................. 5
X Earthwork ....................................... S 282,000.00
Subsurface Items: .................................. S
X Subgrade and Stabilization ........................... S 79,625.00
X Drainage (List any special items) ....................... S 218,750.00
Sub-Drainage ...................................... 5
Structures: Width x Length
Bridge Rehabilitation Y ........ $
New Bridge Y ........ $
Widen Bridge Y ........ $
Remove Bridge Y ........ $
New Culverts:
Size Length Fill Ht. ..... S
Culvert Extension .............................. $
Retaining Walls:
Type Avg. Ht. Skew ..... S
Noise Walls .................................. S
Any Other Misc. Structures ...................... S
X Concrete Curb & Gutter ............................. S 118, 800.00
Concrete Sidewalk .................................. S
Guardrail ......................................... $
Fencing: W.W. and/or C.L. ............ S
X Erosion Control .................................... S 32,000.00
Landscape ........................................ $
Lighting .......................................... 5
X Traffic Control ..................................... S 40,000.00
Signing: New ................................ S
Upgrading ........................... S
X Traffic Signals 2 New ........................... S 80,000.00
Revised ........................ $
RR Signals: New .............................. $
Revised ........................... S
With or Without Arms ............... S
If 3R: Drainage Safety Enhancement .............. S
Roadside Safety Enhancement ............. S
Realignment for Safety Upgrade............ S
X Pavement Markings:
Paint Thermo X Markers X ......... S 22, 500.00
Delineators.. ... ... .. ... .... S
X Other(Mob.andNlisc., Clearing and Grubbing and Utilities) .... $ 938,625.00
CONTRACT COST (Subtotal): S 2,425,000.00
PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
i
Contingencies & Engineering (150,,0) ........................ S 375,000.00
PE Costs .............................................. S
Force Account ..........................................5
Construction Cost S 2,800,000.00 '
X Right of Way:
Will Contain within E31st Right of Way: Yes No
E3jsting Right of Way Width:
New Right of Way Needed: Width Est. Cost S f
Easements: Type Width Est. Cost S
Utilities: S
Right of Way Subtotal: S 1,400,000.00
Preliminary Engineering S 150,000.00
Total Estimated Cost: (Includes R/W) S 4,350,000.00
Prepared By: Denick Weaver Date: 11/30/95
The above scoping has been reviewed an d approved" by:
INIT. DATE INIT. DATE
Highway Design Board of Tran. Member
Roadway Mgr. Program & Policy
Structure Chief Engineer-Precons
Design Services R.G. 11/28/95 Chief Engineer-Oper.
Geotechnical Secondary Roads Off.
Hydraulics Construction Branch
Loc. & Surveys Roadside Environmental
Photogrammetry Maintenance Branch
Prel. Est. Engr. Bridge Maintenance
Planning & Environ. Statewide Planning
Right of Way Division Engineer
R/W Utilities Bicycle Coordinator
Traffic Engineering Program Development
Project Management FHWA
County Manager Dept. of Cult. Res.
City/Municipality Dept. of EH & NR
Others
Scope Sheet for local officials will be sent to Division Engineer for handling.
Comments or Remarks:
"If you are not in agreement with proposed project or scoping, note your proposed
rovicinnc in (?nmmantc nr Rrmnrkc Sectinn and initial and date after comments.

73 .1L ,]Oe W• ctrl, ° _07 f3. 7137
.IV 70 .10 T3 - A.9. r3 .03.05 w
'OS _
n 2-13-S
150) 10
IL17 _ 7117 77]3 •?
.re 7I7j 7101 0 7?.
Jp .10 07 .It ° .03 71.0 . T163
_ J ! 1 o
L!2°_.10 .7170 07 ?
0 7167 ?
ISM p \ .070] .Oe 7761 ° tip 'L7a J0
?: n- ... j 1]3.2 o .100 .13.1]° 07 \2143
c .17 ?,e7 y
r y o? ? 7.161
E. aede7 Sr. a. JO
' _11 4 ?• .n 8.1.7 125'..0
1601 la 0s : rlv
1' ° 212?5 ..Q ,? q1 1117 7771
of Ii7e / r. --
.10 07 07
9e / r
.02 • 03.17
13lI
IO 1 \
END PROJECT ^ ° ?u1
a, g ! '00 °703 IP;q '/ X'J i
7. 7769
.rr 11? i rQ .70 ;.i
.04 t
?J' _ 10 ? ]731
,177 1 ?s 7111 ? .17 -
r..._..._ \ 1
2179 tyU .w 7757
7 • ?? \`[, \ t: .i 1 :>-? .. lit 1.
It: u9i_ E. 3717. i
- 1
fi/ e
H--e S
1 f: e? J 7770 ?r0
(1 1 f_ I,90 w1 0 701 '.
161
j ell's
J L.. ..t 1 (•_--_.' .IS .,.15 77,9
,., / .Oaf 777 .13
? f/ - 960 !../ ° 1 ? ? 711e? 12 17!I
n 1176 , - ----'
i, 03 0.103 7760 .. /
? ,p 1,19 o?V 'f
o , T '. O3 oa 07 o]r s ' rr
• 1 ? ? 1- 1,16 7 1 r'2
a 7 S 7 l li.w 0 ? 7731 ? .. i i [,j I
ens BEGIN PROJECT
°e - P, In .e3 JLai
. In 1w
, sr. ,• iL
111Q ,
.33 731.ZO 0e Oe
Rlj
131 :cry v1.+ 51. t i' 147`
ASHEBORO
o'
1 ` : POP. 15,252 '• o
1 371 pe?oi.Y
t .10 L7L
U .e3 .5.067
W. Svc,b.Y U. ,22 .1a
rt SvS,bwy ad. .10
f '3 °a
ll
03 .76• .7e ? 1. ? Evq et 212. ?<k

r 4S- --I
Soph
R A N
I
It I Fa I°R
??cEs
73?71 ?
Goss I I
chaps],
f Ili - Ramseur t
49
?shehor ;

?
I
9 A M unEi
1 1k Colerl
•
N. G. 2odMKd

22
Pork 7
s
Sea¢rove
I Whynol
03,6c1
(7- Iz
C 17- 12-1
4
h
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
US 220 BUSINESS, FROM PRITCHARD
STREET TO SR 2261 (OLD LIBERTY ROAD)
IN ASHEBORO, RANDOLPH COUNTY,
STATE PROJECT NO. 8.1571301,
FEDERAL PROJECT NO. STP-220B(l),
TIP NO. U-2200
0 KILOMETERS 1
o MILES a FIGURE 1
SIA v+
'rj
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS GARLAND B. GARRETT JR.
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201 SECRETARY
February 27, 1996
MEMORANDUM TO: Mr. Eric Galamb
DEM - DEHNR - Water Quality Lab
4401 Reedy Creek Road
FROM: H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
SUBJECT: S 220 Business, From Pritchard Street to Old Liberty
Roa SR 2261), Asheboro,_Rndolp County, Federal Aid
Project No. STP-220B(1), Sate roject No. 8.1571301,
TIP Project No. U-2200
The Planning and Environmental Branch of the Division of Highways has
begun studying the proposed improvements to US 220 Business in Asheboro. The
project is included in the 1996-2002 North Carolina Transportation
Improvement Program and is scheduled for right of way in fiscal year 1999 and
construction in fiscal year 2001.
The proposed project consist of widening US 220 Business from Pritchard
Street to Old Liberty Road (SR 2261) in Asheboro, please see attached map).
US 220 Business will be widened to a five lane 19.5 meter (64-foot) curb and
gutter section.
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 federally funded
Categorical Exclusion. This document will be prepared in accordance with the
National Environmental Policy Act. It is desirable that your agency respond
by April 29, 1996 so that your comments can be used in the preparation of
this document.
If you have any questions concerning the project, please contact Derrick
Weaver, Project Planning %ineer, of this Branch at [phone],
Ext. 234. ?q GAF
L
F?y??
HFV/plr 9! FO
Attachment
?Fs
8
73 •II, 1 .1 170. w. .^r 01 171 2157
It, 70 10 25 01 A- .I3 05.0'.,
n q w
Y - 7115
1305
sa; f - v ?° ^ 110.
.14 ) i1 175 3
1713 2".:... - _ 22s
214, o 7!
to 07 ,12 0 AS SIeO 7713
c J
716t 1 114
. 10 p
s 2170 0° m 2162
-J 1]!7 .r
1500 .03\c 0705 Ca )1n1 ° 1'10 1761 -Jo
t l
1501 : -10 "',15C 07 X21.3
S 71 e) S
, ' 7-^ 4 p? o :111
r Sri0
.17 Sr..O7F ID ?'c .ce PS ? /
CO ti t l e7 %
t 1601 1191
II i 1102 - n _]173'75 .? A 05 ?7 7151
t Y M1 ]Ir• ?-•??
r1196. .10 07
M1 07 0 1106 ?h? /
1661 02 .05.17 .1J I.
e ? 7t77 D1
n
END PROJECT
2761
o1v4 ? 27/93/^o?? r317_o0 .1
2 2211 • ' M ` / i 7712
II 1175 71 0 .10
.04 7 linr ?nw 1 >', 7 1
° o ? w i n!1
\ U75 ? 7u1 1I 11
- l 7169 1712 05 7157
05 in
)7 iI t. Y 1 2717
F' 0 .13 o
1b1o E. n6r ?.? i
It.
-81 Id 7)57 O 1 p0
W I l
2 1 y1. !l 1? . 7750 010
1.9o -1 707
>'? J t. .15 ,^2.15 7112
:?'? m u7r J/ - i 1 .0
12- m]]O .Is
- 7]u
1116
J=` \p/ ?1.1? 7 ilJb _ 111, r i
1iu 1 e9 ,? ei .. ri a
1 .01 P.
,.d,. , et oe mo51
1 z
Oa' 7 ?:? ( +O
' ?? ?IU9 ewt 1? 1.61 4!7° ?
of oe c _1 t a_.o° n, 7n7r- .. ' ,i
_13 117} ° 1' ? 5 e.d1° 1 I I u, o.o ? - -_1 - _. l?'
BUS, BEGIN PROJECT
1 e a. '1 ?
1 179, 01' 1 270
' 1110 1.61 !jw /
Pra10 1 62 2111
° oe er 7117 St 1c? t3!e
.. V17
55 1j` OC R
11l? ; City Yew Sr.
n2 ASHEBORO
r .o
2 € POP. 15,252
T ]716 0.1 p5`,
.10 ??, 2119 AS
Al `y oM1t
w. 5°6,bwr 51. 22 1e 7 3°I;,bwy Rd. 1
7 37 ?i °
of a IU1 Evn 41 `
... .24 74 71 i_1
?TI't1(?hda 88
62 Glenola r ?YCfi1ma-I
1 Level Cross 7 7 \ 1
8 2208 2 L1beft
4s 311 5
229 6 Randlemat
l I
C
h
ia
Sop hape
Grays
O \
i
$t

1 Rj` A N D -
aheyy,
?-Wthvlilc 8 (
O ??L
dH
k Pl
lnv
Fran
fd sr 1
r

?.',6 L? f ails It-- =
' Ramseur
19 1
of
h
s
e
1 j
Farmer' 220 1 a.
58 3 Mount
- - 6 8 42 11 Colend
p° `` , a a 1
7r C.12 1
4
F
IARRIE
UW
m¢s va,w l

' 1 l
5

Seagrove W17rnot

4
G
h
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
US 220 BUSINESS, FROM PRITCHARD
STREET TO SR 2281 (OLD LIBERTY ROAD)
IN ASHEBORO, RANDOLPH COUNTY,
STATE PROJECT NO. 8.1571301,
FEDERAL PROJECT NO. STP-22013(1),
TIP NO. U-2200
0 KILOMETERS 1
FIGURE
a 1
o MILES
N
cu
0
Q
it
00
n.
?Z
L?
Lu I-
U U. 0
w
0 Z
z W
LL I"
Q
a
w
0
U
Z
O
Z
C
cu
L
L

0
F 0
z o
o
o
O
Q
W
Z

W ? 5 a? C
U. d }}
nib ln4.1
S

z °
? o
O p
Q N
W
U
O
>
z
U

H
0
V
?cr
?O
LLJ O
O
Q
O
U
Co
O .-4
> I
Z co
. 0
m
W
C3
7
z
W
U
_
O

z