r-2597&R-2040d+e (3)

yM1 MAY 2 5 2011
DEN, - WATER QUALITY
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA Wetlands & Sto?mwa????
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
BEVERLY EAVES PERDUE EUGENE A. CONPI, JR.
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
Concurrence Point 2a
Bridging Decisions
June 9, 2011
TIP Projects R-2597 and R-204 D&E
Improvements to US 221 from North of SR 1366 to NC 226
Rutherford and McDowell Counties
The Merger Team reviewed the alignments for this project during Concurrence Point 2.
The preliminary design, including typical sections, will be presented at the Concurrence
Point 2a meeting. Wetlands and streams will be shown on the design.
A Hydrologic and Hydraulic Analysis Report for the subject projects was finalized in
January 2006. Information from this report is included in the attached "Hydraulic Table"
and will be the primary focus of the Concurrence Point 2a meeting. Also attached are
maps and photographs depicting the major drainage structures.
Project Overview
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to improve a
15-mile portion of existing US 221 from north of SR 1366 (Roper Loop Road) to
SR 1153 (Goose Creek Road) (TIP Project R-2597) and a 4-mile portion of US 221 from
SR 1153 (Goose Creek Road) to US 221-NC 226 (TIP Project R-204D&E) in Rutherford
and McDowell Counties. The proposed improvements consist of widening US 221 from
a two-lane roadway to a four-lane divided roadway and some realignment to straighten
curves on US 221 between Thermal City and Glenwood and near I-40.
A four-lane divided facility with a 46-foot grass median is generally proposed in rural
areas with less development and higher travel speeds and a 23-foot raised median is
proposed to minimize property impacts in areas near Gilkey, the I-40 interchange, and
Marion. The project also includes the replacement of Bridge No. 17 over the Second
Broad River. The right-of-way is proposed to be a minimum of 200 feet. Limited control
of access and access only at existing secondary roads (SR's) will be studied.
The proposed improvements are included as two projects in the NCDOT 2009-2015 State
Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). R-2597 has been divided into three
sections: Section A extends from north of SR 1366 (Roper Loop Road) to SR 1325
(Nanneytown Road), Section B extends from SR 1325 (Nanneytown Road) to SR 1781
(Polly Spouts Road) northern intersection, and Section C extends from SR 1781 (Polly
Spouts Road) northern intersection to SR 1153 (Goose Creek Road). R-204D&E
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
919.707.6000 (o) 919.250.4224 69

includes Section D (US 221-NC 226 intersection south of Marion to I-40) and Section E
(I-40 to Goose Creek Road (SR 1153)).
Project History
Concurrence Point l: Purpose and Need of the Project and Studv Area Defined
A Merger Team Meeting was held on October 16, 2002 to discuss the purpose and need
(Concurrence Point 1) for TIP Project R-2597. There was concern among the Merger
Team members regarding the lack of logical termini of TIP Project R-2597 and project
segmentation. NCDOT agreed to examine the possibility of combining TIP Project
R-2597 with TIP Project R-204 or re-addressing TIP Project R-2597 limits. Concurrence
on the purpose and need was not achieved and would be re-examined once a logical
northern project terminus was determined for TIP Project R-2597.
The project study area and the Purpose and Need Statement were revised to include TIP
Project R-204D&E, as well as TIP Project R-2597, and to extend the project study area to
US 221-NC 226 near Marion. The Purpose and Need Statement was distributed to the
Merger Team members and concurrence on Concurrence Point 1 for the subject projects
was reached, the form is dated October 16, 2002. The two projects will be evaluated in a
single environmental document. The purpose of the projects as shown on the signed
concurrence form is: The purpose of these projects is to improve the level of traffic
service by reducing travel time along the US 221 Intrastate Corridor and increase safety.
Preliminary Discussion for Concurrence Point 2
Once concurrence was reached on CP 1, the Merger Team discussed Concurrence
Point 2, specifically the alignment alternatives that would be carried forward. .
The project was divided into segments for evaluation purposes. These segments include
east side, west side, or best fit widening of the existing highway. Some realignment is
also being considered to straighten the curves on US 221 between Thermal City and
Glenwood and near I-40. These design options were presented at the Merger Team
Meeting on June 15, 2004. The Merger Team members requested detailed maps of the
proposed alternative designs to better evaluate the alternatives and their impacts, in
addition to information on the classification of impacted streams and a best fit alignment
for Segment C. The Merger Team agreed to review the additional mapping and materials
prior to a second meeting to reach concurrence on Point 2 for this project.
Concurrence Point 2: Design Options for Detailed Study
The Merger Team met again on August 17, 2004 to discuss the outstanding issues
pertaining to Concurrence Point 2. At this meeting, background on the design options
that have been considered for the projects, including the design options requested during
the previous Merger Team Meeting was provided. Concurrence was reached that the
following alignments would be carried forward: Al (West Side Widening); B1 (West
Side Widening), B2 (East Side Widening), and B3 (Avoidance Alternative for the
Monteith Historic Property); C (Best Fit Alignment); D (Best Fit Alignment); El (West
Side Widening); F1 (West Side Widening) and F2 (East Side Widening); G1 (West Side
Widening) and G2 (East Side Widening); and H (Best Fit Alignment).

The Merger Team concurred with the "Alternatives to Be Studied" as discussed at this
meeting and signed the Concurrence Point 2 signature sheet.
Project Status
The wetlands and streams have been delineated. These delineations were verified by the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,(USACE) representative on March 22, 2005.
The USFWS lists four species in Rutherford County, three species in McDowell County,
and one species in both Rutherford and McDowell Counties under federal protection of
the Endangered Species Act as of March 21, 2011. The bald eagle, listed for McDowell
County, is protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGPA). No
Federally Listed Threatened and Endangered species have been found along the subject
projects.
The project study area was adjusted slightly in various areas so that the entire design
would be contained within the project study area limits. The preliminary designs will be
presented at the concurrence meeting. A Traffic Capacity Analysis Report was completed
for TIP Project R-2597 in April 2004 and for TIP Project R-204D&E in November 2002.
In April 2003, the Historic Architectural Resources Survey Report was completed for TIP
R-2597 and determined that of the 38 historic architectural resources identified as being
at least fifty years of age within the APE, three of these properties were considered
potentially eligible for listing on the National Register, while 35 resources were not
eligible for National Register listing. The William Monteith House was determined
eligible for the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion C for architecture.
The Albert Weaver Farm was determined eligible for the National Register of Historic
Places under Criterion A for agriculture and under Criterion C for architecture. The B.G.
Hensley House was determined eligible for the National Register of Historic Places
(NRHP) under Criterion C for architecture.
A previous Historic Architectural Resources Survey Report conducted along US 221
south of Old US 221 (SR 1536) in Rutherford County identified five properties within the
study area for the R-2597 project as being fifty years of age or greater. Of the five, only
one, the Gilboa United Methodist Church, was determined eligible for the NRHP under
Criterion C for architecture.
An historic architectural resources survey previously conducted along US 221 north of
I-40 (R-204D&E) in McDowell County identified five properties within the study area for
the R-204D&E project as being fifty years of age or greater. Of the five, none of the
resources were determined eligible for the NRHP.
An Archaeological Study was conducted for TIP R-204D&E in October 2002. Five
archaeological sites were discovered during a reconnaissance survey of the project area,
one of which was recommended for further testing to determine its eligibility for the
National Register. The four remaining sites were recommended as not eligible.
In June 2007, an Archaeological Survey Report was completed for TIP Project R-2597.
One previously recorded site and six additional archaeological sites were recorded in the
project APE. The results of the archaeological study indicated that additional
archaeological work is recommended for one site to determine its boundaries and

eligibility for the National Register. Another site was located within the boundaries of an
NRHP eligible architectural resource; however, the portion of the site that lies within the
project APE is disturbed and does not contribute to the NRHP eligibility of the resource.
The four remaining sites were recommended as not eligible for National Register listing.
In addition, there are two historic cemeteries located near the project APE; however, no
further work is recommended for these sites. The NCDOT will perform additional
archaeological surveys in several areas along existing US 221 where the proposed
alternative designs have extended outside the original project APE after a Least
Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative (LEDPA) is selected.
Since the Concurrence Point 2 Merger Meeting and based on new information, the
NCDOT also investigated replacing the bridge over the Second Broad River on existing
alignment (Segment Dl). Details regarding Segment D1 are included in the Revised
Concurrence Point 2 handout. The Merger Meeting is being held to discuss a revision to
the detailed study alternatives carried forward (Revised Concurrence Point 2), as well as
to identify and reach concurrence on the bridge locations and lengths (Concurrence
Point 2a) for the proposed improvements to US 221 in Rutherford and McDowell
Counties.
Attachments
Hydraulic Table
Figures
Major Stream Crossings for Rutherford County
Major Stream Crossings for McDowell County
Preliminary Design at Major Stream Crossings
Stream Crossing Photographs
FIGURES
0
C?nC)?: Z a
< -aX> vm
55 5 >
EL a _a a a
d m 2 y m
m m m m m
N N N N N
N O CD O
m N ? 7 .D
O
(nnN ,j TJ
c ? :ro
a a a v
m ° m
? m
m z
x
.a
a
m n n -i
c c -
n m CD
CD
n
o CD a m
2L ID .N. J
7 O
CD N J
N C m
0 a
M j
n N a
c m
a
E m° o m
N 3 N
2 0
CL v
= o
CD
° a
3 0 m a
o a 3
< CD
(f) O N
A
O r 3
C. m x N N
P
O X =, O
10 N
n
c m 3
cn
o
c ° N
Z) = N
O
3 m
(D <
o J M
(D
N o m
3 C
O Q N
?.
J C:- m
m
m _, m
CL co
CD a7
CD m
J
c n.
m n
J N
? W N
J E
CD a
CD N ?
C m ?
m m
(<D 3
? o
° n
DI N .?
Q n
m N
? O
N C
7 a
Q
(D CD
N
V
V
7
m
N
m
0
0
CL
0
CD
7
O
7
n
CL
m
a
a?
m
3
CD
0
m
(D co N J m t, A W N
m m

2 m m m o D o D D D D D D
0
O
7 O
J
7 Z U1 j Cn Cn Cn Cn Cl)
C7 7 O m J m 7
n m n

n m

7
m
J

.ZJ

3
0 n
0) 0
3
Q n n
3 o
0
0 ° 3
Z) ° 3 ° o
CD m o am am n G) am am :1 J
7 a N
m 1 a 11 a
m a
m a
lTJ O m
a
(O J
a ? ?
O O, m
O co
O
O -1 C
N
.
n° m accy
ac
a co
a
0 07

C7

m
m m x zJm ?7m Zl d 2
?d ?d m
?c2 m <`2 <2 <' < < m
,c
0 m m m n
? m m
0 0 0 0
m
A N i ? x 70
(
D CD m p
?E ;D r (
D m ((DD rDD
v m m m m (D _m ?
m n v m_
J 7 7 J 7 O O 7 7 J J 7
N N w (ll N n 00 n (U N N N N
D 7

CL a J

a J J

a a
CD
O x 0' a

a

a
:1
a
71
a
X ? ? J
O ?5, ? n
m m =
m m (D m m
J 7 7 7 7 (O m J 7 7 7 J
a a a n a a a a a a
D
d
N N A? A N ? ?
C) C) C cn co O
x x x x n Fo
c ;zv x s x
m
N

O W
A W N
W O
O O

(D
N
(D
A
V
p
m
co
m

`
W
(J1 (O N W W
N N D Ut
O A N
Z. N
O
O N
D V O N W W (O
V m
x F a` s
a x
fo
N
m

co w

4?

09
NJ
EA

K)
(fl W
N O </? O O W
W
V -A N
(c A
Cn co EA m
W O W
v
N
N
A A O A C. O O O

ER
C) U) O j

O O

W

N

(n

EA

EA
V
A
V
(D
W
V
O N
O m
A
0) D
N
W
CD
jV

m
i co
(D
.A m co

'A

(Vii
N
-j
V
Qo p

m
Cn
o N

0 m

om
CD co C) p

n C) Cl) U7 Cn Cn Cn Cn V) (n

W N
Cn A N
W N W
W m W
N
IX) N
O
(b
Cn
N ? O
J 0
m m
m : 7
m m j
m j
m
m
m j'
m
v 3 v
3 m
Cl)
3 to
m
m
3 m
° -0 ° 7 ° m m o m a m a
m
a) W n n m m (n n m n n ro n
CD
N O N O N O N O N O N O N O N O cn O N O
N N N N N N N N N
m m m m m m m m m m
v v
3 m m m
3 3 m m m
3 m m
3
CD m v m v o CD m m m m
CD m m m m m m m m m m
m m m m m (D m m m m m
J 7 7 7 7 J 7 7 7
J 7 J 7 7 J 7 7 7 7 J
N N O1 [U N 61 d N d N ?1-
N C) S? S J) n S n 7 C7 7 C7 n (7 n
7 N 41 v O) m C)
j m tll N d O 61 d fu SU 7 w N N N N
7 J 7 J
CD J 7 7 J J
7 7 J J 7 7
= 7 7 7 J 7 Z
J J 7 J 7
J J J 7
m 7 7 7
J 7 J 7
J J
- m m m m m m - CD m m m m M (D m m - m m m M
m ? of ag m ?. a? CL
m

ma
a
(D
a a CD
a ID
a a n
'm6 a a s
a s
s a
a a
m
m0
j. S S ?. ? 3 7 7' = 7' 7 = S Z
co
Jam mm W N OCn N mN) mN W N Nm mN
Ft? 5
S
J
J x
?` 7
7 S
7
J

CCD ?99C6 ?S1
0 'a doo-I Jadc
?-
a
?\ N
f '? 1
J
so
ova ??
6,0
do,
/mar a
0 I =
g v m m O
UJ
L
N
y N ? Z C ??,a)7
?.

o
c
o

' 10
I I

ooh
to
r.

/ co

r') x Cl)
Ul C.
N
.Z7
n
W
??
16
0
O
cn

r
0
0
r
n
O
l W 1
x cn ?
?C 3
CD m
.G
NJ c/)
N
0
?•?? A cAn
°
,
? u
o CD
*?R
crib o xv
cn G
N? ?? a cn cci
C

fG
1 E
C
T
qi
F
y ?
?? O
? C -i C x S N o
a
-
a
C4
f(D
L
Q
0 R
v
fD
0 0
? F O
=
O
H
C
cn ?

o

3
x U?
rn m ?..

;o
n n
C7 ?
X
0
O
o s
0
m ? v_? a
X m
m ?.
0
I?
dUcie Creek
Rc
(SR 1153)
c?
cfl Q
CD
C ti
? N
N ?
O
A v
n
PRELIMINARY DESIGN AT
MAJOR STREAM CROSSINGS
U
1
. Q
O
N
1 ? J
y ?
F ?
F?
R ?
r
TIP R-2597 and R-204 ME
SITE 1
Cathey's Creek
0 50 100
i I I , I
SCARF (F)
c ,
M/
EXPRESSWAY GUTTER
I
,- s
i
i

?,Jj u /N u i wuv

TIP R-2597 and R-204 ME
SITE 2
Stoney Creek
-?F -r

0 50 100
I\

I?
F?

h
r

0 50 100
TIP R-2597 and R-204 D6E SITE 3
Rockhouse Creek
SCALE (F71
i
??rr???naarn?????•c??ran•wacrosx? ..,.. a?sir:- ,..
(3) 6'X 6' RCBC
II '?

r
`F
F
m_ \ F?

Z?
ROB
VAN
72" CMP
F
\` F
mss. ?
TIP R-2597 and R-204 D&E I SITE 4
UT to Second Broad River

0 50 100
i I I , I C
SCALE (FT)
?.:5
r
72" C M P
F ?
?. I Y

r

F F

O a
POOL
r?
?f

4 fl
72" CMP
?7-
5L i1J_¦J O
TIP R-2597 and R-204 ME SITE 4a
UT to Second Broad River
SCALE (FO
v '
- 1
W
L J
41
M
/ L
\ c
o
1 m LO
W w
w v~5
Lj- f , Cp
x `u
G 1 / N
? I
ui l?
U)
U)
w
Q. W
)LL- LU
O
1 1 Call,
? C
1 I O
?\ I"
0
0
E
o LL,
u
N
O
1
z
o?
V °C
O-0
a
0
2c`
W
? c
10
w Nf
W
a LL-
u? LL (
I
(I ( 1 W
cha
I
U
I \ \ O
N
U? \U ?
\ v
f`
a
tn
N
I
d
F-
f I ? 1
?1 1
1

l
z
r
I I?
a? , 3
I
I
I I
1

0
0
E
0 W
in
N
0
C7 >
Z oc
o
?m
,0-0
we
o
V
N m
N
W
W
Q
N
v
o`
Lf)
N
a.
H

? J

v<

? l
CJ
N v ?

?
O _J
1 4
mO `'1\
U ?
m
U

x L?
o
T LL
L
i
i
I
IPI N
1
CI?II

1 0
}

v
_
rV
h W

N

J o

W T

4
1
m
Z?
o?
Q?
Uo
0
22 -o
O
u?

W

ss '- 0

O
N

C
O

in
N
o?C
d.
H

All
r
0
,I
1 I I ` C w
U tt J ?
Q ?? 1
1 t
vl
vl
v\
i
v \

W
0
tV
oC
C
O
01
N
OC
? a
i
'OTSto. 1000.00
6'X 5' RCBC
(?'r
o• ?
---
10
;ta. 10.71.74 % t1

pl? 6 X 5' RC B C

0 50 100
TIP R-2597 and R-204 ME SITE 7a
UT to Second Broad River
SCALE (F1 J

(3) 9' X 8' RCBC
F F _F _F _F

F C
C F F FW F F F

TIP R-2597 and R-204 D&E
SITE E
Goose Creek
0 50 100
i I I , I e
SCALE (FT)
F_-7-- F
F

(3) 11' X 12' RCBC
- x
/ T 4r1,
F F -F _ F -
%.--
c
F -F
_- ?? - - - r
- - - C c F F F F
c c R
BRYAN SC
BENNEI

TIP R-2597 and R-204 D&E
r?
Cl
SITE 9
North Muddy Creek
0 50 100
i I I I I]
SCALE (FT)

c

T?
REMOVE EXISTING PIPE
AND RESTORE STREAM
BED
? o
J I
???20 F
6'x6' RCBC
3.73
)+76.40 1
- 6'x6' R C
f80.00 PGSto. 11.89.13
? -
10.00.00 I FTSta. 12-,59.74
O? ` = 4
0 50 100
TIP R-2597 and R-204 D&E SITE 10
UT to Corpening Creek
SCALE (FT
STREAM CROSSING
PHOTOGRAPHS
Site 1 - Catheys Creek; Downstream Side
Site 1 - Catheys Creek; Upstream Side
Site 2 - Stoney Creek; Downstream Side
Site 2 - Stoney Creek; Upstream Side
Site 3 - Rockhouse Creek; Downstream Side
Site 3 - Rockhouse Creek; Upstream Side
Site 4 - UT to Second Broad River; Downstream Side
Site 4 - UT to Second Broad River; Upstream Side
Site 4a - UT to Second Broad River; Downstream Side
Site 4a - UT to Second Broad River; Upstream Side
Site 5 - Scrub Grass Branch; Downstream Side
Site 5 - Scrub Grass Branch; Upstream Side
Site 6 - Second Broad River; Downstream Side
Site 6 - Second Broad River; Upstream Side
Site 7 - UT to Second Broad River; Downstream Side
Site 7 - UT to Second Broad River; Upstream Side
Site 7a - UT to Second Broad River; Downstream Side
Site 7a - UT to Second Broad River; Upstream Side
Site 8 - Goose Creek; Downstream Side
Site 8 - Goose Creek; Upstream Side

Site 9 - North Muddy Creek; Downstream Side
Site 9 - North Muddy Creek; Upstream Side
Site 10 - UT to Corpening Creek; Downstream Side
Site 10 - UT to Corpening Creek; Upstream Side