20150623 Ver 1_Environmental Assessment_20111222

Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Project Review Form
Project Number 12-0150
County Cumberland Date Received 12/20/2011
Due Date 1/16/2012
Project Description Environmental Assessment - Bridge No 116 replacement on NC 24 210
(Rowan Street), Southern Railroads and Hillsboro Street, Federal -Aid Project
BRNHS-0024, State Project 8 1444501, WBS 33727 1 1, STIP Project B-4490
This Project is bem= reviewed as indicated below
Regional Office
Regional Office Area
In House Review
Asheville
V Fayetteville
Mooresville
Raleigh
Washington
Wilmmgton
Winston Salem
✓ Air
✓ Water
✓ Aquifer Protection
✓ Land Quality Engineer
Marme Fisheries
Coastal Management
Water Resources Mgmt
✓ Water Supply Section
✓ Parks & Recreation
Water Quality
✓ Water Quality DOT
Wildlife
✓ Wildlife DOT
Waste Mgmt
Air Quality
Manager Sign Off/Region
Date
In House Reviewer/Agency
Response (check all applicable)
No objection to project as proposed
Insufficient information to complete review
No Comment
Other (specify or attach comments
If you have any questions please contact
Melba McGee, Environmental Coordinator at Melba McGee(&ncdenr gov
DEC 2 2 2011
DENR WATER QUALITY
WETLANDS AND STOR WATFR RRANCH

Fayetteville �
Replace Bridge Number 116
tJn NC 24-210 (Rowan Street)
Over CSX, Norfolk Southern Railroads and Hillsboro Street
and Intersection Improvements
Cumberland County
Federal-Aid Project BRNHS-002A�(24)
State Project 8.1444501
WBS Element 33i27.1.1
�'IP Proj��t ���490
: � .; �,��
I� £'=i � : �.��� �� •,
U. S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
And
N. C. Department of Transpot�tation
Division of Highways
Submitted pursuant to 42 U. S. C. 4332(2)(C)
��
�� ..
y, �
�'_
���E
APPROVED:
� R �
°� � � ���,��" �'' �=� �-� __
Date ��hn F. Sullivan III, PE
Division Administrator, FHWA
��` C+
��
`t
�
�,'
�
�
�
��
// �� /j .
ate��,�Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Manager,
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Unit, NCDOT

Fayetteville
Replace Bridge Number 116
On NC 24-21 Q(Rowan Street)
Over CSX, Norfoik Southern Railraads and Hillsboro Street
and Intersection Improvements
Cumberland County
Federai-Aid Project BRNHS-0024(24)
State Project 8.1444501
WBS Element 33727.1.1
'�'IP Proj��t �-4490
�.,�.< < �� �
. �-
�
.�r:
_� � =� -
� r,
�'��
y
�
�
�.
�
�
:
�
-I
Doeumentation Prepared in Projeet Development and F,nvironmental Analysis Unit By:
�..
John . Richards, III, EI
Project Planning Engineer
Projeet Development and Environmental Analysis Unit
� � ��� � �
Ja es A. McInnis Jr., PE
Project Engineer
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Unit

TABLE OF CONTENTS
PROJECT COMMITMENTS ............................................................................................ i
SUMMARY....................................................................................................................... iii
1. Type ofAction ..................................................................................................... iii
2. Description of Action ........................................................................................... iii
3. Summary of Purpose and Need ............................................................................ iii
4. Akernatives Considered ....................................................................................... iv
5. Summary of Environmental Effects ...................................................................... iv
6. Permits Required ...................................................................................................v
7. Coordination ..........................................................................................................v
8. Contact Information ............................................................................................. vi
I. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION ...............................................................1
A. General Description ...............................................................................................1
B. Historical Resume and Project Status .....................................................................1
C. Cost Estimates .......................................................................................................1
II. PURPOSE AND NEED FOR PROJECT ...................................................................2
A. Project Purpose ......................................................................................................2
B. Need for Project .....................................................................................................2
1. Description of Existing Conditions .........................................................................3
a. Route Classification ...........................................................................................3
b. Physical Description of Existing Facility ............................................................3
(1) Roadway Typical Section ...........................................................................3
(2) Horizontal and Vertical Alignment .............................................................3
(3) Right of Way and Access Control ...............................................................4
(4) Speed Limit ................................................................................................4
(5) Intersections ...............................................................................................4
(6) Railroad Crossings .....................................................................................4
(7) Structures ...................................................................................................4
(8) Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities/Greenways ..............................................5
(9) Utilities ......................................................................................................5
c. School Bus Data .................................................................................................5
d. Traffic Carrying Capacity ...................................................................................5
(1) Trafiic Volumes Without Project ................................................................5
(2) Levels of Service Without Project ..............................................................5
e. Accident Data ....................................................................................................6
f. Airports ..............................................................................................................7
g. Other Highway Projects in the Area ...................................................................7
2. Transportation and Land Use Plans ........................................................................8
a. Local Thoroughfare Plans ..................................................................................8
b. Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program ...........................................8
c. Land Use Plans ..................................................................................................8
C. Benefits of Proposed Project ................................................................................10
1. Local Plans ..........................................................................................................10
2. Trafiic Volumes With Project ..............................................................................10
3. Levels of Service With Project .............................................................................10
4. Safety ..................................................................................................................10

IIL ALTERNATIVES STUDIED ...................................................................................10
A. Preliminary Study Akernatives ............................................................................10
B. No-Build Akernative ............................................................................................1 l
C. Build Akernative ..................................................................................................1 l
IV. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS .............................................................................11
A. Roadway Cross-section and Alignment ................................................................ l l
B. Right of Way and Access Control ........................................................................12
C. Speed Limit .........................................................................................................12
D. Design Speed .......................................................................................................12
E. Anticipated Design Exceptions ............................................................................12
F. Intersections/Interchanges ....................................................................................12
G. Service Roads ......................................................................................................12
H. Railroad Crossings ...............................................................................................12
I. Structures .............................................................................................................13
J. Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities/Greenways ........................................................13
K. Utilities ................................................................................................................14
L. Landscaping .........................................................................................................14
M. Noise Barriers ......................................................................................................14
N. Work Zone, Traffic Control and Construction Phasing .........................................14
V. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF PROPOSED ACTION ..................................15
A. Natural Resources ................................................................................................15
1. Biotic Resources ..................................................................................................15
a. Terrestrial Communities ...................................................................................15
b. Aquatic Communities .......................................................................................16
a Summary of Anticipated Effects .......................................................................16
2. Waters Resources .................................................................................................17
a. Streams, Rivers and Impoundments ..................................................................17
b. Water Quality Monitoring Data ........................................................................18
a Summary of Anticipated Effects .......................................................................18
3. Waters ofthe United States ..................................................................................19
a. Wetlands ..........................................................................................................19
b. Summary of Anticipated Effects .......................................................................19
c. Avoidance, Minimization and Mitigation .........................................................19
d. Anticipated Permit Requirements .....................................................................19
4. Rare and Protected Species ..................................................................................20
a. Federally-Protected Species .............................................................................20
5. Soi1s .....................................................................................................................20
B. Cukural Resources ...............................................................................................21
1. Historic Architectural Resources ..........................................................................21
a. Historic Properties ............................................................................................21
b. Project Effects ..................................................................................................25
2. Archaeological Resources ....................................................................................26
C. Section 4(fl/6(fl Resources ..................................................................................26
D. Social Effects .......................................................................................................28
1. Neighborhoods/Communities ...............................................................................28
2. Relocation of Residences and Businesses .............................................................28
3. Minority/Low-Income Populations .......................................................................29

4. Public Facilities ...................................................................................................29
5. Economic Effects .................................................................................................31
E. Land Use .............................................................................................................31
1. Existing Land Use and Zoning .............................................................................31
2. Future Land Use ..................................................................................................31
3. Project Compatibility with Local Plans ................................................................31
F. IndirecUCumulative Effects .................................................................................31
G. Flood Hazard Evaluation ......................................................................................32
H. Trafiic Noise Analysis .........................................................................................33
1. Trafiic Noise Impacts and Noise Contours ...........................................................33
2. Noise Abatement Akernatives ..............................................................................33
3. Summary .............................................................................................................34
I. Air Quality Analysis ............................................................................................35
1. Project Air Quality Effects ...................................................................................35
2. Mobile Source Air Toxics ....................................................................................35
3. Construction Air Quality Effects ..........................................................................36
J. Hazardous Materials ............................................................................................36
VL COMMENTS AND COORDINATION ..................................................................37
A. Citizens Informational Workshop .........................................................................37
B. Local Ofiicials Meeting .......................................................................................37
C. Public Hearing .....................................................................................................37
D. Agency Coordination ...........................................................................................37

Figure II-1
Figure V-1
Figure V-2
Figure V-3
Figure V-4
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3A
Figure 3B
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8A
Figure 8B
Figure 9
MAPS AND ILLUSTRATIONS
Signalized Intersection Level of Service without Project
National Register Eligible Boundary for Haymount Historic District
Proposed National Register Boundary for Orange, Chatham and Moore Streets
Historic District
Proposed National Register Boundary for Lions Civic Center and Rowan Park
Proposed National Register Boundary for (former) Shearer Texaco Station
Project Vicinity Map
Current Study Alternative
2007/2030 Average Daily Traffic Volumes No Build
2007/2030 Average Daily Traffic Volumes (Build)
Proposed Typical Sections
Environmental Features in Project Area
Thoroughfare Plan
Fayetteville Future Land Use Plan
Fayetteville Northwest Gateway Master Plan
Fayetteville Northwest Gateway Master Plan
North Carolina Veterans Park
LIST OF TABLES
Table S 1— Summary of Environmental Impacts .................................
Table 1— Project Cost Estimates ................................................
Table 2— Existing Roadway Right of Way .....................................
Table 3— Existing Roadway Speed Limits .......................................
Table 4— Accident Rate Comparison .............................................
Table 5— Intersection Accident Summary .......................................
Table 6— Project Effects on Terrestrial Biotic Communities ................
Table 7— Anticipated Effects on Streams .......................................
Table 8— Jurisdictional Wetlands within Project Area .........................
Table 9— Federally-Protected Species in Cumberland County ...............
Table 10 — Soils in Project Area ...................................................
Table 11 — Project Effects on Historic Resources ...............................
Table 12 — Homes and Businesses to be Relocated ..............................
Table 13 — Predicted Traffic Noise Impacts ......................................
APPENDICES
Appendix A - Comments Received
Appendix B— NCDOT Relocation Assistance Program/Relocation Reports
iv
2
4
4
7
7
16
18
19
20
21
26
28
33

PROJECT COMMITMENTS
Fayetteville
Replace Bridge Number 116
On NC 24-210 (Rowan Street)
Over CSX, Norfolk Southern Railroads and Hillsboro Street
and Intersection Improvements
Cumberland County
Federal-Aid Project BRNHS-0024(24)
State Project 8.1444501
WBS Element 33727.1.1
TIP Project B-4490
NCDOT Hvdraulics Unit
A floodway revision may be required for the proposed crossing of the Cross Creek
floodway. NCDOT will coordinate with the Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) and local authorities during final design ofthe project for approval ofthe floodway
revision and to adhere to applicable floodplain ordinances. (see Section V-G)
NCDOT Roadwav Desi�n Unit
To minimize impacts to the National Register-eligible (former) Shearer Texaco
Service Station, the proposed alignment of Bragg Boulevard has been shifted to avoid
impacts to the property. No right of way or easements will be required from this property.
NCDOT Roadwav Desi�n/Structure Desian Units
Five-foot sidewalks and 42-inch rails are proposed on both sides ofthe new bridges in
order to accommodate pedestrians. Fourteen-foot wide outside travel lanes are proposed on
Rowan Street in order to accommodate bicyclists.
To minimize impacts to the National Register-eligible Orange, Chatham, and Moore
Streets Historic District, a retaining wall with a maximum height of 10 feet is proposed on
the north side of relocated NC 24-210 (Rowan Street) between Chatham Street and the
proposed new bridge.
NCDOT Roadwav Desi�n/Structure Desian Units/Favetteville Area MPO
NCDOT, the Fayetteville Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (FAMPO) and
the City of Fayetteville have discussed constructing a pedestrian culvert to carry the proposed
Little Cross Creek Trail under relocated Rowan Street as part of the subject project. The
culvert would be funded by FAMPO. It is expected FAMPO will provide a formal request to
NCDOT for this pedestrian culvert prior to completion ofthe final environmental document
for this project.
Environmental Assessment — B-4490 Page 1 of 2
November 2011

NCDOT Roadside Environmental Unit
In order to minimize effects to the National Register-eligible Orange, Chatham, and
Moore Streets historic district, landscaping will be provided near the proposed retaining wall
at the corner of Rowan Street and Chatham Street.
NCDOT Proiect Development and Environment Analvsis Unit
Prior to completion of the final environmental document, a special meeting will be
held for the minority-owned and occupied business owners expected to be relocated to allow
them the opportunity to review and comment on the project.
The final determination regarding a de minimis impact finding for Festival Park will
be made prior to completion ofthe final environmental document.
NCDOT Proiect Development and Environmental Analvsis UniUCitv of Favetteville/
Favetteville Area MPO
On October 14, 2011 the City of Fayetteville requested additional items be included
as part ofthis project. The Department will coordinate with the City to ensure the items
requested are addressed and included as part ofthe final environmental document (See
Appendix A).
Environmental Assessment — B-4490
November 2011
u
Page 2 of 2

_ 1/��
Environmental Assessment
Prepared by the
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Unit
of the
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1. Tvne of Action
This is a Federal Highway Administration Action, Environmental Assessment.
2. Descrintion of Action
The project involves replacing existing Bridge Number 116 on NC 24-210 (Rowan
Street) to the north of its current location and reconfiguring the intersections of SR 3147
(West Rowan Street) with NC 24/SR 3828 (Bragg Boulevard), and NC 210 (Murchison
Road) with SR 3147 (West Rowan Street) at NC 24-210 (Rowan Street) into a single,
signalized intersection (see Figure 1).
3. Summarv of Purpose and Need
The purpose ofthe proposed project is to replace Bridge Number 116 on NC 24-210
(Rowan Street) and to relocate existing Rowan Street in support of the Fayetteville Northwest
GatewayPlan and the proposed North Carolina Veterans Park.
The proposed project is intended to address the following needs:
NCDOT Bridge Maintenance Unit records indicate Bridge Number 116 has a
sufficiency rating of 7 out of a possible 100. The bridge is considered structurally
deficient and therefore eligible for FHWA's Highway Bridge Replacement and
Rehabilitation Program.
Without reconfiguring the intersections of NC 24 (Rowan Street), Bragg Boulevard,
NC 210 (Murchison Road) and West Rowan Streetthe level of service is expected to
range from E to F in the design year (2030). (see Figure II-1)
In 2007, the City of Fayetteville approved the Northwest Gateway downtown
redevelopment plan. Portions of existing NC 24-210 (Rowan Street) right of way is
withinthe proposed limits ofthe North Carolina Veterans Park. Relocatingthe bridge
to the north and reconfiguring the existing intersections would allow this right of way
to be reused for the park. (see Sec II-B-2-c)
iii

4. Alternatives Considered
Preliminary alternatives investigated for the proposed project included the "No-build"
alternative and replace the existing bridge along with intersection improvements. Two
preliminary intersection alternatives were studied, a signalized intersection alternative and a
roundabout alternative at NC 24-210 (Rowan Street), NC 210 (Murchison Road),
NC 24/SR 3828 (Bragg Boulevard), and SR 3147 (West Rowan Street). Ofthese preliminary
alternatives, only replacement of the existing bridge along with signalized intersection
improvements was studied in detail.
A capacity analysis was conducted for a dual lane roundabout alternative and was
removed from further consideration because the dual lane roundabout would only operate at
an acceptable level of service unti12015. In the design year (2030), a dual-lane roundabout
with dual-lane approaches and bypass lanes would operate at level of service F. In
comparison, the proposed signalized intersection will operate at level of service D in the
design year.
5. Summarv of Environmental Effects
Table S 1 presents a comparison ofthe current project alternatives.
* Impacts defined as disproportionate adverse impacts
to minority or low income populations (Section V-D-3).
**Impacts to schools, parks, churches, fire stations, cemeteries, etc.
iv

6. Permits Required
Based on anticipated impacts to jurisdictional surface waters and wetlands, the project
will likely require an Individual Section 404 Permit from the US Army Corps of Engineers.
Other permits that may apply include a Nationwide 33 Permit for temporary construction
activities. The US Army Corps of Engineers will determine which permit will be required.
Additionally, a North Carolina Division of Water Quality General Section 401 Water
Quality Certification will be required prior to issuance of the Section 404 Nationwide Permit.
Other Section 401 permits that may be required include a GC 3688 for temporary
construction, access and dewatering.
A floodway revision may be required for the proposed crossing of the Cross Creek
floodway. NCDOT will coordinate with the Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) and local authorities during final design ofthe project for approval ofthe floodway
revision and to adhere to applicable floodplain ordinances. (see Section V-G)
7. Coordination
The following federal, state and local officials were consulted regarding this project:
US Department of the Army — Corps of Engineers
US Environmental Protection Agency
NC Wildlife Resources Commission
NC Department of Administration — State Clearinghouse
NC Department of Cultural Resources — State Historic Preservation Office
NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources — DENR
DENR — NC Natural Heritage Program
DENR—NC Division of Water Quality
NC Department of Public Instruction — School Planning
NC Division of Parks & Recreation
Fayetteville Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (FAMPO)
Mid-Carolina Rural Planning Organization
City of Fayetteville
v

8. Contact Information
The following persons may be contacted for additional information concerning this
proposal and statement:
John F. Sullivan III, PE, Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
310 New Bern Avenue, Suite 410
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601
Telephone: [phone]
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph. D., Unit Head,
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Unit
NC Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
Telephone: [phone]
vi

Fayetteville
Replace Bridge Number 116
On NC 24-210 (Rowan Street)
Over CSX, Norfolk Southern Railroads and Hillsboro Street
and Intersection Improvements
Cumberland County
Federal-Aid Project BRNHS-0024(24)
State Project 8.1444501
WBS Element 33727.1.1
TIP Project B-4490
L DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION
A. General Descrintion
The proposed project involves the replacement of Bridge Number 116, which carries
NC 24-210 (Rowan Street) over the CSX Railroad, Norfolk Southern Railroad and Hillsboro
Street in downtown Fayetteville. The project also involves reconfiguring the Rowan Street
intersections with Bragg Boulevard and Murchison Road into a single signalized intersection.
B. Historical Resume and Proiect Status
TIP Project B-4490 was initially programmed in the 2002-2008 North Carolina State
Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) as a bridge replacement project. Project
development studies for the project began in 2003.
In 2007, the City of Fayetteville requested that Bridge Number 116 be replaced north
of its current location and that the intersections of Rowan Street with Bragg Boulevard and
Murchison Road be reconfigured into either a roundabout or a single signalized intersection.
This configuration for Rowan Street is depicted on the City's Northwest Gateway Plan (see
Section II-B-2-c and Figure 8A). The City would like to use the existing Rowan Street right
of way between the railroad tracks and Bragg Boulevard for the second phase ofthe North
Carolina Veterans Park (see Section V-D-4 and Figure 9). Relocating the bridge to the north
and reconfiguring the existing intersections would allow this right of way to be reused for the
park.
The project is included in the approved 2012-2018 STIP and is scheduled for right of
way acquisition and construction in federal fiscal years 2014 and 2016, respectively.
C. Cost Estimates
The cost estimate for the project included in the 2012-2018 STIP is $24,300,000. Of
this total, $2,200,000 is estimated for right of way acquisition and $22,100,000 is estimated
for construction.

below.
The latest cost estimate for the recommended alternative for the project is presented
IL PURPOSE AND NEED FOR PROJECT
A. Proiect Purpose
The purpose ofthe proposed project is to replace Bridge Number 116 on NC 24-210
(Rowan Street) and to relocate existing Rowan Street in support of the Fayetteville
Northwest Gateway Plan and the proposed North Carolina Veterans Park.
B. Need for Proiect
Bridge Number 116 carries NC 24-210 (Rowan Street) over railroad tracks and
Hillsboro Street north of downtown Fayetteville. The bridge was built in 1956. The
proposed project will address the following needs:
NCDOT Bridge Maintenance Unit records indicate Bridge Number 116 has a
sufficiency rating of 7 out of a possible 100. The bridge is considered structurally
deficient and therefore eligible for FHWA's Highway Bridge Replacement and
Rehabilitation Program.
Without reconfiguring the intersections of NC 24 (Rowan Street), Bragg Boulevard,
NC 210 (Murchison Road) and West Rowan Streetthe level of service is expected to
range from E to F in the design year (2030). (see Figure II-1)
In 2007, the City of Fayetteville approved the Northwest Gateway downtown
redevelopment plan. Portions of existing NC 24-210 (Rowan Street) right of way is
withinthe proposed limits ofthe North Carolina Veterans Park. Relocatingthe bridge
to the north and reconfiguring the existing intersections would allow this right of way
to be reused for the park. (see Sec II-B-2-c)

1. Description of Existina Conditions
a. Route Classification
NC 24-210 (Rowan Street), NC 24 (Bragg Boulevard) and NC 210 (Murchison Road)
are classified as urban principal arterials in the North Carolina Functional Classification
System.
NC 24 in the project area is designated as a Strategic Highway Corridor. The corridor
vision for NC 24 in the project area is a`Boulevard." Parts of NC 210 in the project area are
classified as a Major Thoroughfare in the 2009 FAMPO Comprehensive Transportation Plan
(see Figure �.
b. Phvsical Descrintion of Existina Faci&tv
(1) Roadway Typical Section
NC 24-210 is signed Grove Street and is a seven-lane roadway with curb and gutter
east of Ray Avenue, with three through lanes in each direction and a center turn lane. West
of Ray Avenue, NC 24-210 is signed Rowan Street and tapers down to a four-lane curb and
gutter section with two through lanes in each direction. Rowan Street ends at a signalized
intersection with Bragg Boulevard. Sidewalks exist on both sides of Rowan Street in the
project area.
North of Rowan Street, NC 24 is routed along Bragg Boulevard, which is a four-lane
undivided roadway with curb and gutter. South of Rowan Street, Bragg Boulevard is
designated SR 3828, and consists of a four-lane section with curb and gutter and sidewalks
on both sides in the project area The sidewalk on the western side of Bragg Boulevard
through the project area is a part of the Freedom Trail (see Section V-D-4).
NC 210 (Murchison Road) in the project area is a four-lane undivided roadway with
curb and gutter and sidewalks on both sides.
West Rowan Street is a four-lane undivided roadway with curb and gutter in the
project area. No sidewalks exist on either side of West Rowan Street between Bragg
Boulevard and Murchison Road. Sidewalks exist on the south side of West Rowan Street
between Murchison Road and Raleigh Street.
(2) Horizontal and Vertical Alignment
The horizontal and vertical alignment of NC 24-210 (Rowan Street) in the project
area is generally acceptable.

(3) Right of Way and Access Control
Existing right of way widths along the various streets in the project area vary. Table
2 below presents existing right of way widths for streets in the project area. No control of
access exists along any ofthe streets in the project area
(4) Speed Limit
The existing posted speed limits on roadways in the project area are shown on Table
3 below.
(� Intersections
All intersections along existing Rowan Street are at-grade with the exception of
Hillsboro Street and Murchison Road. A one-way ramp connects westbound Rowan Street
with Murchison Road and West Rowan Street. The ramp terminus at West Rowan Street and
Murchison Road is signalized. A one-way ramp also connects southbound Hillsboro Street
with eastbound Rowan Street. These ramps carry NC 210 traffic between Murchison Road
and Rowan Street. Five of the six intersections in the project area are signalized.
(� Railroad Crossings
Existing Bridge Number 116 carries NC 24-210 (Rowan Street) over existing CSX
and Norfolk Southern Railway tracks. The Norfolk Southern Railway track carries
approximately four trains a day. Of the two existing CSX tracks, one carries upwards of 30
trains per day, including six daily Amtrak trains. The other track is a spur line and is used for
military equipment transport.
(7) Structures
Bridge Number 116 carries NC 24-210 (Rowan Street) over railroad tracks and
Hillsboro Street. The bridge is 637 feet long with a clear roadway width of approximately 56
feet. The bridge was built in 1956. The bridge is considered structurally deficient and has a
sufficiency rating of 7 out of 100.
4

A triple barrel 12-foot by 9-foot box culvert conveys Cross Creek under existing
NC 24-210 (Rowan Street).
(8) Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities/Greenways
Sidewalks exist along most ofthe roadways in the project area. In the project area,
sidewalks exist along both sides ofNC 24-210 (Rowan Street). Sidewalks exist along both
sides of Bragg Boulevard in the project area The Freedom Trail is located along the west
side of Bragg Boulevard through the project area (See Section V-D-4 and Figure 8A).
Sidewalks exist along both sides of NC 210 (Murchison Road) in the project area. Sidewalks
exist on the south side of West Rowan Street between Murchison Road and Raleigh Street.
Little Cross Creek Trail is a greenway proposed to be built by the Fayetteville Area
Metropolitan Planning Organization (FAMPO) along Cross Creek in the project area.
(9) Utilities
Existing utilities in the project area include buried and aerial telephone lines, fiber-
optic lines, aerial power lines, a water line, storm and sanitary sewer lines, a gas line, and an
aerial cable TV line. Overhead lighting exists along roadways in the project area Street
lights are attached to existing Bridge Number 116.
c. School Bus Data
Seventeen school buses travel existing NC 24-210 (Rowan Street) and NC 24 (Bragg
Boulevard) inthe project areatwice daily.
d. Traffic Carrvina Capacitv
(1) Traffic Volumes Without Project
Current (200'� traffic volumes along existing NC 24-210 in the project area vary
from 19,500 to 29,800 vehicles per day (see Figure 3A). Inthe year 2030, withoutthe
proposed project, it is expected that trafiic volumes along existing NC 24-210 in the project
area will range from 31,700 to 44,500 vehicles per day (see Figure 3B).
(2) Levels of Service Without Project
The effectiveness of a roadway to service traffic demand is measured in terms of level
of service (LOS). Level of service is a qualitative measure describing the ability of a facility
to carry traffic and how individual users perceive traffic conditions. It is based on factors of
speed, travel time, comfort, maneuverability, interruptions, convenience and safety. Levels
of Service range from "A" to "F", with "A" representing free flow (ideal conditions), and "F"
representing forced or breakdown flow (undesirable condition).
A transportation facility is considered to be operating at capacity when it is just able
to accommodate the traffic demand. Once the traffic demand exceeds the facility's capacity
(LOS E), excessive delays occur.

Four sigrtalized intersections were artalyzed in the project study uea without the
proposed project. Three of the four sigrtalized intersections analyzed currenTly operate at
level of service D. The remairting sigrtalized intersectioq NC 24-210 (Rowan Sheet) at NC
24 (Bragg Boulevud), currenfly operates at level of service E.
Without the proposed project, level of service for the four sigrtalized intersections
artalyzed within the project study uea is exPected to be between D and F in the design yeu
(2030).
"`:,0 5�- �4F
401 M�H J��p R e2s6
CySQ 0� 9�F pR
hRO �ys ° r
CR 1
�L OS6
9,s5ry �.Pee
NCl6/BqqGCBlVO o�Ov
SR]'11tlWE5T ROWPNSt.
NL 26 � SR 31J]
D/E
2,
INTEFSECTION
LEVELOFSERVICE �
20W I 2030 :+
210 NCd10-SRI16i
� D/D
MOOflE 5T II�
� N
�
9
i
nm
s
W.ROWqNST �a jl� NC2G/p�pROWprySi
HSS.
pOWP
CS
4 �
R9<yo NC20-RAYNVE
� N° "O D/F
0
6R9C'C
NC2f0-NCY6 e(L� WP�F'pSt.
E / F FAVETTEVILLE
NOTTOSCALE BqpN0i5LN. a MAIOEN.
Figure II-1: Signalized intersectionLevel ofService withoutProject
e. Accident Data
Accident rates for NC 24-210 were obtained for the time period between July 1, 2004
and June 30, 2006. Table 2 below compues the accident rates for NC 24210 with the
2004-2006 statewide accident rates over the same time period for urban NC routes and the
critical rate.

�• � � �
Total Accident Rate Fatal Accident Rate
ACC/100MVM ACC/100MVM
NC 24-210 446.61 0.0
(Rowan SL)
2004-2006 Statewide
4-Lane Undivided 432.95 1.23
NC Routes
Critical Rate* 513.07 7.93
ACC/100MVM — Accldents per 100 mllllon vehlcle mlles
* The critical rate is a statistically derived number that can be used to identify
high accident roadway segments.
From July 1, 2004 to June 30, 2006, 87 accidents were reported along NC 24-210
(Rowan Street) from SR 3950 (Ramsey Street) to Bragg Boulevard in the project area. A
majority ofthe crashes involved angle/sideswipe crashes (37%) and rear-end/stop crashes
(29%).
An intersection crash analysis was also performed for the same time period for all
intersections in the study area. Table 5 below presents the number of accidents, severity and
crash rate for the intersections in the project area. One fatal accident was reported at the
intersection of Bragg Boulevard and Hay Street in downtown Fayetteville. Most of the
accidents involved rear-end/stop and angle crashes. An intersection with a severity less than
6.0 is considered low.
ACC/100MVM — Accidents per 100 million vehicle miles traveled
f. Airports
No airports or other aviation facilities exist in the vicinity ofthe project.
g. Other Hiahwav Proiects in the Area
There are several projects within Cumberland County and they are:

• B-4090 — Replace bridge No. 125 on NC 24/210 over Cross Creek. Right of way
is in progress and construction is scheduled for fiscal year 2012.
• B-4949 — Replace bridge No. 61 on I-95B/US 301 over Cross Creek. Right of
way is in progress and construction is scheduled for fiscal year 2012.
• B-4091 — Replace bridge No. 85 on I-95B/iJS 301 over SR 1738, SR 1741 and
Cape Fear River. Right of way is in progress and construction is scheduled for
fiscal year 2012.
• U-3423 — Widen NC 24/87 (Bragg Blvd) to six lanes from US 401 bypass to
North of SR 1437 (Santa Fe Drive/Shaw Road). Project is currently under
construction.
• U-4900 — Widen NC 210/87 (Murchison Road) to additional lanes from US 401
bypass to Bernadine Street. Right of way is scheduled for fiscal year 2019 and
construction is currently unfunded.
• P-4901A — Addition of connection track to CSX rail line in Fayetteville. This
new track will be south of Bridge Number 116. The proposed new bridges will
accommodate this track. Construction is scheduled to begin in fiscal year 2012.
2. Transportation and Land Use Plans
a. Local ThorouQhfare Plans
The proposed project is shown as a grade separation in the current Comprehensive
Transportation Plan (CTP) approved working map by the Fayetteville Area Metropolitan
Planning Organization (FAMPO) (see Figure �.
b. Metronolitan Transnortation Imnrovement Proaram
The proposed project is included on the Fayetteville Area Metropolitan Planning
Organization's Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program. The Fayetteville Area
MPO has allocated $4,400,000 of its direct attributable funding for this project.
c. Land Use Plans
The Cumberland County 2010 Land Use Plan, adopted in December 1996, serves as
a guide for the revitalization of existing development and as a framework for future
development within Cumberland County. The plan recognizes that quality development
increases property values, increases the tax base, attracts new economic development, and
that a public/private partnership is essential for continued growth. The plan also addresses
the visual appearance and image of entrance corridors/gateways to municipalities within the
County and provides standards to enhance their visual appearance. Bragg Boulevard
(NC 24) and Murchison Road (NC 210) are both listed as Designated Entrance Corridors for

the City of Fayetteville in the plan. The plan also recognizes the increased need for open
space and recreational areas.
The Draft 2030 Growth Vision Plan is a new comprehensive planning initiative for
Cumberland County and its municipalities and is currently under review for adoption. One
of the many policies contained in the Draft 2030 Plan is the focus on a balanced
transportation system made up of a network of roads, mass transit services, sidewalks, trails,
and bicycling facilities to help reduce automobile dependency and trafiic congestion. The
Draft 2030 Plan also focuses on the expansion of parks and recreation facilities.
The Fayetteville Renaissance Plan, developed in 2002, is the City of Fayetteville's
long term vision for the future of downtown Fayetteville. The Renaissance Plan seeks to
rediscover the urban attributes of successful cities and towns. The plan focuses on quality of
life issues for its citizens and emphasizes the importance of respecting the rich history and
heritage of the city. Design strategies set forth in the plan serve to guide future development
and investment in the city core.
The Fayetteville Renaissance Plan Implementarion Projects study was completed in
October 2003. The purpose of this study was to revitalize downtown and to take projects
identif'ied in the Renaissance Plan and prepare them for implementation. The ultimate goal
ofthis study is to strengthen the economic position of downtown which involves athree-
pronged approach:
1) Construct new housing in the downtown and to the east of downtown;
2) Help downtown retail to achieve greater diversity and success, and;
3) Create an anchor of attraction and activities that will bring people downtown.
One of the issues identified in this study, is the lack of a clear entry point that would signal
arrival into the downtown area. The study also urges the city to prepare a strategy for
improving the interaction of multimodal transportation elements within the city.
The Northwest Gateway Plan is the City of Fayetteville's long term vision for the
area surrounding the convergence of Bragg Boulevard, Rowan Street, and Murchison Road.
This area surrounds the site ofthe NC Veterans Park. The plan depicts Rowan Street, Bragg
Boulevard and Murchison Road all intersecting at a roundabout. Rowan Street and the new
bridge are shown on the plan north oftheir current location. A portion ofthe North Carolina
Veterans Park is shown on the plan within the existing Rowan Street right of way.
The proposed North Carolina Veterans Park is intended to honor the state's veterans
from all branches of service, but it is also intended to serve as a catalyst for surrounding
private development and link the Gateway area to the downtown. The design for the
proposed park also fills in missing links between other downtown attractions such as Festival
Park, Cross Creek Linear Park, Freedom Memorial Park, Martin Luther King Jr. Park and
Freedom Trail (see Figure 8A and 8B).
7

The first phase ofthe park is open, and is located north of and adjacent to the existing
Airborne and Special Operations Museum. The second phase ofthe park is intended to
utilize NCDOT right of way now occupied by Rowan Street and Bridge Number 116.
C. Benefits of Proposed Proiect
1. Local Plans
The proposed realignment of NC 24-210 (Rowan Street) to the north and
reconfiguration of the existing intersections will support local plans to redevelop existing
NCDOT right of way into the second phase of the North Carolina Veterans Park.
2. Traffic Volumes With Proiect
With the proposed project, traffic volumes along NC 24-210 (Rowan Street) are
expected to vary from 30,400 to 44,500 vehicles per day in the design year 2030 (see
Figure 3B).
3. Levels of Service With Proiect
In the design year (2030), the reconfigured intersection of Rowan Street, Bragg
Boulevard and Murchison Road will operate at a level of service of D or better. This single
signalized intersection will replace four ofthe five signalized intersections in the project area
No improvements are proposed to the existing intersection of Rowan Street with Ray
Avenue.
4. Safetv
The proposed project may potentially reduce certain types of crashes, such as rear end
collisions and frontal impact crashes by providing a less congested, more free flowing
alternative to the current facility. The reconfiguration of Rowan Street, Bragg Boulevard and
Murchison Road will redirect traffic and reduce redundant turning movements for through
traffic and may reduce the incidence of certain types of crashes.
IIL ALTERNATIVES STUDIED
A. Preliminarv Studv Alternatives
Several alternatives were considered for the subject project. Initially, alternatives
were considered which included replacing only the bridge in place. Replacing the existing
bridge in place would require detouring traffic onto adjacent facilities. This additional traffic
would increase congestion and delay on surrounding roadways. Also, Bridge Number 116
provides the only grade separated railroad crossing in the area. Detouring trafiic onto other
roadways would mean additional traffic at nearby at-grade railroad crossings, which would
result in additional traffic delay and increase the potential for accidents at these crossings.
10

As discussed in Section I-B, in 2007, the City of Fayetteville requested that Bridge
Number 116 be replaced north of its current location and that the intersections of Rowan
Street with Bragg Boulevard and Murchison Road be reconfigured into either a roundabout
or a single signalized intersection.
Roundabout Alternative
Fayetteville's Northwest Gateway Plan shows a roundabout at the proposed
intersection of Rowan Street with Bragg Boulevard and Murchison Road. Traffic capacity
analyses were performed for atwo-lane roundabout at this intersection. It was found that a
roundabout would operate at level of service F in the design year (2030). The roundabout
would only operate at an acceptable level of service until the year 2015. Therefore, a
roundabout was not recommended for the proposed intersection.
Signalized Intersection Alternative
A trafiic signal at the proposed NC 24-210 (Rowan Street) intersection with NC 24
(Bragg Boulevard) and NC 210 (Murchison Road) will operate at level of service D in the
design year (2030). Atraffic signal is recommended atthe proposed intersection.
B. No-Build Alternative
The no-build alternative would avoid the environmental impacts anticipated to occur
as a result of the proposed project, but would not meet the purpose and need of the project. If
the no-build alternative was selected, Bridge Number 116 would eventually have to be closed
to trafiic.
C. Build Alternative
The build alternative includes the replacement of existing Bridge Number 116 and
reconfiguration of the intersection of NC 24-210 (Rowan Street) with NC 24-87 (Bragg
Boulevard) and the intersection of Rowan Street with NC 210 (Murchison Road) into a single
signalized intersection. To accommodate reconfiguration ofthe Rowan Street and Bragg
Boulevard intersection, work will be required on portions of NC 210 (Murchison Road), SR
3147 (West Rowan Street) and Washington Street in the project area A new culvert will be
required to convey Cross Creek under realigned NC 24-210 (Rowan Street).
IV. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
A. Roadwav Cross-section and A&�nment
A six-lane typical section (three through lanes and a concrete median) is proposed
along NC 24-210 (Rowan Street) from NC 24 (Bragg Boulevard) to Ray Avenue. Two
twelve-foot lanes and an outside fourteen-foot lane with curb and gutter will be provided.
Five-foot sidewalks will be provided on both sides of Rowan Street. Proposed typical
sections are shown on Figure 4.
11

B. Riaht of Wav and Access Control
Approximately 100 to 120 feet of right of way will be required. No control of access
is proposed.
C. Speed Limit
The proposed speed limit on SR 24-210 (Rowan Street) is 35 MPH. The proposed
speed limit on NC 24/SR 3828 (Bragg Boulevard) is 35 MPH. The actual speed limit(s) for
the project will be determined during final design.
D. Desian Speed
A 40 MPH design speed is proposed for the project. This is consistent with the
anticipated 35 MPH posted speed limit for proposed NC 24-210 (Rowan Street) and NC
24/SR 3828 (Bragg Boulevard).
E. Anticipated Desian Exceptions
It is anticipated no design exceptions will be required for the project.
F. Intersections/Interchanaes
A trafiic signal is proposed for the intersection of NC 24-210 (Rowan Street) with
NC 24 (Bragg Boulevard) and NC 210 (Murchison Road).
G. Service Roads
It is not expected service roads will be required for the project.
H. Railroad CrossinQs
The proposed bridges will cross tracks owned by CSX and the Norfolk Southern
Railway (NS). The NS track carries approximately four trains per day with train speeds
averaging 10 miles per hour at the project location. CSX owns and operates two tracks
crossed by the existing Bridge Number 116. One of the two CSX tracks carries over 30
trains per day including six daily Amtrak trains. The other CSX track is used to transport
military equipment in and out of Fort Bragg. Norfolk Southern uses this CSX track, as well.
As mentioned in Section II-B-1-g, a NCDOT rail project will add a new connection
track south of existing Bridge Number 116. The project, P-4901A, is expected to connect
two separate rail lines which provide service to Fort Bragg Military Base, Fuquay-Varina,
Rocky Mount, and Florence, South Carolina.
12

L Structures
Two bridges and a culvert are proposed to be constructed as a part ofthe project.
The two proposed bridges to carry Rowan Street over the railroad tracks will have a
clear roadway width of 76 feet and will be approximately 125 and 158 feet long. Five-foot
six-inch sidewalks and 42-inch barrier rails are proposed on both sides of both bridges in
order to accommodate pedestrians.
Plans for the proposed second phase of the North Carolina Veterans Park show
Hillsboro Street ending north of relocated Rowan Street. Therefore, the westernmost
proposed new bridge will not accommodate Hillsboro Street.
A proposed four barrel 12-foot by 6-foot reinforced concrete box culvert measuring
approximately 800 feet long will carry Cross Creek under the proposed intersection of NC
24-210 (Rowan Street) with NC 24 (Bragg Boulevard).
It is expected the Fayetteville Area Metropolitan Planning Organization will request a
pedestrian culvert be constructed as part ofthis project to carry the proposed Little Cross
Creek Trail under relocated Rowan Street (see Section IV-�. This culvert would be funded
by the Fayetteville Area MPO.
J. Bicvcle and Pedestrian Faci&ties/Greenwavs
Pedestrian and bicycle accommodations are proposed to be constructed as part ofthis
project. Existing sidewalks on either side of Rowan Street, Bragg Boulevard, Murchison
Road and West Rowan Street which are disturbed by the project will be replaced. Five-foot
sidewalks and 42-inch rails are proposed on both sides of the new bridges in order to
accommodate pedestrians. Fourteen-foot wide outside travel lanes are proposed on Rowan
Street in order to accommodate bicyclists.
The Freedom Trail follows Bragg Boulevard through the project area Little Cross
Creek Trail is a greenway proposed to be built by the Fayetteville Area Metropolitan
Planning Organization (FAMPO) along Cross Creek in the project area. FAMPO, the City of
Fayetteville and NCDOT have coordinated regarding the Freedom Trail and Little Cross
Creek Trail.
NCDOT, FAMPO and the City of Fayetteville have discussed constructing a
pedestrian culvert to carry the Little Cross Creek Trail under relocated Rowan Street as part
ofthe this project. The culvert would be funded by FAMPO. It is expected FAMPO will
provide a formal request to NCDOT for this pedestrian culvert prior to completion of the
final environmental document for this project.
13

K. Utilities
The project is expected to have a medium to high level of utility impacts. Utilities
along the project will be relocated prior to construction. Care will be taken to prevent
damage to water lines and fiber-optic cables in the area.
L. LandscaninQ
Landscaping will be provided near the proposed retaining wall at the corner of Rowan
Street and Chatham Street (Section V-B-1-b). Disturbed areas along the project will be
reseeded with grass.
M. Noise Barriers
No noise barriers are proposed along the project (see Section V-H-3).
N. Work Zone, Traffic Control and Construction Phasina
The proposed project involves replacing existing Bridge Number 116. The existing
structure will be utilized to maintain trafiic (vehicular and pedestrian) on-site while the new
structures are constructed. Trafiic will be shifted onto the new structures before the old
structure is removed. Temporary detours may be necessary to construct portions of the
structure. Care will be taken to maintain pedestrian and bicycle access.
The existing bridge will be removed once traffic has been shifted to the proposed new
structures. The project will also involve removal of an existing culvert carrying Cross Creek
under Rowan Street. Existing structures will be removed in accordance with NCDOT's Best
Management Practices (BMP) for bridge demolition and removal.
14

V. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF PROPOSED ACTION
A. Natural Resources
1. Biotic Resources
a. Terrestrial Communities
There are three distinct terrestrial communities located in the study area Due to the
disturbed nature of much ofthis area, the terrestrial communities only correspond to the
classifications described by Schafale and Weakley (1990) in two areas. Animals observed
during field investigations are denoted with an asterisk (*).
Small Basin Wetland
The small basin wetland community is found where water draining from steep
railroad grades collects, creating a wetland. This community only covers less than one
percent ofthe study area. Dominant canopy and sapling species include hackberry, tree-of-
heaven, and cherry laurel, with Chinese privet in the shrub layer. The herbaceous and vine
layer is relatively sparse, primarily made up of green arrow arum, trumpet creeper and poison
ivy.
Mixed Hardwood Forest
Mixed hardwood forests are found in pockets of land not already converted to
residential or commercial development. The mixed hardwood forest community covers
approximately 11 percent ofthe project study area Dominant canopy and sapling species
include hackberry, winged elm, pecan, sweetgum, red maple, red mulberry, willow oak, tree-
of-heaven, and loblolly pine along the margins. The primary shrub layer consists of Chinese
privet and cherry laurel as well as some ofthe canopy species. The almost non-existent
herbaceous layer consists of a robust vine layer and includes species such as summer grape,
climbing hempweed, sweet autumn clematis, saw greenbrier and Virginia creeper.
Maintained/Disturbed
Maintained/Disturbed land encompasses various habitats that have recently been or
currently are being impacted by human disturbance and make up approximately 89 percent of
the project study area. These disturbances may include parking lots, residential and
commercial developments, and maintained open fields and lawns.
Within the study area species identified in the maintained/disturbed community
include numerous ornamental species, fescue, ryegrass, Chinese privet, Eastern baccharis,
goldenrod, aster, and kudzu. Common tree species identified include sycamore, bald
cypress, southern catalpa, hackberry, and mimosa.
15

Terrestrial Wildlife
Faunal species are highly adaptive and are likely to occur within the biotic
communities previously discussed. Maintained roadside and residential communities
adjacent to forested tracts provide support for early successional species. Forested areas
identif'ied provide forage and cover for wildlife dependent on mature forests with mast
producing hardwoods and is likely to meet the nutritional and shelter needs of a variety
wildlife species.
The project study area is likely to contain the eastern cottontail rabbit, gray fox,
raccoon, and the Virginia opossum. Reptiles expected in this area include eastern box turtle,
rat snake, yellowbelly slider, black racer, six-lined racerunner, and green anole. Bird species
expected to occur in the study area include mourning dove*, northern mockingbird*,
Carolina chickadee*, northern cardinal*, killdeer*, and Carolina wren*. No game species,
predatory birds, or scavengers were observed in the project study area.
b. Aquatic Communities
The study area contains two modified perennial streams. Fish species likely to occur
in this system include redear sunfish, bluegill, American eel, redbreast sunfish, mosquito-
fish*, and the largemouth bass. Amphibians expected in the study area include bullfrog and
southern toad.
c. Summarv of Anticipated Effects
Due to the urban nature of this proposed project it is unlikely substantial impacts to
biological functions will occur. Any construction-related activities in or near these resources
have the potential to impact biological functions.
Terrestrial Effects
The communities likely to be affected by the project are presented below.
16

In general, the project would likely cause the following impacts to terrestrial
communities:
• Direct loss of terrestrial habitats through land clearing, excavation, or fill.
• Wildlifehabitatfragmentation.
• Riparian zone and stream buffer reductions/habitat corridor loss.
• Loss offood sources.
Effects on Aquatic Communities
Impacts to the aquatic communities are likely to result from the physical disturbance
of aquatic habitats (e.g., substrate and water quality) and watersheds. These impacts are
likely to be greatest at stream crossings. Disturbance of aquatic habitats has a detrimental
effect on aquatic community composition by reducing species diversity and the overall
quality of aquatic habitats. Physical alterations to aquatic habitats can result in the following
impacts to aquatic communities:
• Inhibition of plant growth.
• Clogging of feeding structures of fiker feeding organisms and gills of fish.
• Burial of benthic organisms.
• Algal blooms resulting from increased nutrient concentrations, which deplete
dissolved oaygen supplies.
• Loss of benthic macroinvertebrates through scouring resulting from an increased
sediment load.
• Increased water temperatures due to removal of riparian canopy.
2. Waters Resources
a. Streams, Rivers and Impoundments
Water resources within the study area are located in the Cape Fear River Basin
(LJSGS Hydrologic Unit 03030004, NCDWQ Subbasin 03-06-15). Two streams are present
in the study area. One ofthese, Cross Creek, is named. The other stream in the project area
is an unnamed perennial tributary to Cross Creek.
Streams have been assigned a best usage classification by the NC Division of Water
Quality that reflects water quality conditions and potential resource usage. Unclassified
tributaries carry the same best usage classification as the classified stream to which they are
tributaries. The classification for Cross Creek, NCDWQ Index No. 18-27-(3), is Class C
from its source to the Cape Fear River.
Class C waters are protected for secondary recreation, fishing, wildlife, fish and
aquatic life propagation and survival, agriculture and other uses suitable for Class C. There
are no High Quality Waters (HQW), Primary Nursery Areas or designated anadromous fish
waters present within one mile of the study area.
17

b. Water Qualitv Monitorina Data
The NC Division of Water Quality Basin wide Monitoring Program is part of an
ongoing ambient water quality monitoring program that addresses long-term trends in water
quality. The program monitors ambient water quality by sampling at fixed sites for selected
benthic macroinvertebrate organisms, which are sensitive to water quality conditions.
There is one benthic monitoring station on Cross Creek within approximately one
mile downstream ofthe project area. Atthis monitoring station, the stream was rated `Fair'
in 2008.
A portion of Cross Creek within the project study area is listed on the 2010 Clean
Water Act Section 303(d) list as impaired waters for aquatic life, due to the fair bio-
classification it received in 2008. However, Cross Creek itself is not listed as impaired due
to sedimentation or turbidity, nor does it drain into any Section 303(d) waters within one mile
of the study area that are listed for sedimentation or turbidity.
Point source dischargers located throughout North Carolina are regulated through the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program. There are no permitted
discharges to streams in the project area. To a smaller eatent, residential runoffthrough
roadside drainage ditches or lawn management may also introduce pollutants.
c. Summarv of Anticipated Effects
Short-term impacts to water quality, such as sedimentation and turbidity, may result
from construction-related activities. Temporary construction impacts due to erosion and
sedimentation will be minimized through the use of Best Management Practices (BMPs).
The contractor will be required to follow contract specifications pertaining to erosion control
measures. These include the use of dikes, berms, silt basins, and other measures to control
runoff. Disturbed sites will be revegetated with herbaceous cover after construction to help
reduce runoffand lessen sediment loadings. Direct discharges into streams will be avoided,
whenever possible. Runoff effluent will be permitted to filter through roadside vegetation,
whenever possible, in order to remove possible contaminants and to decrease runoff
velocities.
18

3. Waters of the United States
Surface waters and wetlands fall under the broad category of "Waters of the United
States", as defined in Section 33 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 328.3. Any
action that proposes to dredge or place fill material into surface waters or wetlands falls
under the jurisdiction ofthe US Army Corps of Engineers under Section 404 ofthe Clean
Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344).
a. Wetlands
There is one jurisdictional wetland within the study area. Wetlands in the study area
are within the Cape Fear River Basin (USGS Hydrologic Unit 03030004). The jurisdictional
wetland is shown in Figure 5 and is described below in Table 8.
b. Summarv of Anticipated Effects
The proposed project will not affect any wetlands identified in the study area
Wetland WA is outside ofthe proposed project limits and will not be impacted as a result of
this project.
c. Avoidance, Minimization and Mitiaation
Final decisions regarding wetland and stream mitigation requirements will be made
by the US Army Corps of Engineers and the NC Division of Water Quality. On-site
mitigation will be used as much as possible. The Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP)
will be used for remaining mitigation requirements beyond what can be satisfied by on-site
mitigation.
d. Anticipated Permit Requirements
In accordance with provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, a permit will be
required from the US Army Corps of Engineers for the discharge of dredged or fill material
into "Waters ofthe United States".
Due to expected project impacts on jurisdictional streams, in individual Section 404
permit will likely be required. Other permits that may apply include a NWP 33 for
temporary construction activities such as stream dewatering or work bridges. The US Army
Corps of Engineers holds the final discretion as to what permit(s) will be required prior to
pro�ect construction.
19

In addition to the 404 permit, other required permits include the corresponding
Section 401 Water Quality Certification (WQC) from the NCDWQ. A NCDWQ Section 40]
Major Water Quality certification for a linear transportation project (GC 3627) may be
required prior to the issuance of a Section 404 Permit. Other required 401 certifications may
include a GC 3688 permit for temporary construction access and dewatering.
4. Rare and Protected Species
a. Federallv-Protected Species
Plants and animals with Federal classifications of Endangered (E), Threatened (�,
Proposed Endangered (PE), and Proposed Threatened (P� are protected under the provisions
of Sections 7 and 9 ofthe Endangered Species Act, as amended. As of September 22, 2010,
the US Fish and Wildlife Service lists seven federally-protected species for Cumberland
County.
No habitat for any federally-protected species occurs in the project area. Therefore, it
is expected the project will have no effect on any federally-protected species.
The bald eagle was declared recovered, and removed (de-listed) from the Federal List
of Threatened and Endangered Species effective August 8, 2007. The bald eagle remains
federally-protected underthe Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (Eagle Act) (16 U.S.C.
668-668d). The Eagle Act prohibits take of bald and golden eagles and provides a statutory
definition of "take" that includes "disturb".
No habitat for the bald eagle exists in the project area Therefore, it is expected the
project will have no effect on the bald eagle.
5. Soils
Cumberland County lies in the coastal plain physiographic region of North Carolina.
Flat to gently sloping topography characterize the area. Elevations in the study area range
from 100 to 140 feet above mean sea level.
20

Soil mapping units are based on the Natural Resource Conservation Service soil
survey for Cumberland County (LJSDA, 1984) and are generally characterized as mixed with
sand and loam. Soils in the study area are shown on Table 10.
*Soils which are primarily non-hydric, but which contain hydric inclusions
B. Cultural Resources
The proposed project is subject to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act of 1966, as amended and implemented by the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified as 36 CFR Part 800.
Section 106 requires Federal agencies to take into account the effect of their undertakings
(federally-funded, licensed, or permitted) on properties included in or eligible for inclusion in
the National Register of Historic Places and to afford the Advisory Council a reasonable
opportunity to comment on such undertakings.
1. Historic Architectural Resources
A field survey of the area of potential effects (APE) was conducted to identify
architectural resources that might be affected by the project. All resources over fifty years
of age within the APE were evaluated according to National Register of Historic Places
eligibility criteria. Field survey findings, documentary research, and eligibility assessments
were presented in a technical report from which the following summaries are drawn.
a. Historic Properties
One resource within the project study area is listed on the National Register of
Historic Places (NRHP). The Haymount Historic District and Haymount Historic District
Boundary Increase have been listed on the NRHP since 1983 and 2007, respectively.
Another district, the Orange, Chatham, and Moore Streets Historic District, has been
determined eligible for listing on the NRHP. Two individual properties in the project study
area were determined eligible for listing on the National Register as well. These properties
are the Lions Civic Center and the (former) Shearer Texaco Service Station.
21

HAYMOUNT HISTORIC DISTRICT
The Haymount Historic Dishict is situated about one mile west of downtown
Fayetteville. Development of the primuily residential uea began in the euly rtineteenth
century. The district contains for[y-one properties. Neuly a century and a ktalf of domestic
ucMtectural design is represented in the dishict today. The Haymount Historic Dishict was
listed on the Natiortal Register in 1983 under Criteria A(event), B(person) and C
(design/conshuction) for its significance to the development of the city and association with
several individuals of local prominence, as well as its ucMtectural distinction. It is one of
Fayetteville's oldest, most intact and cohesive residential neighborhoods. Seven properties
wittun the district ue within the project study uea and the bounduy eatends north east to
just outside of proposed intersection improvements to SR 3828 (Bragg Boulevud)
approaching NC 24210 (Rowan Sheet).
Figure V-1 National Register Baundary for Haymount Historic
District
22

ORANGE, CHATHAM, AND MOORE STREETS HISTORIC DISTRICT
The Orange, Cktatrtam, and Moore Sheets Historic Dishict is an approximately 100
acre site bounded by existing right of way along SR 3950 (Ramsey Sheet), Cumberland
Street, NC 24210 (Rowan Sheet) and Hillsboro Sheet just north of downtown Fayetteville.
Eight properties in the district ue within a portion of the study uea and three of eight ue
within the proposed rigM of way. The district ktas been identified as eligible for the Natiortal
Register under Criterion A(event) and C(design/conshuction). It illushates the evolution of
southem urban ueas during the Jim Crow decades uound 1900, and reco° i'es an important
city neighborhood trtat developed uound Fayetteville's first African-American public school
(1912) and the St Joseph's Episcopal Church (189�.
Chatham and Moore Streets Historic District
23

LIONS CIVIC CENTER
The Lions Civic Center is located on the south side of SR 3147 (West Rowan Street)
east of Woodside Avenue on the westem edge of the project study uea. The property
includes the Civic Center, built in 1955, and the Rowan Puk on approximately 12 acres. The
Lions Civic Center is a two-story, asymmetrical, concrete building clad in red brick. The
building played an active role in the development of the City of Fayetteville in the mid-
twentieth century by provicling the oppor[unity for many civic clubs to meet and orgartize.
The property is eligible for the Natiortal Register under Criterion C(design/construction) for
its ucMtecture. The Lions Civic Center and accompanying Rowan Puk ue within the study
uea but outside of the project limits. The Natiortal Register-eligible bounduy for the
proper[y is shown on Figure V-3 below.
at�,��_r3_.� .
�� �IL.__ �.
�������
r .; � �;.,
rrz Fs {,.
M�;���' _� .,
i �� - : ' i� �� �
. r ,.
''. I ` � ��
�.-- Q r
� � ¢��� ��` r� �% �'���.'`�
� �' �',. � r :_ ��-
�� ' �
�
�� � �
g,�;
�.� �.
��� �,
� ���.
w�
�' ��V�+�
� ,�
�
^ ,.�� ��,
FORMER SHEARER TEXACO SERVICE STATION
The (former) Sheuer Te�.co Service Station sits adjacent to existing right of way
along SR 3147 (West Rowan Street) and NC 24 (Bragg Boulevud) and is bounded to the
east by Cross Creek. The building is an e�.mple of the influential Sheamline Modeme
service stations designed by American ucMtect and indushial designer Walter porwin
Teague for Te�.co Oil Company. Conshucted in the 1940s, the Sheuer Te�.co Service
Station was initially run by John L. Sheuer until the 1960s when it cktanged rtames and
operated as a service station under other brands until the mid-1970s.
24

The property is eligible for the Natiortal Register under Criterion A(event) and C
(design and construction) in the ueas of commerce, hansportatioq and ucMtecture. It is a
sigruficant e�.mple of a now increasingly rue building type and illushates the practice of
corporate branding through ucMtecture in the mid-twentieth century. The property
encompasses approximately 035 acres and is witMn the study uea. The Natiortal Register-
eligible bounduy for the property is shown on Figure V-4.
Figure V-4 Proposed National Register Boundary for (former) Shearer Texaco Station
b. ProiectEffects
The Haymount Historic Dishict is adjacent to SR 3828 (Bragg Boulevud) and will
not be impacted by the realignment and relocation of the intersection of NC 24 (Bragg
Boulevud) and NC 24-210 (Rowan Sheet). No right of way will be required from the
Haymount Historic Dishict The State Historic Preservation Office concurred that the
proposed project will have no effect on the Haymount Historic Dishict.
The Orange, Cktatham, and Moore Sheets Historic Dishict is within the proposed
project limits. To minimize impacts to the dishict, retairting walls were considered on the
north side of existing Rowan Sheet at the southem edge of the Mstoric dishict Two
retairting wall options, a 10-foot and a 28-foot Mgh shucture, were considered to minimize
fill in the district. Right of way would be required from the Mstoric dishict with either height
wall.
The State Historic Preservation Office concurred that the project would ktave no
adverse effect on the Mstoric district with either a 10-foot or 28-foot Mgh retaining wall. As
a condition of the `no adverse effecY determination for the Orange, Chatham, and Moore
Streets Dishict, NCDOT was asked to investigate the city sign ordvtance to insure a billboud
could not be erected on vacant property within the eligible bounduy. City officials informed
NCDOT staff that the city sign orclirtance would proMbit constructing a new sign in this uea.
25

Due to the aesthetic appearance and cost associated with a 28-foot retaining wall, a
10-foot retaining wall is proposed. Landscaping will be provided at the corner of Rowan and
Chatham Streets to ease the transition from the wall into the historic district.
The Lions Civic Center is located on SR 3147 (West Rowan Street) and is just west
of the current project limits. No right of way or easements from the Civic Center property
will be required. The State Historic Preservation Office concurred the project will have no
effect on the Lions Civic Center.
The former Shearer Texaco Service Station is located on the southeast corner of
existing NC 24 (Bragg Boulevard) and West Rowan Street. The proposed alignment of
Bragg Boulevard has been shifted to avoid the service station. No right of way or easements
will be required from the former Shearer Texaco Service Station property. The State Historic
Preservation Office concurred the project will have no adverse effect on this property.
Project effects on historic properties are shown on Table 11 below.
The State Historic Preservation Office concurred with these findings on August 9,
2010. The related correspondence and concurrence forms are included in Appendix A.
2. Archaeoloaical Resources
The State Historic Preservation Office has reviewed the project for archaeological
resources. In a letter dated June 17, 2008, the State Historic Preservation Office stated that
no known archaeological sites exist within the project study area and recommended no
archaeological survey be conducted for the project. A copy of the State Historic Preservation
Office's letter is included in Appendix A.
C. Section 4(fl/6(f1 Resources
Section 4(� of the US Department of Transportation (LTSDO� Act of 1966, as
amended, specifies that publicly owned land from a public park, recreation area, wildlife and
waterfowl refuge, and all historic sites of national, state, and local significance may be used
for federal projects only if there is no feasible and prudent alternative to the use of such land
and the project includes all possible planning to minimize harm to 4(� lands resulting from
such use.
26

Section 6009(a) ofthe Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity
Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) amended existing Section 4(� legislation to
simplify the processing and approval of projects that have only de minimis impacts on lands
protected by Section 4(�. This revision provides that if a transportation use of Section 4(�
property results in a de minimis impact on that property, an analysis of avoidance alternatives
is not required and the Section 4(� evaluation process is complete.
Four historic properties or districts within the study area are eligible for or listed on
the National Register of Historic Places. The proposed project will require the use of land
from one eligible district, the Orange, Chatham, and Moore Streets Historic District.
The State Historic Preservation Office concurred the proposed project will have "no
adverse effecY' on the historic district.
The proposed use of land from the Orange, Chatham, and Moore Streets Historic
District is considered a de minimis impact because the project will have "no adverse effecY'
on the historic property. Under Section 6009(a) of SAFTEA-LU, Section 4(� does not apply
in this case, because this project will have a de minimis impact on the historic property. The
State Historic Preservation Office has concurred with this de minimis finding under Section
4(� (See concurrence form in Appendix A ofthis document).
Festival Park, a City owned park, is within the project study area. A temporary
construction easement is proposed within a portion of Festival Park. No adverse effect to
park property is anticipated. The City of Fayetteville's Parks and Recreation Director has
reviewed the project and is in agreement with the temporary construction easement which
will be used to construct a sidewalk along a portion of the project adjacent to Festival Park.
In an email dated October 21, 2011 and memorandum dated November 17, 2011, the Parks
and Recreation Director and the Interim Director for Engineering and Infrastructure agreed
the proposed project will not adversely affect any activities features or attributes of Festival
Park. A copy of the email and memorandum are included in Appendix A. The proposed
temporary use of land from Festival Park is considered a de minimis impact.
The public will be afforded an opportunity to review and comment on the project's
effects on Festival Park at the public hearing to be held for this project following distribution
ofthis environmental assessment (see Section VI-C). Under Section 6009(a) of
SAFTEA-LU, FHWA anticipates Section 4(� does not apply in this case, because this
project will have a de minimis impact on the park. The final determination regarding a
de minimis impact finding for Festival Park will be made prior to completion of the final
environmental document.
Additional Section 4(� resources in the project area are the North Carolina Veterans
Park, Freedom Memorial Park, the Freedom Trail and Rowan Street Park. All of these
resources are outside the project limits. No impacts are expected to these Section 4(�
resources in the project study area
27

Section 6(� ofthe Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 stipulates that
property acquired or developed with the assistance of the Fund may not be converted to a use
other than public recreation unless suitable replacement property is provided. No properties
acquired or developed with the assistance of the Land and Water Conservation Fund exist in
the project area.
D. Social Effects
1. Neiahborhoods/Communities
The project study area is within the municipal boundary of the City of Fayetteville.
The project study area comprises a mix of commercial development in the eastern and
southern portions and residential development in the northern and western portions.
A portion of Hillsboro Street in the project study area between existing West Rowan
Street and Hay Avenue is expected to be closed as part of the planned North Carolina
Veterans Park and Northwest Gateway Plan (See Sec II-B-II-c). Access for businesses and
residents in the project area will be reduced. However, Bruner Street and Murchison Road
will provide access for business and residents that use Hillsboro Street. Additionally, the
FAMPO proposed pedestrian culvert under relocated Rowan Street for the Little Cross Creek
Trail will provide pedestrian connectivity for pedestrians and bicyclists currently using
Hillsboro Street (See Section IV-�.
The proposed project is expected to increase mobility and will not limit access to
existing communities and will promote safer traffic movements in the project area.
2. Relocation of Residences and Businesses
The proposed project will require the relocation of businesses. All relocations will be
carried out in accordance with Federal and State laws and regulations. NCDOT's Relocation
Assistance Program will be utilized to assist in finding replacement property for those
relocated by the project. Table 12 below presents the anticipated number of homes and
businesses which would be relocated by the proposed project. Appendix B includes
information on NCDOT's relocation assistance program, as well as the relocation report for
the project.
�• i � i�•..�
Homes Businesses
0 13(10)
Numbers in parenthesis O indicate minority-owned
homes or businesses
Thirteen businesses are expected to be relocated as a result ofthis project. Twelve of
thirteen businesses to be relocated are identified as tenants. Relocation assistance will be
provided to all businesses to be relocated. The relocation of businesses is not expected to
cause an adverse impact to the community because suitable business sites are available in the
28

area. No housing or property shortages are expected and no schools or churches will be
relocated by this project.
3. Minoritv/Low-Income Populations
Executive Order 12898 requires each federal agency, to the greatest eatent allowed by
law, to administer and implement its programs, policies and activities that affect human
health or the environment so as to identify and avoid "disproportionately high and adverse"
effects on minority and low-income populations.
The project study area includes a higher percentage of minorities than the county
average. Approximately 72.3 percent ofthe study area population is minority, compared
with 45.1 percent for Cumberland County. Approximately 10 of 13 businesses to be
relocated by the project alternatives are minority-owned or occupied. No residential
relocations are anticipated as a result ofthis project.
The percentage of low-income households in the project area is approximately 38.2
percent, which is higher than Cumberland County's percentage of 12.8 percent.
A citizens informational workshop was held for the project on November 23, 2009
(see Section VI-A). This workshop was advertised in local newspapers and newsletters
announcing the workshop were mailed to area property owners.
Prior to completion of the final environmental document, a special meeting will be
held for the minority-owned and occupied business owners expected to be relocated to allow
them the opportunity to review and comment on the project.
The project study area has a higher low-income and minority population than the
county average (72.3 percent compared to 45.1 percent). Through the public involvement
program, coordination with local officials, and accommodation of local development plans
the public has been kept informed ofthe proposed project. This project is being implemented
in accordance with Executive Order 12898.
4. Public Facilities
There are a number of existing and planned public facilities within the project study
area. Existing public facilities include Festival Park, the Airborne and Special Operations
Museum, the Freedom Memorial Park and Trail and the North Carolina Veterans Park.
Planned public facilities in the project study area include the second phase of the North
Carolina Veterans Park and the Little Cross Creek Trail.
Festival Park opened to the public in 2007. It is an outdoor entertainment complex
located between existing CSX and NS railroad tracks servicing the Train Depot and adjacent
to NC 24-210 (Rowan Street) just south ofthe proposed project. The park is considered a
Section 4(� resource, although temporary construction easements will be obtained from the
park, the Parks and Recreation Director has agreed this will not adversely affect the operation
of the park. The project will have a de minimis impact on the park and no further Section
29

4(� evaluation is required (see Section V-C). The final determination regarding a de minimis
impact finding for Festival Park will be made prior to completion of the final environmental
document.
A portion of the land for Festival Park was obtained by the City of Fayetteville from
the Army through the Federal Lands to Parks Program. Although temporary construction
easements will be required from a portion of Festival Park, no easements will be required
from park property obtained through the Federal Lands to Parks Program.
The Airborne and Special Operations Museum (ASOM) is located in the southern
edge ofthe project study area. It is part ofthe U.S. Army Museum System and is a museum
honoring airborne and special operations history and organization. No impacts to ASOM are
anticipated as a result ofthis project.
Freedom Memorial Park and Trail is part of the greater Northwest Gateway Plan
adopted by the City to improve the visual, physical, transportation, and social connections
between downtown and the surrounding Fayetteville area. The park is in the southwest
corner of the study area and the trail is located on the west side of Bragg Boulevard in the
project area. No impacts to either resource are expected as a result of this project.
North Carolina Veterans Park honors the state's veterans from all branches of service.
A portion ofthe park south ofthe project limits was opened on July 4, 2011. The second
phase ofthe park will utilize a portion ofthe current right of way for NC 24-210 (Rowan
Street) after the roadway and bridge are relocated during replacement of Bridge Number 116
and intersection improvements planned as part ofthis project.
Lions Civic Center is adjacent to Rowan Street Park just west of the proposed project
limits on West Rowan Street within the project study area The Lions Civic Center and
adjacent Rowan Street Park property is eligible for the National Register of Historic Places
(see Section V-B-1). Rowan Street Park is just outside the project study area and includes a
12 acre lot with trails, benches, picnic tables, and a playground. No impacts to the park or
civic center are expected as aresult ofthis project.
The Little Cross Creek Trail is a proposed multi-use trail that is expected to connect
existing greenway trails between Cross Creek in the project study area. The trail is still being
developed by the Fayetteville Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (FAMPO).
NCDOT has coordinated with the City of Fayetteville and FAMPO regarding
Freedom Memorial Park and Trail, the North Carolina Veterans Park and the Little Cross
Creek TraiL This coordination will continue as project development for the subject project
continues. NCDOT, FAMPO and the City have discussed constructing a pedestrian culvert
to carry the Little Cross Creek Trail under relocated Rowan Street as part of the subject
project. The culvert would be funded by FAMPO. It is expected FAMPO will provide a
formal request to NCDOT for this pedestrian culvert prior to completion of the final
environmental document for this project.
30

5. Economic Effects
It is expected that the project improvements in mobility and access will have an
overall positive effect on local businesses. The only exception would be the businesses
currently located on Hillsboro Street north of Rowan Street. The visibility of these
businesses will be greatly decreased due to the permanent closing of Hillsboro Street by
construction of the second phase of the North Carolina Veterans Park. Impacts as a result of
the permanent closing of Hillsboro Street are not expected to be high since access will still be
provided.
E. Land Use
1. Existina Land Use and Zonina
Land use in the study area consists of a combination of residential, commercial,
industrial, institutional and open space.
2. Future Land Use
Expected growth areas in the project area are near Fort Bragg Military Base
northwest of Fayetteville and along Bragg Boulevard. Land adjacent to the project area is
expected to be developed for public and private use. Redevelopment of the land existing
Rowan Street occupies for the North Carolina Veterans Park will have a positive impact on
the area surrounding the proposed project.
3. Proiect Compatibilitv with Local Plans
The proposed project is compatible with local land use plans and the jointly adopted
Fayetteville Area Metropolitan Planning Organization's 2035 Long Range Transportation
Plan and will implement part of the Northwest Gateway Plan adopted by the City of
Fayetteville. The proposed project is consistent with the Northwest Gateway Plan in that it
proposes to realign the intersections of Bragg Boulevard and Murchison Road with Rowan
Street as part ofthe project to improve access to the downtown and surrounding areas and
attractions. In addition to the benefits from this project and the other components ofthe
Northwest Gateway Plan that will accrue to the greater Fayetteville area, the nearby
communities will also potentially benefit in the future from expanded and improved park and
recreational facilities as the plan is implemented.
F. IndirecUCumulative Effects
The Council of Environmental Quality (CE� regulations (CFR Regulations, Title 40,
Section 1502.16) require a discussion of both the direct and indirect effects of the proposed
action. Direct effects are those effects that are caused by the action and occur at the same
time and place. Indirect or secondary effects are those effects, "which are caused by the
action and are later in time or farther removed in distance, but are still reasonably
foreseeable." A cumulative effect is defined as the "impact on the environment which results
from the incremental impact of the proposed action when added to other past, present, and
31

reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (Federal or non-Federal) or
person undertakes such other actions."
The Future Land Use Study Area (FLUSA) for this project is the area that could be
affected as a result of the proposed project and encompasses all areas potentially subject to
increased development pressure as aresult ofthe proposed project. The FLUSA occurs
entirely within the municipal limits of Fayetteville, with a western boundary following
US 401 and NC 87 (also known as Martin Luther King Jr. Freeway, a major roadway).
Blounts Creek forms the southern and eastern FLUSA boundary through downtown, and
ends at the US 401/Ramsey Street interchange to the north.
Based upon the results of the analysis and the Indirect and Cumulative Effects
Screening Matrix, there is a low to moderate concern for indirect and cumulative effects as a
result ofthis project.
As a bridge replacement project with some intersection realignment the scope for the
project was rated as low-medium. The realignment ofthe Rowan StreetBragg Boulevard
and Rowan/Murchison Street intersections and the closure of the southern end of Hillsboro
Street will result in a slight change to travel patterns, access and property exposure.
Because few indirect impacts are anticipated, the cumulative effect ofthis project,
when considered in the conteat of other past, present and future actions, and the resulting
impact on the notable human and natural features, should be minimal. Therefore,
contribution of the project to cumulative impacts resulting from current and planned
development patterns is expected to be minimal.
Qualitative analyses of the probable development patterns in the FLUSA suggests
that the proposed project will have little to no effect on future stormwater runoff or water
quality in the watersheds encompassed by the project.
Indirect and cumulative effects are described in more detail in the B-4490Indirect
and Cumularive Effects Screening Report. No additional indirect and cumulative effects
studies are recommended.
G. Flood Hazard Evaluation
The City of Fayetteville and Cumberland County are both participants in the National
Flood Insurance Program. A detailed flood study was performed for Cross Creek. The
proposed project will traverse Cross Creek within the detailed study area. The Cross Creek
crossing will likely require a flood insurance rate map modification or revision. Figure 5
shows the location of 100-Year floodplains in the project area
NCDOT will coordinate with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
and local authorities during the design phase of the project for approval of a flood insurance
rate map revision and to insure compliance with applicable floodplain ordinances. It is
anticipated the proposed project will not have a substantial effect on the existing floodplain
or on the associated flood hazards.
32

H. Traffic Noise Analvsis
In accordance with Title 23 Code of Federal Regulations Part 772, Procedures for
Abatement ofHighway Traffic Noise and Construcrion Noise (Title 23 CFR 772), each Type
I highway project must be analyzed for predicted traffic noise impacts. Type I projects are
proposed federal or federal-aid highway projects for construction of a highway on new
location or improvements to an existing highway which significantly changes the horizontal
or vertical alignment or increases the vehicle capacity. Trafiic noise impacts are determined
from the current procedures for the abatement of highway traffic noise and construction noise
found in Title 23 CFR 772, which also includes provisions for traffic noise abatement
measures. When traffic noise impacts are predicted, examination and evaluation of
alternative noise abatement measures must be considered for reducing or eliminating these
impacts. A copy ofthe unabridged version of the full technical report entitled Trafiic Noise
Anal� can be viewed at the NCDOT Century Center, 1000 Birch Ridge Drive, Raleigh.
1. Traffic Noise Impacts and Noise Contours
The maximum number of receptors predicted to be impacted by future trafiic noise is
10 and are shown in Table 13 below. The table includes those receptors expected to
experience trafiic noise impacts by either approaching or exceeding the FHWA Noise
Abatement Criteria or by a substantial increase in eaterior noise levels.
Alternative
Build
No-Build
*Per TNM�2
Traffic Noise
Residential Churches/Schools Businesses Total
1 0 9 10
and in accordance with 23 CFR Part 772
The maximum eatent ofthe 72 and 67 dBA predicted noise level contours measured
from the center ofthe proposed roadway are 96 feet and 232 feet, respectively.
2. Noise Abatement Alternatives
Measures for reducing or eliminating traffic noise impacts were considered for all
impacted receptors. Noise abatement measures evaluated include highway alignment
changes, trafiic system management measures, buffer acquisition, vegetative barriers, land
use control and noise barriers.
For each ofthese measures, benefits versus costs, engineering feasibility,
effectiveness and practicability, land use issues and other factors were considered. Noise
abatement measures are evaluated based upon their feasibility, which involves the
combination of acoustical and engineering factors, and reasonableness, which involves
consideration of social, economic, and environmental factors. Noise abatement is considered
reasonable if it does not exceed maximum allowable quantities or costs for abatement.
Abatement is feasible if it can be provided without any adverse impacts and it provides
33

prescribed minimum levels of noise reduction. Noise abatement mitigation measures do not
meet the preliminary feasibility and reasonableness criteria for this project and are not
recommended.
Traffic System Management Measures
Traffic system management measures are not considered viable for noise abatement
due to the negative impact they would have on the capacity ofthe proposed roadway.
Highway A&gnment Changes
Substantially changing the highway alignment to minimize noise impacts is not
considered to be a viable option for this project due to engineering and/or environmental
factors.
Buffer Acquisition
Costs to acquire buffer zones for impacted receptors will exceed the NCDOT
abatement cost threshold. Therefore, this abatement measure is unreasonable.
Noise Barriers
Noise barriers include two basic types: earthen berms and noise walls. These
structures act to diffract, absorb and reflect highway traffic noise. For this project, noise
barriers and earthen berms are not viable abatement measures because those required to
provide the needed noise level reductions will exceed the maximum allowable base quantities
for materials, as detailed in the NCDOT Traffic Noise Abatement Policy.
This project does not provide control of access, meaning that commercial
establishments and residences will have direct access connections to the proposed project,
and all roadway intersections will be at-grade. Businesses, churches and other related
establishments require accessibility and high visibility. Noise barriers do not allow
uncontrolled access, easy accessibility or high visibility, and would therefore not be
acceptable abatement measures for this project.
3. Summarv
Based on this preliminary study, trafiic 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. No additional noise analysis will be performed for
this project unless warranted by a substantial change in the project scope, vehicle capacity or
alignment.
In accordance with NCDOT Traffic Noise Abatement Policy, the FederaUState
governments are not responsible for providing noise abatement measures for new
development for which building permits are issued after the Date of Public Knowledge. The
Date of Public Knowledge of the proposed highway project will be the approval date of the
34

final environmental document, which is likely to be a Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI). For development occurring after this date, local governing bodies are responsible
for insuring noise compatible designs are utilized along the proposed facility.
L Air Oualitv Analvsis
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.
1. Proiect Air Qualitv Effects
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) are set for carbon monoxide
(CO), nitrogen oxide (NO), ozone (03), lead (Pb), particulate matter (PM) and sulfur dioxide
(SOz). The main pollutants from transportation sources are carbon monoxide, ozone and
particulate matter.
The project is located in Cumberland County, which has been determined to be in
compliance with NAAQS. 40 CFR parts 51 and 93 are not applicable because the 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. This project is an air quality neutral project and a
project level CO and PM2.5 analysis is not required.
2. Mobile Source Air Toxics
Mobile source air toxics (MSATs) are a subset of the 188 air toxics defined by the
Clean Air Act. MSATs are compounds emitted by highway vehicles and non-road
equipment.
This document includes abasic analysis ofthe likely MSAT emission impacts ofthis
project. However, project specific health effects ofthe emission changes associated with the
project alternatives cannot be predicted with available technical tools.
Evaluating the environmental and health impacts from MSAT's on a proposed
highway project would involve several key elements, including emissions modeling,
dispersion modeling in order to estimate ambient concentrations resulting from the estimated
emissions, exposure modeling in order to estimate human exposure to the estimated
concentrations, and then final determination of health impacts based on the estimated
exposure. Each ofthese steps is encumbered by technical shortcomings or uncertain science
that prevent a more complete determination of the MSAT health impacts of the proposed
project. Research into the health impacts of MSATs is ongoing.
For both Build and No Build alternatives, the amount of MSATs emitted is
proportional to the vehicle miles traveled (VMT), assuming other variables such as fleet mix
are the same for each alternative. Regardless ofthe alternative chosen, emissions will likely
be lower than present levels in the design year as a result of EPA's national control programs
35

that are projected to reduce annual MSAT emissions by 72 percent from 1999 to 2050. Local
conditions may differ from these national projections in terms of fleet mix and turnover,
VMT growth rates, and local control measures. However, the magnitude ofthe EPA-
projected reductions is so great (even after accounting for VMT growth) that MSAT
emissions in the study area are likely to be lower in the future in virtually all locations.
Consequently, higher levels of MSAT are not expected from the Build Alternative compared
to the No Build Alternative.
A copy of the unabridged version of the full air quality technical report entitled Air
Qualit�� can be viewed at the NCDOT Century Center, 1000 Birch Ridge Drive,
Raleigh.
3. Construction Air Qua&tv Effects
During construction of the proposed project, all materials resulting from clearing and
grubbing, demolition or other operations will be removed from the project, burned or
otherwise disposed of by the contractor. Any burning will be performed in accordance with
applicable local laws and ordinances and regulations ofthe North Carolina State
Implementation Plan (SIP) for air quality in compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520. Care will
be taken to insure burning will be performed 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. Measures will also 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.
J. Hazardous Materials
Based on afield reconnaissance survey and database review ofthe project area, no
landfill sites exist in the project study area.
Fifteen underground storage tanks (LJST) and nine other sites were identified within
the proposed project study area Additionally, there is the possibility unregulated USTs may
exist within the proposed right of way limits. If a site with unregulated USTs or landfills is
identif'ied, a preliminary site assessment will be performed prior to right of way acquisition.
The sites were all identified as low risk sites and are not expected to have an impact on the
proposed project.
36

VL COMMENTS AND COORDINATION
A. Citizens Informational Workshop
A citizens informational workshop was held on November 23, 2009, at the Airborne
and Special Operations Museum in Fayetteville to obtain comments and suggestions about
the project from the public. Approximately 48 citizens attended this meeting, not including
NCDOT representatives. This meeting was advertised through local newspapers and flyers
were sent to property owners and citizens in the project area.
An aerial map of the study area with the preliminary alignment ofthe proposed
project was presented at the workshop. The majority of those attending supported the
project. Some citizens expressed concerns about project effects on their property, but agreed
with the need for the project. A few citizens opposed the project entirely.
B. Local Officials Meetina
A local officials meeting was held prior to the citizens informational workshop.
Participants atthe meeting included elected officials and stafffromthe City of Fayetteville,
the Public Works Commission of Fayetteville, members ofthe Chamber of Commerce,
representatives from the Fayetteville Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (FAMPO),
NCDOT Stafffrom Division 6, the Roadway Design Unit, and the Project Development and
Environmental Analysis Unit.
C. Pub&c Hearina
A public hearing for this project will be held following approval of this document and
prior to right of way acquisition. The proposed project design will be presented to the public
for their comments atthe hearing. Citizen comments will be taken into consideration as
project design continues.
D. Aaencv Coordination
NCDOT has coordinated with appropriate federal, state and local agencies throughout
the project development study. Comments on the project have been requested from the
agencies listed below. An asterisk designates an agency from which comments were
received. Copies ofthe comments received are included in Appendix A.
*US Department of the Army — Corps of Engineers
*US Environmental Protection Agency
NC Wildlife Resources Commission
*NC Department of Administration — State Clearinghouse
*NC Department of Cultural Resources — State Historic Preservation Office
*NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources — DENR
* DENR — NC Natural Heritage Program
*DENR—NC Division of Water Quality
NC Department of Public Instruction — School Planning
37

NC Division of Parks & Recreation
Fayetteville Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (FAMPO)
Mid-Carolina Rural Planning Organization
* City of Fayetteville
38

--- :..: -
'�.
FEET
0 1000 2000
0 20�0 4Y0 00
MEiERS
+y NORIX GROLINA DEPARTMENT
s,�� OF TWWSPORTAIION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
� %IOJELI UEVELOPMBR AND
•M„�„j ENYIRONMENTALANALYSISUNIT
FAYkTEVILLE
IIEMCE BRIOGE NIIMBER ➢6 ON NC 44]10
(ROWAN SINEE� OVER C9I, NORFOLK
SOl1IHERN RNIAOAOS AND HILI590R0 SIREEf
AND INIEASECIION UIP0.0VFMENR
CUM9ENAND COIIMY
TIP P0.0JECI B���90
FIGIIRE 1

�'�k� ! �
�r
�. �r
��
e a,t
�: ' '
�
, �
NC 24 (E
�}�-
. IPRELIMINARY DESIGN -SUBJECT TO CHANGE
1;;N,,,;°,�GC �`-�•a
R � :.
. °iF. ' ' ti�SO�' iM
.. _ � �' Ro, �
"�
,;.s
BEGIN PROJECT
�rr
i6�
��.�
x � �r �i
i�qy
4
� �JT
-s ♦ ` + f�l
� _ : s� � .w�
31 \� ' �
� I� `
�C '
�F Y � �,
1 T �
-. � ���'� .s
LEGEND
PROPOSED PAVEMENT y
PROPOSED CUT OR FILL }
PROPOSED EASEMENT `
�� PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY
� PROPOSED RETAINING WALL '� ��g ���
_ PROPOSEDSTRUCTURES , F "�
HISTORIC RESOURCES IN THE PROJECT AREA
HAYMOUNT HISTORIC DISTRICT
FAYETTEVILLE DOWNTOWN HISTORIC DISTRICT
ORANGE, CHATHAM AND MOORE STREETS
HISTORIC DISTRICT
� LIONS CIVIC CENTER, ROWF\N STREET PARK
� (FORMER) SHEARER TEXACO SERVICE STATION
�
�� Z
<�
�
.-, �
r o
�' . �,
_ + �, � PREP
PROPOSED
. � RETAINING WALL
aa _�
�= �.��,
� .�'A ` ��
� �� � ♦ ���� xt
� e � _ . . � �:���.��1
. h _ �I
��
j �� �
e
�.
a
1� � .-
� NCVP
P
�. �s
END PROJECT � �.
�.'•
4.
� r,�,- �
� w -_ � �
; .•
\
.c,
0
0
�
QJ
K
MOORE ST.
� PRELIMINARY DESIGN - SUBJECT TO CHA
�. I�f.� ` .
1 � � �� a.,
s �� ,�� �� ?' �,
y..
�u�� L� °�� �1� -.,. ` ; R � _
O� p��1 r� . ��
� �� � �
s + , �y,t�,�ik�. , �
�- �� . f •
cn�, � "G A -�- � ,�? � ,
� '� '
/ � = + ' 1;'� fl�
STUDVqREA
Ir�" �
� ; . . �.
� �iL. :�
�� � .
F
, �� � . END PROJECT
.-'.
i.����"� � �� ��r
f �^ `
�, s �e P . �
P � �
�II �� �� i { i 'I
it� '. v ' � .;I , � f
� 9�
, ; - � � FESTIVAL PARK �� � �
�!1�,.. .. k � . . . : . . ��
�. . l�:
yI"'�. 1� Y-'�� �F
r
e � '�
�: �
� ,
N,
' f
t
.'A
W� ,
,,'� � M
v �
�� .
' ti
�:
� �A � `!� I ������ M ��1
�� ,, - �° �,��:
'v •� 4 ��� �!�', �4
�w � eAi � �� � �" �' ��
� r. 2\ 1, � . . �
�� Y y �• �
�.
_ .� r � � •
, � �.
, ,
p�-� ���-n��
�i � '1--k5..
v
�
�e
� '� � �I ti . �n , .. � . { e.�.�i � "�� _ .,. ^ _� i
., � �� � �
',
� . � `9 �, � 'Z b, .� �`° -� �,�` '��. I �
. / // P f �
� l , ��� �� I � �� CROSS CREEK .`"'`� �� � � i ��I
-� ASOM , � - - �, � � � � 1 ,..J
� � �. �, � � } �Ti' E
� .\
'�'� �� �i.5 W � 1 ��. '�\ � � �k..��.�� .� l�
'�L� ��� �: _i } � ���.` � �, . ? "„ NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT
$ �� ;, � 't \ -� �c/ OFTRANSPORTATION
� �� � ��' �"'� ,� �r. ��^ DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
� �,�� ' f .� u�j � Ay . J' ..��, �:`� PROJECT DEVELOPMENTAND
�`� w � DOWNTOWN `, � � ENVIRONMENTALANALYSISUNIT
, \.,;,�i._J,U� .;
HqyST � ��i� FAYETTEVILLE REPLACE BRIDGE NUMBER 116
^;�� � ON NC 24-210 (ROWAN STREET)
v� � w_ �� ��.+ OVER CSX, NORFOLK SOUTHERN
� � ����` ', RAILROADS AND HILLSBORO STREET
aiwYAREq . e° � ��, � AND INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
11 .'^
°�+� +�+�J �'° '�:. 0 200 400 800 CUMBERLAND COUNTY
�'� �...,,:,,. TIP PROJECT B-4490
i�� rr11°frfi �� �
� i` Feet - FIGURE 2

NC 24 (BRAGG BLVD.) NC 210 (MURCHISON ROAD)
�o 0
195 � '�; 85 N 3
317 \ � � 115 � � � $
+ 10PM60 _
(z,�
� �� 45
3 13
4 5�
�
�
12 21
16 31
28
33
�-
1
SR 3147
(WEST ROWAN STREET)
214 ��
347
%DHV %DIRECTIONAL
\ 10 PM 60/� PEAK HOUR
� a� DIRECTION
%DUAL %TTST
149
246
104
140
42 _J � r,��!
f i
�
1� � 50
� 3 65
253
3I�
�
0
N A
169 � �
241
�22
29
�22
29
HILLSBORO STREET
� ^ /
�
a �i
o "
�
10 I
1�
4�52
297 �j!
4� /
�
J
0
w �
� 3
.r �
20
25�
23 0
30 s O
�
� �
� J
= �
+ X
y UT
�
T
i
53 T
69 1
T
y
y����-
4$ llf
70 PM 60
4 (2,7) � 23
� 2�
� ��
�
2� ?4
25 31
SR 3825 (WALTER ST.)
� 185
r26o
SR 3828 (BRAGG BLVD)
1
i
�
T
�1
T
2 �
4 T
1
T
1
t
�
T
T
1
�
1
2
13
21
HILLSBORO STREET
10PM55 _
(2,— ��
TI P PROJ ECT B-4490
CHATHAM STREET
J �
N
N 3 J
.� �
N
a
5�
NC 24-210 (ROWAN ST.)
�s1
%T
�
/y,������0�0
f�
9
NO BUILD
RAY AVENUE
°�1t?6
a N 33
� v
3 296 8
, 4 443 10�
�� �
-1
18
23
42
53
� 70 PM 55
� 14 �z''�
�
21
� �
� T
d N
o v
�
\��"�\�/ �, ��� �
-�
298
445
2007 AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC
2030
IN HUNDREDS
NOT TO SCALE
FIGURE 3A

NC 210 (MURCHISON ROAD)
NC 24 (BRAGG BLVD.)
7�
A
187 ��%��
304
�O
A
85 ��/�!�eo
115
pg 3 !
33 6 �
�
__` 25
27
SR 3147
(WEST ROWAN STREET)
209
325
��
%DHV\ � DIRECTIONAL
10 PM 60 � PEAK HOUR
� 3� DIRECTION
%DUAL %TTST
25 38
34 � \ 50
/ � �
3� � 08
44 147
163 � 222
297
444
��
°o
.�
; �,,
1
�
/ !-
1-
� 162
220
HILLSBORO STREET
0
m ,�
a �i � 0
o`-' 1 �Q
� � O
T �
y J
� �
+
T X
� U
T
����y�`,�
i
/����� �
.�/y` T
�
�
T
�
�
T
—'•+
T
10PM60 _ �
�y� �
y
T
SR 3825 (WALTER ST.) �
� T
J-
1 '
2
SR 3828 (BRAGG BLVD)
70 PM 55
�Z��
TI P PROJ ECT B-4490
CHATHAM STREET
N
N 9
� 3 � � �
�. N
9
4 3 296
5 I , 4 443
��� -� •
NC 24-210 (ROWAN ST.)
,�-tS'�.
�
�/y��Ny�`���0
BUILD
RAY AVENUE
m
a �i � � 26
° v 33
8 11
1�1 14
�
—i
1�
23
��
21
42 �
53 � a N
o V
�
RAY AVENUE
� 10PM55
�� )
—1
zss
445
2007 AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC
2030
IN HUNDREDS
NOT TO SCALE
`
FIGURE 3B

VARIABLE
�.ji.�a�.��
a,
TIP PROJECT B-4490
PROPOSED TYPICAL SECTION
(NC 24-210 ROWAN STREE�
� � �
� �
� �
�
� �
� ''� 'I�
�
� �
� �
� �
� �
� ,
� �
�'��-I
� , \
� �
� �
� �
� �
� ' � ' �
� �
� �
� �
� �
� �
� �
�
VARIABLE
RAISED MEDIAN
PROPOSED BRIDGE
TYPICAL SECTION
�
VARIABLE
NOT TO SCALE
SIDEWALK
FIGURE 4

' i'" � � »� a t � .•` �' � C�
_ � Ai �� � • � _C � � _
j , � i � : �'' /�: V��
� � ♦ � � 4: � � ��� � �
. ' ��' ,i,•' ... �} �,j � e.�'.f�'�'�," � ,,!�•� � s; N
: i i,. - � ± , .� � L �� .•� �� � A �
� � M � �� � ��� � � .. �� • � `�i �'� � ��'� �.�i �� �� � . � l.
*� � a+ e � . � � � � I t\• � a:'.
i �,'d ���-�. � a � �� �\4 � �+ �` �.
�•. 11/ ,yn,�� ����}.. '- � � � h�$` r, �, ��y A�S ��il► t� 'i
1 � f�p�=r� �i . a� � r s } P � I VN p� A`r ,�.�
� C!y""� ` ♦ ♦�y n zw� � i �� .. ti�� 'qt 1
�'� . YYb�� �` � 4�� 1 '�o o /` . - U� :�`y � ' i,�\
�-'•' � i 't,� �s � "�;�,��`,� ' n: ' 3 ; ` ����.._, �F� /P�s� � �li�� � \.���1.�. ,� ��♦ \
\-_ :. <Ro °, :� ' : � _ � �._.--f ° t� '": �;� � u'11 �' ,. �
,� A'y� 3 qo . "'trrr–� � '
,.� �". l�'� � y���srr�� �O O �� .
�
S/� i��; i't � O.��k ¢ u . ��
) • N1 Q �rt f [!
/ �j �
T � •�/' ♦� . fC � 4aM ' ��� 4 / a
}n
r - A q i � � 4 �'� rr � `�j �_ t • �; / )
��� / �1, � e . ti ,
� • • o u '�� � r� . � .,-,.
� �` �"�T:�. �. �� � % r � ���� 1 MOORE ST . �.. � � 4 ,.
� R'' ': ' , - �5�,` �S- �� '� �' ENOPROJECT V 1�
NC 2487 (BRqGG BlVO ,� / �/+ � �� t �� 13 F • �,Ny � *
_ ) a` � . .1 ': � ,.. � �
� .. "„ • �� ��e " ' �' : � . ���'� � � 25'X"� :, t�" ��'� � �..; :
BEGINPROJECT �' `t'� � �r � � 1 �-,,,,,#,,,� NC24210(ROWANST.
' � ' .. WpHSt n 'z / ,! ,�!!� � sP. I' � ri,+ ,.
' tao �Y{.�r . . ��� '�� ,,
, sa3 � � � �; , , ;a�,= � z i +A; �i
es , • «
� � �
14 W t � �
1' � ( SB � � r•* ��� .�'F �
x � i1T t�„ { / : yi� � .
t
..( �p � � i� l; � r���� -�' .� ..Jd . � � � � �
f
3
'�� rr-'_ �� y�k+!? q ,"a.
\
' R '
2 �5 . ➢ ay� + /
y4 �3
5 3 �� a�Mk � W •• � i.
�- N i ^�
�� $� ' .�If`"' 2 ��`'�'—" �� aErzsoN ST � � �,..�� �`�
ER
t'a'�'"� � HP� �' . �4 �� `� . 't '�3 . 5 ; cc� --�
,� ���� ,.w"" ?`.��"z'i� 3 k� � � ^�' � ,� �"�1�'3 � r �,': v �'#Sw`"z�
�a}�.�i j�`. `�,-„� �} '^.,.. J� � RUSSEIIST m �
E���b'i ,.�y'�. Sl ,. ..,�x . , � 1 ,..,,y•��
K 4. � b°� y. F� ' �, O
1
� }� ' j p �. �' � Q � ^.�°�� ��R,
{ (f i W .i �, .
S .
� '' �'� ` , m � # ' x �Z"Y�' ii:? � VANDER QUAD
0 500 1,000 2,000 �;; i c"i �-�� {t*' FAYETTEVILLE QUAD
,
( NORTH CHROLINH DEPHRTMENT
FQQI '� �� � "�t = 7 ? : OF TRHNSPORTHTION
� • � , 1' ��F,y�,�,� ��: DIVISIONOFHIGHWHYS
� Y '� PRQIECTDEVELOPMENTHND
LEGEND N rt ��' --��'� ENVIRONMENTHLHNHLYSISUNIT
PROPOSEDALIGNMENT �' t �` '% -� REPLACE BRIDGE NUMBER 116
--STUDYAREA �'��) ' ���������� oNNC2a2io(ROwaNSiReer�
— CROSS CREEK r�J � + OVER CSX, NORFOLK SOUTHERN
RAILROADSAND HILLSBORO STREET
JURISDICTIONAL STREAMS � r� �� AND INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
WETLANDS CUMBERLANDCOUNTY
!/i 100 YEAR FLOOD PLAIN '.`,1 TIP PROJECT &4490
pR,,, ' FIGURES

.�
Y� `♦
. `•�.
� ..
.
♦
:
� S't �
z
y� L
� — -����- � � TIP PROJECT B-4490
` ' ������
I
` • �
� •��♦
` �w Y�.
j `"
'
` �
�
h
♦
i•
— — — PROJECT STUDYAREA
�O � .>
�— //a
_ . -_1�:�..
� �
�
' ``
' ��
' /
' ,
I �
;,,
.
:
■
.
:.
t
.
■
.A
.a
• �
• N
.-
:.
�
•
�` �
� ,
1
' �
•
� '
` ' •
�
5t
h
�/ C'J
__� 1
�
�
U
Z
DOWNTOWN FAYETTEVILLE
�
c/ �
�
N
\�
/
/ �`
�\```!
Highway Map
Fayetteville Urban
Area
WORKING MAP
Comprehensive
Transportation Plan
Plan date_
F�e.���ys
exisn�y
• � � � � i Neetls lmp�ovement
������• ftewmn'entletl
Expres ways
ExlsHng
Needs Imp�ovement
•�����• Rerom�rentletl
Bouleva�tls
Exlsting
Needs Impmvemen[
•�����• Recomn'entletl
O[he� MaJO�TM1OmugM1`a�es
Exlsting
� � � � � Needs Impmvemen[
������• Recomrt'entletl
MI'�io� TM1Oroughfares
E[ISVnc
- - - - - Neetls Improvemsnt
------ Recommentletl
,•i E�clsting IntemM1ange
Proposetl In[ercNange
Exlsfing rretle Separellon
...., P�oposed G�atle Sepa�ation
0 400 $00
� FEET
6ase map date: P/ovember5, 2G10
Fefe� to CTP tlocoment fo� mo�e ya-alls
FIGURE 6

�
k4}
3
_�
� J +.+.
�4: MR-5
�
.r���
� . . .�-��.
�
�
L
i
};
��OI
}
�
NC 24/87 (BRAGG BLVp.
�
401
�;�. ' ` 5'�' � `
� � ♦
�` , ?'°� ��
� ���
� ��
�k,
r� ���
S� ���pN
S�♦
`.N+ .l ., �.
Y •
S�31�� l ,�+
� � 7 '
� f �:
�•��..� �.
'�. ,��
S F�6�
:�� , �
�,
,
I
��• .f' r..
DOWNTOWN FAYETTEVI LLE
AREA ZONING MAP
�� y -�N�C
ff .
� ���
. � o�
o �4�
� N� `
�` ..4.��ti `
► �
� � ` � ��
, ♦ � C 1 � T. ,,,.
�� , ��._ .,
�oti _ ♦_ _I �� � �
� � � . �� �
'''' . . � • ,
�� i .
r ` 11k 1k .
1 r
. M R-5 �' .
�; SF-101. �
� ' �
� �
` , �-�--� L � .�
� �
� � ��
�, f � li�
� � '�
} �. •�� '-,
tir ��r ' � � � .M
�
,,
.,r_
I
��� PROJ ECT STU DY AREA �
� � 5
��
� LI
,4
��
} s�� �,
31y �� '
4 .A .•
� � �o .
ff � h� ,r r,
�. . . ... _ .. .. . � .r� {� � �.
. . � � � kJ�
'� �
_._:r+ : � s LC �
�� . � •-� zarti ��, �-rL�rv4
� MOORE ST. t� s�
:�.�������r � ��� �
, � �.._.. � f. _. . ���
, ..�
..� .
NC 24-210 (ROWAN ST.
' ' ' ' • • ti J
. . � ..a � : ti
� - - - - - - �
'� ' O I
� � y' ^� ti
.� � � .
�� � �
LC'���
F+ �
�
ASOM
HAY ST.
LEGEND
Streets � AR �[=D � P.�:A � �•,�U � FND � 5F-15
APCI � AR-h9H� - DT � P:12.+'Canditianal � h,�U.+'Candition�;l � F';,+Conditianal � 5F-15-MHd
�..
■■■■.
�■ ■ ■ � HAO � C1rConditional � HI � P:1HC� � hC � R6rGonditianal � 5F-E
....�
�■ ■ ■` HLd � C3fConditional � L'� � P:1R-5 � OI � 5F-10 � SF-�-h�HO
.....
� ■ HLO - CC � LI � P.�R-S-P•.�HO � P2.+Canditional � SF-10-F,�HD � County
�... �
� City Limits
Map Updated: 7�112011
'MHD is a Manufactured Housing �verlay �istrict
.� � �
r
�
,
FAYETTEVILLE
�
0 500 1000
FEET
� � �
� �
� �
_ �t
MR-5
� �
r�. ��
�
�
��,
��,
,�
N
HI
�
� 4
.�
5
�
� �
JJ'r�� fr
�
�
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT
o �oa,„_
• �� �° y� OF TRANSPORTATION
_; DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
' �' PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND
,s
F"r o_.RaNS`°p ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS UNIT
� REPLACE BRIDGE NUMBER 116
ON NC 24-210 (ROWAN STREET)
OVER CSX, NORFOLK SOUTHERN
RAILROADS AND HILLSBORO STREET
AND INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY
TIP PROJECT B-4490
FIGURE 7

FAYETTEVILLE NORTHWEST GATEWAY MASTER PLAN .� .
- 1� � ' I -z < - L�near rk 1 � . � J' � J' I.��� � � i �
� . 4 ` •' co„�e�r� �,� _ � . �
' � r � b +� � . �� ~ � 3� Murchiso�Road1 � ..
� � � •' ��r Linear Park & FS i I i � �
� - • _ �� �. � Connection , � - 4 _ �a� �
-+� � i_ � w �• � � � . : � � �� . ,,�. � 7 �
` � �,� _ -'� � . s �� . - --- -�� . ` �� 1t4; �.,� � ' �� �r r"M�♦
�� � � �• �_ '�j� • ��� . - 'r _ � � _ _ � � �, ' _� • � , _ .7i1' ~�s i A..�� � '�s I
� ' .` � .� � - . ' - � {'f _ -
_ � � �_ ' ~ ���� Rounda5ou� .�fi*;� �* `� �11 .
: ar�. -- —_� C�_ __ � � '�r � � � _,t r '� ,' �. _
� �y � RowaR 5.. L „ ` ,
� =�" fi�� .' 1 ;,�a.�. ��i� p �l :�1, �,t,.s�' � L�}��r _ ` � �x����s
-� i s r a � � r
� ` !� . w.,,�. t,�,�'� � a �,,�� � .i � : � e �,� Rescauranz �I � E! Q �{ ��� ,� I ' i � _� � �: ti '
�j r. � . Y� � "�,�,,�.; ��'`� -. � .: - _ ' '� � TIP PROJECT B-4490
t' � .. � ! �nnuic�_Famay• ���--� � Rowan�p � , , = � � � r
, �_ 11 •� � {� ! l - -- _ � �� .'-� � Commans.6a 'rl � -1 - _ __ �I l. ' k .
f Cornmercial � i � �� �`"a° sr.ee� ti
. � : < < �/ '` _ � _j 4� � ' � � �'� � �� �
y� M _� �
F J�'� ' , _ % � ��.`'X�� ���.� - � '� �.' .r- i � r � -��r - - - . _.
�. y� � � �-������ `� ! �- ` � r �a"`� __`"��~ � `�� _�-� � � ��. �� F �� {{ ��' �������° ` w
� . • A iR' T '� -�' - 3: ! d.o "C_7 � - Rowari� " y�r` •i �.. � '�`�''�'4t- '� �, . . � - - F`' � . -. 11�, �►��, �• _ � p�l. � Ne B'�9e
� •�` �' + 7f -j .Neighborhood ? � � � y� , � Park `���f -,. � '�� -_
�"�.r� . nF� � � T ;�� �- - .-Park "� _ i ��-_ �i,t � �it �.,�' nl���T �- ��ti�{� - _ .
ir� � , ti - ��=: �� • �,;�-' ` �. ; 1 � �� ti,
'y. �� _�,qM ", � - '��� . ' �(�f � 1 `tl; � `! � �� � _ � �,� � - � - t� �� _ j } � �"�����y Ga��� � � �� "� - �s - ' - i
�--, � T I � .31� _ 'f_ r �' � � �., ��f i��j f � ��'� i�n'JUri[k3ei�t�er !
w'� � � `�t �-.`''1 .f' � �. '� 1� _ � `' `� Y;'��% ti` �3e#i i.r � - ' �e e ""ed
""� 401 � ; _,. Y � �. d ,, ; `� �� ry �'� - ..-' � �-. .� � . .
� � `�'1'�� , ���
� � � I � �no ;'� 1J � ` �.� • - ���r: � Q ..� � ~' . ���F ,
�• - y-^�"r�tti � a" � � � �� . � � ' - -- _ �+ = - --- '�� �-' �1 . .�_ {: ..�. � 3F�fj � •" �� .
�,y� �.� � I° 4, m;�� FREEDOM TRAIL . �' ��r= ���� . ,�'�' ���-
,�• � �r�.
'-� � - - � � � ?�al i t .� j' .: �''� •
� � � � '''f : ' _ �T:
"� ��. I� \ �� - -- - -�` Reflection �� 'd ' + ��� ��[ . C� Ij� � �_ ! _ .
� _ � r -I��,�� d � � _�' �, . �. Pand ��� C� � ` .�` � , � � 'f �r
�'� � �` � � � �
�'`� � � `� S 1 ,� g• +� � � � �
� �. � . e' � � �. { [ � ' � �.;; . • ,�j' � � „ r � -
•� � ' � � j ` � ~ � �� � - � i ` �' � �' .�_
_ '.�-- � � _ .? � � � �I ti .c+ � _..:.�- s - , NCVP ' # - � � . � � w� �' �
r 4 _;f �: , ' � . ,� �' _a , r F ''��r_ , . �i°� � � �Forrrmal Gardens� 'V"- .�^� . � �� .+"'
F•;. _ % ■ _� _ .
� �� � � /# � ' � . �� �p � • ��,T� � i -'
•. - � � 3 w eo. '[�ir� � . _ � p
� ' '�t� .' �- - r� _ � � . �� cQ�t` � 7•� _ �
� � � � - �
_ � � � '!�''"�� y� � �+ / a � � ,<� _ � '� • � x
, �� "'T . �ri � i � / . " � � # � �- - � � .�� � � � �'�' 4�� �
��V � �.S . r �� - �� � J. Gateway_ ��+� s -- ' r, a ��
�` .� .�� � s :'�-_ � i � !� . �� - "�+ ,�: Residential _�l� �' � - r-�`. ' � i� � � ' • ` -- ' `�� '� �
�-� ' 1' • �i � � - -� �_: � . j � • _ R � � . . � � . f'� � y
r� � , ��► 'f �� -� � '�• � - !�'.��� . � � � �� � ,( J//%%%/// '' �
. r-� �� e � . �1J��� . I Sh Park{ng � . .. �r` i �`.
� � ' �Y�-=s �� .+�ir ' ' +i�y+� _ � ' , _ . _ � y � �
w '� �. � ' -4N� #t`. j � f 3 5 r +�.�j`
' - '{' � � � ,��,I_ � ~ � � Y , . - - .. - tr � � u,�R a, Pa,k � � , j�`�
i [ tl nco ..c- �'„;: F ��
•x � l. ��.• �� �� �ti + �� - . M- s . : � s 1 �.' � � Pu61ic Parkinq & 4 -+�a -
. � . � � � . , � .`��` � � � : �, � _�• : . Y ` . "_ t . � ./� � � I � - Festival Park ��.�y -
� . �: .� �- � .,��
� � _ �. - � �� �=� �'- " : , ��.,�-:r _ i� , �+� � .��� �� � �' . � = � �
E. . � .,�
�" �� t �e •�. •, � � �f. � � �; ��' ,C+' /�� � ' �` .��51.
� ,� �. 'ii f . � c�+l/��' ��� � � ,41,� .� ir �
_ � —� °� 4 �. -'� � � _ � Restrooms � l.�� � - 1, �� , �! ! � .�-� ' � r.-�-_ _
� "� � � •� � � �"�''"r w - _ ' � - ' . -.-. :�� . - _ �' � I�r `�� _. . �? f ' � � ..i � .
! r _ - � �L '� .� 4� l 1 ''y{r � _ a
� , ' �3ti{ � � � �Y � �' � � • i � ' ,' l''� � V � . . I f . _ ~ � - �
i�'Ni ti�� L,� r +.� r a C� .2� ��
- � �_77� S � ' �^ ► ' _ • ' �7A ,�,�'.� 'il ! '1I -�-i�r :. t -�ir�� ~ � � . ' � ! � J t7 OC t �'' .
� -- - �-� � -- , - -�`�- � � .-� i . / , �` ���--- - � ° ' . "
... � _ .�-r :� � ,�,r - �„ • ,.,,�,� �� ! � _ �,* ' • _. �� - � � — , . � ��: �.
- _ � _� , -; ' _ ' - _ . `_r �� � ASOM I' % - -
� Freedom Memorial �•� � �
- . • ; . .ai: e. - - _ � � � -- - - Pa�k
� �" �� /
`..N1 ' ' X� ��:��: � ' ' . �- -�'.-- �v' fl' �?7[1' '7[1[1'
� � - '� - -, {L �� ' _� �'7' �� � _ j 1 f - + � . fT� 1
� � �.. . . ���„� _ _ - : y .. � /�: t �4l � �-� _ _ . `ti. ' r r� _�" �` � �� � �� � 1� 1 �J
-,.r �i �� V�
• '�;-�'- -� �� � "� -�_ - �"l � �, '� ! �`' . �7�. � . .� � �;'� - . _ z -��� - . . `1 ir - r' f�� �
. �� � ' '� . -� _ i��' _ � % � . � ► y ��' �"
'= "a�= - �`�� � - FIGURE 8A
y sr.�
crea red: 7/3 7/�8 `

�',` •,`, ;1 ,-, � :
g�e"�'��e , FAYETTEVILLE NORTHWEST GATEWAY MASTER PLAN �� �-�, `�, . .
lake `� ` .
y, ;
o- r�' ��� ��'
_ z. - �-� _, �\ ., � {�i - � „'' qr.4� l]H i � _, {� L', '�'1 �C7 ��li4ii. �� �. � 1. � -�° � � � �`
` mazarick park _ . e \ _ - i1 ' �=. �4�'tr,`5� o� � 4 � '6 4+ ��nt5�� �.` � �
� ��-` � - potential ex#ension of linear �' �� ° � � y� Cl4a,� . c � � ' � `D '� } ••}. �
, " parkpathway tofsu campus r-� °'_� �-�=�� -- -,� �,' -.�����` �
Qlinear park pathway extension to ,4- �� °�. _-_ ��-� �_�:� �> � _ new murchison rd_connection increases Q
connect martin luther kin ark with � � ��- �r�55 ' +�{.r; _ -��, _� � - `�' r
g p �_� L. «��k �- � ,, �,,�-fz�, � -} , access and �isibility to area north of rowan
mazarick park & glen�ille lake to the f �`�`�'=`-===-°s ._ � -` �`�' �{ � - ��• ;;� st_ that is out of the floodway and can
north, and �eterans park to the south , :''Lr � ;' accomodate relocated businesses and other
���,� _� . � , ' public and pri�a#e uses that link fsu and
, � ,.
� `�;,`--�b; '_ a. - - �- i � ' downtown to be studied further as part of
; ., ;�
r��� .� � �' i: � " murchison rd. corridor plan
� � tormer . • � �F.-_
washingtondr. -J-- '"� �� � -� -S.,] r �
former schaol site and surraunding s�f�oo� }�}�'� ( r� �' �r T'_ _ i,' f�qy� r4' ����41 �"`
area provide opportunity to better ' � fsu�.b,.aggbi�d. � , ,� .. , 1-� ` ` �
connect fsu to bragg blud. with a transit�onal . 401 ' `,'� ?` cross creek rerouted and reconfigured
�ariety of potential uses to be � rede�elopment �. �� ' C to reduce / elirnir�ate flooding on
ex lared with the murchison rd. �-'� aPPortunity '. ,
p -; �� martinr,��h '� `�. , murchison rd.
corridor plan � t ' king parlc ' ' „ �r �; _
� --- � �� I ! []`a `.p a �'� � senior � • `,�y L g .. S7 CI �.�? � L�} .i�r � `°r � � �."} TI P PROJ ECT B-4490
� E ' -center '[ �
. ��_�� ����� �[�� ��� �. � � . . - � �
�;�1�=.%7-� o �, road realignment unlacks new land
murchison,bragg,& rowan realigned "' � y� ; i ��� `° � _ to create larger�eterans park parcel
#o i ntersect and create clear gateway ` z %5 " ,. � a� •° .'� �, �
c._t � ;- �-, s r �f
and connections between fsu,t�"le fsulclo�ntoi�n �zF �, . j_� r.}:�1� ,
doWl`1tOWCl,and bragg " �' , � � ��' 1 transit�onal r, _'+ - r � ' �
�. ,fz �� ,] comm. reclerrelo�,e„t ,� new rowan st. bridge realigned to the m
Z'el� f�? � i s r'' n�sen °1�Portu ty {� •
'"=�"-�; - `� north to keep existing bridge intact
preferred design is a roundabaut for ={� ;Q���,�,;�;, �;, u�: � ` � space � � "' rP � ,�. ,
R � � � '�� until reconstruction is complete
enhanced atewa a earance, but °° A� _
9 Y PF� �["1�� f i � , � _ � exis . � U(� >
depending on projected traffic � '�' `�'�; �'� �o�„�,,. gareWay � _ , -�� .: �:� �
�olumes, a traditional in#ersec#ion , :� r_7�=; r;r � ,,,�n,q� � � ;`- - — - �: ti. �-:r �, ' �-.3 '� �.,�,
ma be re uired as an alternate `i'� � ' � � � t ��
y C� � f� ;s _ 1. :.' pr nsed ' proposed �°� - m
�--�.� r� � o : i. °����F�.�•• •�� ' i � ��it��� re dential comm. `t � freedom memorial parkand asom
���-` � _�.- ,, ;, . « , i � _ -�. �-_ connnected to veterans park
� c�� �r� Dia - L� �} , "-�-- �
L�� �, � , � L�L-+ .'f�l e I t ` , . � i f 1 : _. ' � , ', �. , " : �rawa n �`1 , L� ,� '�`. l ( I
o�ir;� roundabQUt creates o ortunit fdi Park . -±'�� U. c1 �
� c• pp y �ece,.a�s linear park pathway extended under
�? ��� �; hi hl visible, si nificant commercial �ia�cea =�
� �, � g y g propas d median �ar� railroad tressel to connect �eterans
rt� �, � ^ `� ���y r de�elo.pment ��._ _, res�ae �ai � ,;� parkta additional parking,festival park,
- -� ° � and downtown
�, �� , - C.5 �i r , � freedam
,``, �. c-�--� ✓ '��.�NV-rr,�•., - `:- '-. � trail f l�a k� s� 1[� � C_%L� r
`� create mixed-use rowan commons i � � r`�� existiny historic pr posed ..��--~� _ - '" - `-p, .� %� '
development with heart of rowan �� ,�;{r.� ,, residential r identiaf � ' ;��e `y �' - �'°°�,``• - ! m
�e��.hn�rMooa create multifamily infill housing as
park preser�ed, enhanced, and con- �'� , ', � n� e r `-_
�'' 1 �; : " transition to existin nei hborhoad
�f nected to �eterans park, linear �,� � ,, � - - . :• g �
park,and downtown,flanked by new � ' - "freedom ,.%parking .:i� C�; ��d to increase downtown li�ing
� � , _ � - � opportunities
+� �! housing & commercial de�elapment S , � J r�t >' ;if inemaria! •^'� ^ • ` / ;iinear (y'�� _
4-1 .+ � . , �} C.-_! asom r: f�stii�ai ,�park ._ .� 1 .
� � . , -- -
r. � � f_i [_I � ] �� ' ��_�,r v�
� �!'!� f� �� ��-7E'1 ,� � � GI c� ' ' ., 5"' =• P'aza� .y_ � __� ,'
� �_i y.. . _. , �� , \_ �'tn �' �i� ' down[ ` n i1•�, '•downtown r� . � � i ,•7t orG- o � J
Q freedom memorial park connected to �,.i ,t �'rr i=-� �_� t� _T, 9atewa j` . care , �� ��
L= ; :, � � exFentiqn.: � �
�,;; , �eterans �ark and rowan park � � � � t � --, ' �` � _ _
� , _
� , u ,:, ��,�1 r:.• � � , ; _ j i
t�.0 _ .� �
- � i f� rf� E�i�2X� - - . � �q; � [�� �' � -- � - - � . - � i:=s healthcare - : L � _. - .. � �'
�);i •� -- I�I;� - �-i �� lLe ._- �� � �. �f y �i campus __ y -`j... 4Ir . � s .-,.
i ❑� '� ��r .I,�j[7�;�i �L? f .JR ' �. . � � I i _ '! `. ' •�� �` '-�„T- �'j �-� I ���+ I L _ i
ff-i � I r�� � O �j -� r�11'��! �_� r� � i ! � � _ _f' _ . - , _ . � _ : � � -r . � `%-�� '`!J,/�y,�Y��iio Fo!Vvn 1' � . - • • - .
'. � { � � f o ijo � ° � ! s� I �j! -� � -� r , � � 1 �[ , t �: , , .= ' ' _�� `� �/ if �rr' I` '--' ��.' -� �� I
ra � G]'C� i � v � �- I
�� � U � I �- � - { _ / �.
i ° Jir r� ��u r�' �I ,� fU Ell f � �i f � I � � r� I � :�,1 � I � :�- � ;�f s � r 'I� • j �' - '�F'''=,". r �- �r r �rr i �rxr
. 1'r �, .+�.43IE][� � + �C1�1 du p�-• �+ 4- �f .o r . �� `� � �,� . � -
L� � " � �J� e ,!; �
"� l � � °�P!� Iirl� !�� 1'qrl`tt''f]CJr}�❑;�❑ ` �q;p�_` � � � ° J i�� �� �' if r � `' I I y,_ �`�! =�.�
� :• ,
i�r�p: , o�oo � � "'#'� ' �` °' a � � - . ° � o �; C-�� hotel site rede�elopment with f � ,-_ _ ,� ,I� r ['-
4 11: � _�, { ti i . c} a i; ? 4a - v a <-- � x'
bn nn.�Qn r� ��. r�- �..�� �: � ' �` � ' � .� � �L�� � street level retail and restaurant
uses to extend downtown core F I G U RE 8 B
to asom / �eterans park

�' __- . __. �.: . - - O O _, _ _ '" . . - -. •- _ -� _ . .
y
"s ._ �= : , .-_�a - - � � �� � � _ _
_ � N RTH CAR LINA VETERANS PARK
_. _ _ ,
�-�' �� :s c� � - _'-� f `F �-� � � �
t� , - , . _ ��_� S� ` " \
� �
`�� -_� -_ - ���,_� ._ , _ __ . . - - - _ � '.. � _r�`_�-.�i- .- � �.. -
� .- .'a- fsf ` 'y o0 0 - . / � � _ �� "�y ��
�- --_. � "�-4 r -s"' _ _ _ - � `�-'� _ r�, > _
. FREE M MEM RIAL PARK
' � � � `
h � "�. . <� _ �, � � �� � �'�- '- - _ . .. �_ . _ - - . _ � . 4 _ .. ' _
�.. + :
�i 3
"��' �:�T .'�- f' :�; � . , .- . ' _ - - � E , l /_ _ ._
.. . � _ .. � , �,._ _ � - , . , . _ _ . rx , �. ,.. K�., - . . __ ! " .
=_r /� ,- � _____'J._ _. �.�� :' FREE�OM TRAIL �� - .. . ' � �, � " r ��' z > =�`�' _
�'
-__ �"r__o " : � � . . i ":; - e _ - ._ _ � �i � .
:
.- _ -.�_ s --`-� _ . ,
. _
� � . .�i " " s� 'F � t�. - � �- _ u ' �v ��� _
-�. �-- _ -.._ - - _ � ..__. _ . _ .. ' . � _ _ _" _ i- _ _ _ y . . - _ __
_ _� _.,'__ - _. . �� �S� _ --- - _ _ --
... .� -. ' ____ - . __._�. _ - - . _ - _ _ .� '
�.� -- - __'-- _ _ __ - ' . . ? _ - ' .- _ � � _ � - � - - —
_- _
.x -.- _. - .-'_�_°. . . -_: _ . "_ ..�. _ _ _ � _ . _ ''- '
� z .' � _ _ ' �..>: ,. ; . . r x'.
_ _ ` ..._� __ C� i _� �_� _ 1 -3 �+::-.
�
. .�- �---__�_. � .�._ .� ` ___ _ �a«oo...� T.�.w.. .. -_ - _ - - C� _ . -
'__' -_ -._ . __ _ - - • - _
- `� -- - - - \ _ � �. -f= - � _ _ -°x.°-- -,r.��
�� " �=S�� a + a�': _ ` 'r�
_ �
z
, , _ - �_ -
-_____. _ _
- ° _ ---_ - - � _ — - ' _
__ . _ `
� -- -- � _ _ _ � - �"
�__
.
����;_,�� � °- �- _ _ _ _ _ _ ��_ . ... f � '��, _ - � z� -° - ��� � �� �������� �,� � -��� � �°
__ c�� � � � �
, _ :`��_4 _ � - � �_��- �: o_ __
-y �- L� m� Y � � " �� � ! ^ -, TIP PROJECT B 4490
i�_ __ - ' . r-ca.aocc�cio � C2 <_ �� � C3 .." � . - S`� � E . �y� ��I . „yC.'u_S
J� ASC]M �`. � 9/j'��p°�'�y,�"@ 1.._ �_ Y�_ 1� 5 �T � -� � - �_ � r � Y �_M //��S � Y o�a�'' ,�} �`� ( MASTEK�PL/�N LEtiEN17 � .
�- / T -�A `P�`�' � _ �� � �. :�.s `y ^s� C �y�J_ S��`:C �'3����!r _ LL �.....�.�r.n - � [ an� �] � A1 C/1MPUSCONNCCTOR
�� \��� y JI
� ' _ � o
A2 ' / � - . . � vo . i
/� . _ «'S � � �, 1 I - 1 A� �_ T-� J/ Y � , /I -j , i,`� � •L > /I/- �! A2 PARK ENTRV
4- si - II2 ��� �} '� l.� � � l� f
� J .�' ' i E ,�q. _ _ ei � i -� 2S_- ./v/ ° _``4"1� � � S� aa rwEVisrokcrriTeR
' f � , �i I ��� � ' �� �_ .� '
:.��� / � } � r�r.� � - N� "'-„ I I_i_.: � ! �'� i . �' � i r � �l�i�S�� _- r C - Ba ' - � `) C "� -'�. �� c �� %�` `�`l�ia o '_ -__ . "_�� - /f - o-+F cov�r.nurv�rv v.wra
1 � . V � § 1 . ... (_ _ .
_� _ "�� . �� � E -�� = � i �� _; -1 �i- i 'x���� _ y- �__'� _ _ �� '��.5��� � � E �� ' _ az
_ °_ ' - . � I � �- � � " C TH€ STOP.Y GAROEN
m+a� ^-�.--� � . __- _ � n�. .�...._ _ , - �� . - � - _ - - � ��'� � � 83
- 'b'�,°3°,� __ -r . ��-Z.� ' m � � `�° "� - F _ -lC.m _. - - _�� _ -_�� ��'�� _= f ci sTOrsvcwcc./'c.��..ii.n��r.��rv-
� _ ,._ a - - � _ - ..
_-- =---. - - _
� �= - �� ,` - - � -_�f o , ER,,,�E
�-, - _<»�r�---�.. � ��_ _T � � -� c��"f ',° T�,�<„Y,A,A .., .
'E 9 � � ti a � - ��m.cq-s,_ _ _-_-....a, � �. _ ,� F 4 _ _ _ . � - ' _ y;-.. .✓���'aew�� � ea s�c� ar t=incn ••rseFi.FCrioN.,
. 3 � _ '.i P sa
� .
—" _ --��'+g�,�� -: _' -�''- .. • _ 6n rv _
c � �
/Y
��� � �Rn��v3_j �%! � .. - `� _ . �� � � ��4ei ` ' � LA� ����� ��/�"� '�
` �
- �_ �_ _. - .. ..." . z � �� ..• . <_ - � O CTCR/lN � C.OIOR c.A�i��tlV
i � C4 V
����'3�� - " -- . .. �
� "'a-'�.<r-- ` . --.' �. �. �-� -� - ��'��� - - � - n
-' _'_ '.. :._ .., , .,._
« - � �. . _.. .-`�� -`c _` �.' _ _ �a-_ - ' _ - cs ..r
r.�B+ms_ - .-FU:'_ .,. - . .�� . ., -.,_ .. . •� -..y:�.. � aaaora3r ., _. ._
�BF�-.-_�. ,._ . �_ _.�,. _ �- _ . N� .I: ra.ti.. _._�F ..-:=r,Y-.,r-��
_ .. _ s . ., .. . ., - _ . . ., � .
�.s:.:s:..�o...- .� w,•��:. � NOT TO SCALE I.�°:s.^:�°..en.�°:�°f::�-°.a«� FIGURE 9�

APPENDIX A
COMMENTS RECEIVED

[THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]

I2EPLY 1'O
ATTENTION OF
Regulatory Division
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
69 DARLINGTON AVENUE
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403-1343
September 17, 2009
Dr. Gregory J. Thorpe, PhD, Managei•
North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina, 27699-1548
Dear Dr. Thorpe:
Reference is made to the letters received during the month of August, 2009, requesting an
evaluation of potential environmental impacts regarding the following North Carolina
Department of Transportation (NCDOT) bridge replacement projects:
Corps Action ID
TIP # Number Pro'ect Name NCDOT Contact
Bridge No. 275 & 278 on SR 1824 (Water Tank
B-4480 SAW-2009-01692 Road over Livin ston Creek Natalie Lockhart
Bridge No. 279 on SR 1831 (Swimming Hole
B-4481 SAW-2009-01693 Road over Livin ston Creek Natalie Lockhart
Bridge No. 116 over Cross Creek, CSX Railroad,
Norfolk-Southern Railroad, Hillsboro Street and
intersection improvements with Bragg Boulevard
B-4490 SAW-2009-01703 and Murchison Road Jameelah EI-Amin
Bridge No. 17 on US 15-401 (McColl Road) over
B-4639 SAW-2009-01695 Gum Swam Christ Wri ht Huff
Bridge No. 108 on SR 1549 (Castle Rock Farm
B-4730 SAW-2009-01702 Road) over Terrells Creek Christ Wri ht Huff
Bridge No. 22 on SR 1111 (Lilly's Bridge Road)
B-4780 SAW-2009-01696 over Richland Creek Christ Wri ht Huff
Bride No. 37 on SR 1311 (Bescher Chapel Road)
B-4799 SAW-2009-01694 over Jackson Creek Christ Wri ht Huff
Bridge No. 65 on US 15-501 (Aberdeen Road)
B-4816 SAW-2009-01698 over Juni er Creek Christ Wri ht Huff
Bridge No. 171 & 172 on SR 1851 (Faircloth
B-4950 SAW-2009-01691 Brid e Road over South River Natalie Lockhart
Bridge No. 8 on SR 1203/SR 1412 (Turnpike
B-4967 SAW-2009-01701 Road) over Drownin Creek Christ Wri ht Huff
Bridge No. 58 on SR 1404 (Fuller Mill Road North)
B-5128 SAW-2009-01699 over unnamed tributar Christ Wri ht Huff
Bridge No. 178 on SR 1484 (Ritter Road) over
B-5164 SAW-2009-01700 Buffalo Creek Christ Wri ht Huff
1

We have reviewed the subject documents and determined that, based upon a review of
the information provided and available maps, the construction of these projects are likely to
impact streams and/or wetlands within the work corridor. Please be aware that impacts
associated with the discharge of fill into jurisdictional waters of the United States are subject to
our• regulatory authority pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Any discharge of
excavated or fill material into waters of the United States and/or any adjacent wetlands would
require Department of the Army (DA) permit authorization. The type of DA authorization
required (i.e., general or individual permit) will be determined by the location, type, and extent
of jurisdictional area impacted by the project, and by the project design and construction limits.
Until additional data is furnished which details the extent of the construction limits of the
proposed project, and an onsite inspection is completed with regard to determinations of the
presence of jurisdictional waters in the project area, we are unable to verify that the project will
not have jurisdictional impacts, or to provide specific comments concerning DA permit
requirements or a recommendation of alternatives. To assist you with determining permitting
requirements, we recommend that you perform a detailed delineation of the streams and/or
wetlands present on the project site. When this information becomes available, it should be
forwarded to our office for review and comment, as well as a determination of DA permit
eligibility.
Should you have any further questions related to DA permits for this project, please
contact me at [phone] or [e-mail].
I�imb�rly Garvey �
Regulatory Project Manager ���
Wilmington Regulatory Field Office
Copies Furnished
Ivls. Natalie Lockhart
North Carolina Departinent of Transportation (NCDOT)
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
1598 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina, 27699-1598
Ms. Christy Wright Huff
North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
Pr•oject Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina, 27699-1548

Ms. Jameelah El-Amin �
North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
Project Deveiopment and Environmental Analysis Branch
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina, 27699-1548
Mr. James Rerko
North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
Division 6 Office
PO Box 1150
Fayetteville, NC 28302
Mr. Art King,
North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
Division 8 Oftice
PO Box 1067
Aberdeen, NC 28315
Mr. Ken Averitte
Division of Water Quality
North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources
225 Green Street, Suite 714
Fayetteville, NC 28301-5043
Ms. Polly Lespinasse
Division of Water Quality
N.C. Department of Envit•onment
and Natural Resources
3800 Barrett Drive
Raleigh, North Carolina 27609
Ms. Kathy Matthews
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
109 T. W. Alexander Drive
Durham, NC 27711
Mail code: E143-04
3

Page 1 of 2
EI-Amin, Jameelah M
From: [e-mail]
Sent: Friday, September 04, 2009 9:47 AM
To: EI-Amin, Jameelah M
Subject: Re: comments on scoping letter for Bridge No. 116 (B-4490)
Jameelah, I also meant to mention that I am the EPA contact for bridge replacement projects. In the future, please forward all
requests for comments on bridge replacements to me at the address below (or email, if you prefer). Thanks,
Kathy Matthews
USEPA - Region 4 Wetlands & Marine Reg. Section
109 T.W. Alexander Dr.
Durham, NC 27711
MAIL CODE: E143-04
phone [phone]
cell 919-619-7319
From: Kathy Matthews/RTP/USEPA/US
To: [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]
Date: 09/04/2009 09:45 AM
Subject: comments on scoping letter for Bridge No. 116 (B-4490)
Jameelah,
I have reviewed the scoping letter, vicinity map, and aerial photograph for B-4490 (replacement of Bridge No. 116) in
Fayetteville, NC. This bridge spans the CSX Railroad, Norfolk-Southern Railroad, Hillsboro Street, and also Sandy Run
Creek. I have the following comments for your consideration:
1. In general, for all bridge replacements, EPA prefers structures that span the waterbody. Efforts should be made if possible
to also span or avoid any wetlands or other aquatic resources in the project area.
2. EPA also generally prefers the replacement of a bridge in the same location, either with road closure and off-site detour, or
staged construction. If a temporary on-site detour is required, it should be designed to avoid impacts to wetlands or other
aquatic resources.
3. Bridge supports should not be placed in the stream, if possible.
4. Bridge deck drains should not discharge directly into the stream, and stormwater should be pre-treated prior to discharge
to a stream or wetland.
5. Impacts to Festival Park and Sandy Run Creek should be avoided or minimized to the extent practicable.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this project. Please contact me with any questions or comments. Have a good
9/8/2009 4

Page 2 of 2
weekend,
Kathy Matthews
USEPA - Region 4 Wetlands & Marine Reg. Section
109 T.W. Alexander Dr.
Durham, NC 27711
MAIL CODE: E143-04
phone [phone]
cell 919-619-7319
9/8/2009 5

Page 1 of 1
EI-Amin, Jameelah M
From: State Clearinghouse
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 5:10 PM
To: Thorpe, Gregory J; EI-Amin, Jameelah M; Stafford, Janice
Subject: Bridge No. 116 replacement, TIP No. B-4490
This is to notify you that the N.C. State Environmental Review Clearinghouse has received the
SCOPING; Bridge No. 116 replacement, TIP No. B-4490. This project has been assigned State
Clearinghouse File # 10-E-4220-0070. This number should be used in all inquiries to or
correspondence with this office.
Copies of the environmental document are being sent to various governmental organizations for review
and comment. In addition, notification of the availability of the document will appear on the North
Carolina Environmental8ulletin at http://www.doa.nc.gov/clearinq/ebulletin.aspx
The review of this project should be completed on 10/09/2009. After the review has concluded, the
comments and signoff letter will be emailed to the email address used for this message. If you have an
alternate email, please email it to me at [e-mail].
Should you have any questions, please call me at [phone].
Thank you.
Valerie W. McMillan
Director, State Environmental Review Clearinghouse
Department of Administration
[phone] Phone
[phone] Fax
valerie.w.mcmillan(a�doa.nc.gov
E-mail correspondence to and fYOm this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law (NCGS
132) and may be disclosed to third parties.
8/19/2009 6

Feder�al Aid #: BRNHS-0024(24) TIP#: B-4490 Counry: Cumberland
CONCURRENCE FORM FOR ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS
Project Description: ReplaCe B1'Idge NO. 116 on NC 24 (Rowan Street) over
the CSX and Norfolk Southern Railroads and Hilisboro Street
On August 9, 2011 representatives of the
X North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
X Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
X North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (HPO)
❑ Other
Reviewed the subject project and agreed on the effects fndings listed within the table on the
reverse of this signature page.
Signed:
;
Representative, NCDOT
____-y-- �
�� �
��
/ /
Date
�'_'�}� ��- _
FHWA, for the �ivision Administrator, or other Federal Agency Date
Representative, HPO
0
Historic Preservation Officer
7
Date
�'- r-- /1
Date

�-
�� �,_
M !� e �A-'
� � e �;z 3�
°s = <�a �Ws
� z � � nh S�O
� �- � e o o � �'n
�o
" a2 2�?'yi� �£.'
, i�� � � � 43 ��\
- a �� �m � �o �_�
p Z ea ° t s o° °�
v eT � h, y Y� ��
� gg c o �2` Q< '
? I�o � ` �II ti2 �3w >
w
r °
° z2 7'� � �ti ��<
S ti 32 �" 4 q 3� a°°
ti, �y M w� ti �.dz
°� a "I� '� v vW z�
t � �u Ir e� W� a�
Z y9i`` 'IF i � �°F 38
�, �
- � � � wr ti .
jW C Y �
uiW
C IY a
u1 Q >G Q W
W °
z 2 e°2 2 7
_ J J J . i
� 3i`3
i -
m a �. � H
= _ 2 �`a a
co E�v� o
\ L Vy FD V�0 �2
V � _
�S No. J:-[] ZO
r�
�
3
_ �
>
�
= �,
i�
'=_h
.` Y
=E
_ `i
: Z
3 ?
= z
r W
_ �
� �r

; �,
;% g ' �'
1�'�j �� .
��/�� �.u`� : ;
/.
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Claudia Brown, Acdng Administrator
Beverl�� Baves Perdue, Governor
I.inda A. CarGsle, Secretary
Jeffre}' J. Crow, Deputy Secretary
Jul�� �, Zo11
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mary Pope Furr
Office of Human Environment
NCDOT Division of Highways
FROM:
SUBJECT
i, �. {'�
��,'��z:� i . ., ����`# {��k�.lf:i,. 1 r������.,-E� __
Claudia Brown � . t ��.���� �
t
Office oEArchives and Histon'
Division of Historical Resources
David Brook, Director
Revised Boundar5� for Orange, Chatham, Moore Streets Historic District, Fayetteville, B-4490,
Cumberland Count��, CH 09-2080
Vanessa Patrick, as of this date, provided us a map of the revised boundary for the Orange, Chatham, Moore
Streets Historic District, which we had agreed was eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places,
but for which there were outstanding questions about the southern boundary and the condition of the houses
on Chatham Street closest to Rowan Street. In addition to our accepting the revised boundary that eliminates a
portion of the property on which a 1973 banking facility is located, we better understand the character and
setting of the area from the pictures that you provided earlier. We appreciate your extra efforts to clarify the
nature and character of the subject eligible district and its boundary.
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,
contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919-807-6579. In all future
communication concerning this project, please cite the above referenced tracking number.
cc: Vanessa Patrick, NCDOT
Donnie Brew, FHWA
Location: 109 L•'ast Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 \{ail Sen•ice Center, Raleic�h NC 27G99-4G 17 Telephone/Fax: (9l9) 807-G�70/�307-G�99
�

_ _-.-__
•�
l�`�� �§� .1'
��u■ �. �>
,�
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Claudia Brown, Acting Administrator
Beverly Eaves Perdue, Governor
Linda A. Carlisle, Secretary
Jeffrey J• Crow, Deputy Secretary
Apri18, 2011
MEMORANDUM
TO: Vanessa Patrick
Architectural Historian
NCDOT, PDEA, HEU
FROM: Claudia Brown
Office of Archives and History
Division of Historical Resources
David Brook, Director
SUBJECT: Historic Architectural Resources Final Identification and Evaluation, Replacement of Bridge
116 on NC 24, Fayetteville, B-4490, Cumberland Counry, CH 09-2080
Thank you for your memorandum of March 24, 2011, concerning the above project.
For the purposes of compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, we concur that the
Lions Civic Center (CD 1051, Property #1) is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places
under Criterion C for architecture. The revised boundary, included in your memorandum as an addendum,
appears appropriate.
We appreciate your second look at the Dudley W. Townsend House (CD 0377, Property #38). Although the
massing of the original house remains intact, the loss of integrity is to such a degree that we believe the house is
not eligible for the National Register.
Thank you for the clarification about the following four surveyed properties outside of the Area of Potential
Effect: the Mansard Roof House (CD 0002, Properry #40, listed in the National Register), the Atlantic
Coastline (ACL) Railroad Station (CD 0168, Property #41, listed in the National Register), 302 and 304
Mason Street (CD 1161, Property #37), and 216 Arch Street (CD 1162, Property #39). We will add this
memorandum to the survey report file so that in the future it is clear that a determination of eligibility was not
necessary for these four properties as part of this project.
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 919-807-6579. In all future
communication concerning this project, please cite the above-referenced tracking number.
Location: 109 East Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 �lail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 Telephone/Fax: [phone]-659I
10

. :.
ll���y "��','�
'Gu� �"`„�
.,�1 .;.
`•�.�
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Pteservation Office
Peter B. Sandbeck, Administrator
13everly E?aves Pecdue, Governor
]�nda A. Cazlisle, Secretary
]effrey J. Crow, Deputy Secretary
March 10, 2011
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mary Pope Furr
Office of Human Environment
NCDOT Division of Highways
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Claudia Brown �� ��I�CG�. �`�t�J`+t...
Office of Archives and FIistory
Division of Hisrorical Resources
David Brook, D'ucctor
Historic Architectural Resources Final Identification and Evaluation, Replacement of Bridge
116 on NC 24, Fayetteville, B-4490, Cumberland County, CH 09-2080
We are in receipt of Vanessa Patrick's lettex of February 17, 2011, transmitting the above report.
For purposes of compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, we concux that the
following properry is listed in the National Register of Historic Places under the criteria cited and remains
eligible:
♦ Haymount Historie District (CD 0179, National Register since 1983, containing CD 1163-1169,
Properties #42-48) and the Haymount Historic District Boundary Inctease (CD 0969, National
Register since 2007): Criterion A for its association with the history and development of Fayetteville,
Criterion B for its association with prominent local figures, and Criterion C fox architecture;
For purposes of compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, we concur that the
following propeYties are eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places under the criteria cited:
♦ Lions Civic Center (CD 1051, Property #1): Criterion C for architecture;
♦ Shearer Texaco Service Station (CD 0637, Property #4): Criterion A for its association with the
branding of roadside service stations and Criterion C for architecture; and,
♦ Orange, Chatham, and Mooce Street Historic District (CD 0677, Study List since 2001, containing:
CD 0677, Properry #20; CD 1�150,�Properry #25; CD 1151',�Properry #26;�CD 1152, Property #27; CD
1153,�i'roperty #28; CD 1154, Property #29; CD 1155, Property #30; and CD 1156, Property #31):
Criterion A for its association with the history and development of Fayetteville and Criterion C for
architecture and urban design.
The proposed boundaries for the Shearer Texaco Service Station; and the Orange, Chatham, and Moore Street
Historic District appear appropriate.
Loeation: 109 F.ast Jones Street, Ralcigh NC 27G01 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Sen�ice Cenrer, Raleigh NC 27G99-4617 Telephone/Fax: (919) R07-0570/N07-G599
11

Adciitional justification is needed for the proposed boundaxies of the Lions Civic Center. r'rom the report, the
history and setting of the Civic Center and the surrounding Rowan Park appear strongly linked. Page 20 oE the
reports identifies the Civic Center and Rowan Park together as "community spaces," and page 23 states that
the Civic Center "was designed to take advantage of its location north of Rowan Park." Is the 1.2-acre
proposed boundary the land leased to the Lions Club by the city? Otherwise, it seems there is a stronger case to
be made for a boundary that either includes just the Civic Center building, or one that includes Rowan Park as
well.
Based on current information, we concur that the following properties are rtot eligible fox listing in the National
Register:
■ College Park Houses (CD 1132, Properry #9); and,
■ 460 West Rowan Street House (CD 1144, Property #19).
Based upon the survey report, we are unable to concur with the finding regarciing the Dudley W. Townsend
House (CD 0377, Property #38, Study List since 2001). The bulky, hipped-roof, two-story addition has
compromised the house's design, and the modern government office building, parking structure, and vacant
lots have compromised the setting and feeling. The house's design is quite plain, lacking the intricate details
common to the Queen Anne Sryle. Thus, we contend that the argument for its eligibiliry under Criterion C is
unsubstantiated.
The following four properties are listed in Appendix B as "properties determined not eligible for the National
Register." Each is located outside of the Area of Potential Effect (APE) and were not fully studied during the
course of this survey:
■ 302/304 Mason Street (CD 1161, Properry #37);
■ 216 Atch Street (CD 1162, Properry #39);
■ Mansard Roof House (CD 0002, Property #40); and,
■ Atlantic Coastline (ACL) Railroad Station (CD 0168, Propexty #41).
Two of these properties, the Mansard Roof House and the Adantic Coastline Railroad Station, have each been
listed in the Narional Register since 1973 and 1983 respecrively. Since these properties are outside of the APE,
the survey does not need to evaluate (or re-evaluate) these properties. However, the repoxt should clarify their
National Register listing.
�Y1e concur that the remaining 25 pxoperties inventoried and included in Appendix B of the survey report
(excluding Properties #37, 39, 40 and 41) are �rot eligible for listing in the National Register, barring additional
information to the contrary.
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 Secuon 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 coorclinator, at 919-807-6579. In all future
communication concerning this project, please cite the above-referenced tracking number.
cc: Bruce Daws, Fayetteville Historic Resources Commission, bda�vs o ci.f i�.nc.us
Vanessa Patrick, NCDOT, vepatrick�ncdot.gov
12

FeAn„Lba��BRNHS-0024(24) [!/'x8-4490 �„u�irCUmberlantl
f0\CCNR4 VCF.40H�I iOH 1'HOPlKI IfY:'OT �IIf:IRL4: PUN
I llf \:\I10\.\I. NFI:ICIlN OF III)IOHIC PL\CFS
Anpr r/n+uy�n�.m. Replace Btltlge No. 116 anE realign Rowan Stree4 Mmc�imn RaaE, anE Bragg
BoYIlViN d5 part o( NC Ve[P2ns' VdK Vldn.
� m sevrcmx. ss, zoio: :.�„'..:��.�.,-. ; ,n..
z ,.�n�.,,,,r �xr.w..�:.,..;i.-.,....;.�:,, i.u.�i�
❑ INaJlli�hxo 1tlio3mumiiH\li
% \..N�CxAwSa¢HmcrmPeov�vmnnRCe011'bl
❑ Uilx-r
Raxu�adJ�..ury�ape�xuiM1U�onc inlvlunlrtauvc>phwnnapM1mmv!acxncmeulYlwneJ
:Ulrynu'.prownia•ya�.1
(� Ilprtn�noprvpnomarfil;, .aWxnM1lnll¢O��Yai+LCnolT�v.nvallllaulr\%9.
� ILaenecnoprvpenisslus�M1mlifiyyemulJ�Mxhvcc..m"�i.r..:s.vmatn..n.it.,mN�vumiGw�M1lniAv
prnivc(.dPIL
� �uan n� n i . i� i i � i i e�a �� '$��fiJR'�id�J1�����)35-J/�
r� n� - n r. i'r �35678� %
n u ia �a�d i i i i �. ri� fn� i iu.�i. m �� �w. Y9
II3} 40I�z�AeAPE)
❑ �u ,�n� �„iae- i md..sudrJ ip �.�rm i i�...nei�.. I� �`�&�
1
❑ nllr�� .�Jm- ��fuy.'4m ue�nm.nrenn.<na u�dercAaiihi.+ �ulm uwnx�A
up I.lu�ca�cm �ellc.�pl��e�frl: 'Fn �v�M1RCio�1.6�lNaNm.ulH�.-on�
rr.�..���m� na:da cs ci-r_m� nm Mn,�.,,���nw�.a ro.inn v�i=.ti
�� H�
ni„e. mr�„m.��. ��„�w��.�m �� v.��m��. 1 � 4 � 9� 14��.5-3 I � 3 Y 34 d— 4 S
s�e�
\i� �,� � `'.��,�� 9-is-in
q(pnenu�i�e, ]CW � Rm
YIIW A(a W[Ui�aun.\imioimv.r_ oruM F d�nl AF^^-1 I�r:�
Aryrtvnunm.IlPO Ihm
Po-.�� �'�Der��4tGD-��.G ., 9-�s-�U
s�„�, u���..d� P2,��3��.� orr,a� no�.�

Michael F. Easley, Governor
Lisbeth C. Evans, Secretary
Jeffrey J. Crow, Deputy Secretary
June 17, 2008
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
:�
,` ��i= ����:,,
�Gu� ��" ;�
r
R�C�IVED
Divisian of High�nrays
JUN 2 4 2008
arecanstrucGon
Prc�:ct Daveiopment and
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources �nvironmentalAnalysis&anch
State Historic Preservation Office
Peter B. Sandbeck, Administrator
Tracy Walter
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
NC Department of Transportation
Office of Archives and History
Division of I-Iistorical Resources
David Brook, Director
PeteY Sandbeck �.�,�
Bridge 16 on NC 24/87/210 over CSX RR, NS RR, & Hillsboro Street, B-4490,
Cumberland County, ER 08-1309
Thank you for you letter of June 3, 2008, concerning the above project.
There axe no known archaeological sites within the proposed project area. Based on our knowledge of the area,
it is unlikely that any aYChaeological resources that may be eligible for inclusion in the National Register of
Historic Places will be affected by the project. We, therefore, recommend that no archaeological investigation
be conducted in connection with this project.
We have conducted a search of our maps and files and have located the following structures of historical or
aYChitectural importance within the general area of the project:
♦ CD 179, the Haymount Historic District is adjacent to the project area.
We recommend that a Department of Transportation architectural historian evaluate this district and repoYt the
findings to us.
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 919-807-6579. In all future
communication concerning this pxoject, please cite the above-referenced tracking number.
cc: Mary Pope Furr, NCDOT
Matt Wilkexson, NCDOT
Location: ]09 East Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27G01 Mailing Address: 4G17 Mail Sen�ice Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4C17
14
Telephone/Fax: [phone]-G599

Beverly Eaves Perdue
Governor
���
.'�':: '..���
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
August 28, 2009
MEMORANDUM
TO: Gregory J. Thorpe, DOT Project Development'and Environmental Analysis
FROM: Harry LeGr�d, Natural Heritage Program
SUBJECT: Start of Study — Proposed Bridge No. 116 Replacement; Fayetteville, Cumberland
County
Dee Freeman
Secretary
REFERENCE: Federal Aid Project No. BRNHS-0024(24), WBS Element 33727.1.1, TIP Project No.
B-4490
The Natural Heritage Program has no record of rare species, significant natural communities, significant
natural heritage areas, or conservation/managed areas at the site nor within 0.10-mile of the project area.
Although our maps do not show records of such natural heritage elements in the project area, it does not
necessarily mean that they are not present. It may simply mean that the area has not been surveyed. The
use of Natural Heritage Program data should not be substituted for actual field surveys, particularly if the
project area contains suitable habitat for rare species, significant natural communities, or priority natural
areas.
Please do not hesitate to contact me at 919-715-8697 if you have questions or need further information.
1601 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1601
Phone: [phone] \ FAX: [phone] Internet: www.enr.state.nc.us
An Equal Opportunity 1 AKirmative Ac�ion Employer - 50°/ Recycled 110% Posl Consumer Paper
15
k"`_ r � ' a u
� � t.. h P� .. C\� C� .,. k.,.,,1
f ' I • ._�
ti � ;i.�gi r.i1 i �! . ��_!};::_;
��P 0 R 2009
��;�.:;... .._...
One
NortllCarol_ina
�<ltllr<���1�

Beverly Eaves Perdue
Governor
MEMORANDUM
�������-
lV�DENR
North Carolina Deparkment of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Coleen H. Sullins
Director
TO: Melba McGee, Environmental Coordinator, NCDENR
AUG 3 `� Z�gee Freeman
Secretary
August 27, 2009
FROM: Rob Ridings, NC Division of Water Quality, Transportation Permitting Unit
SUBJECT: Scoping Review of NCDOT's Proposed Bridge Replacement Project: B-4490 (Cumberland County)
In reply to your correspondence dated received August 21, 2009 in which you requested comments for the above
referenced project, the NC Division of Water Quality offers the following comments:
Project-Speci�c Comments
Little Cross Creek is class C; waters of the State. Little Cross Creek is on the 303(d) list for impaired use for
aquatic life. DWQ is very concerned with sediment and erosion impacts that could result from this project.
DWQ recommends that the most protective sediment and erosion control BMPs be implemented to reduce the
risk of nutrient runoff to Little Cross Creek. DWQ requests that road design plans provide treatment of the
storm water runoff through best management practices as detailed in the most recent version of NC DWQ
Stormwater Best Management Practices.
2. Any anticipated bank stabilization associated with the bridge replacement and/or culvert installations or
extensions should be addressed in the Categorical Exclusion (CE) document. It is understood that final
designs are not determined at the time the CE is developed. However, the CE should discuss the potential for
bank stabilization necessary due to culvert installation. An adequate bank stabilization amount should also be
applied for in the permit application, to prevent the need of a later permit modification.
3. Any anticipated dewatering or access structures necessary for construction of bridges should be addressed in
the CE. It is understood that final designs are not determined at the time the CE is developed. However, the
CE should discuss the potential for dewatering and access measures necessary due to bridge construction.
Also, An adequate amount of bank stabilization should also be applied for in the permit application, to
prevent the need of a future permit modi�cation.
General Comments Regarding Bridge Replacement Projects
DWQ is very concerned with sediment and erosion impacts that could result from this project. NC DOT shall
address these concerns by describing the potential impacts that may occur to the aquatic environments and any
mitigating factors that would reduce the impacts.
Transportation antl Permitting Unit
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
Location: 2321 Crabtree Blvd., Raleigh, North Carolina 276�4
Phone: 919-7�3-17861 FAX: [phone]
Intemet: htlp:llh2o.enr.state.nc.us.!ncwetlands/
;�n Equal Opporluniry ! Affirmative Aclion Employer
16
NorthCarolina
��tur�allr�

2. If foundation test borings are necessary; it shall be noted in the document. Geotechnical work is approved under
Genera1401 Certification Number 3687/Nationwide Permit No. 6 for Survey Activities.
3. If a bridge is being replaced with a hydraulic conveyance other than another bridge, DWQ believes the use of a
Nationwide Permit may be required. Please contact the US Army Corp of Engineers to determine the required
permit(s).
4. If the old bridge is removed, no discharge of bridge material into surface waters is allowed unless otherwise
authorized by the US ACOE. Strict adherence to the Corps of Engineers guidelines for bridge demolition will be a
condition of the 401 Water Quality Certification.
5. Whenever possible, the DWQ prefers spanning structures. Spanning structures usually do not require work within
the stream or grubbing of the stream banks and do not require stream channel realignment. The horizontal and
vertical clearances provided by bridges allow for human and wildlife passage beneath the structure, do not block fish
passage and do not block navigation by canoeists and boaters.
6. Bridge deck drains shall not discharge directly into the stream. Stormwater shall be directed across the bridge and
pre-treated through site-appropriate means (grassed swales, pre-formed scour holes, vegetated buffers, etc.) before
entering the stream. Please refer to the most current version of NC DWQ Stormwater Best Management Practices.
7. If concrete is used during construction, a dry work area shall be maintained to prevent direct contact between curing
concrete and stream water. Water that inadvertently contacts uncured concrete shall not be discharged to surface
waters due to the potential for elevated pH and possible aquatic life and fish kills.
Bridge supports (bents) shall not be placed in the stream when possible.
9. If temporary access roads or detours are constructed, the site shall be graded to its preconstruction contours and
elevations. Disturbed areas shall be seeded or mulched to stabilize the soil and appropriate native woody species
shall be planted. When using temporary structures the area shall be cleared but not grubbed. Clearing the area with
chain saws, mowers, bush-hogs, or other mechanized equipment and leaving the stumps and root mat intact allows
the area to re-vegetate naturally and minimizes soil disturbance.
10. Sediment and erosion control measures sufficient to protect water resources must be implemented and maintained in
accordance with the most recent version of North Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control Planning and Design
Manual and the most recent version of NCS000250.
11. All work in or adjacent to stream waters shall be conducted in a dry work area unless otherwise approved by NC
DWQ. Approved BMP measures from the most current version of NCDOT Construction and Maintenance
Activities manual such as sandbags, rock berms, cofferdams and other diversion structures shall be used to prevent
excavation in flowing water.
12. Heavy equipment shall be operated from the bank rather than in stream channels in order to minimize sedimentation
and reduce the likelihood of introducing other pollutants into streams. This equipment shall be inspected daily and
maintained to prevent contamination of surface waters from leaking fuels, lubricants, hydraulic fluids, or other toxic
materials.
13. In most cases, the DWQ prefers the replacement of the existing structure at the same location with road closure. If
road closure is not feasible, a temporary detour shall be designed and located to avoid wetland impacts, minimize
the need for clearing and to avoid destabilizing stream banks. If the structure will be on a new alignment, the old
structure shall be removed and the approach fills removed from the 100-year floodplain. Approach fills shall be
removed and restored to the natural ground elevation. The area shall be stabilized with grass and planted with native
tree species. Tall fescue shall not be used in riparian areas.
17

General Cnmme�ts if Replacing [he Bridge with a Cu1veM
Placement oC culvcrfs and other struc[ures fn wa[e�s, streams, end weflands shall be below Ihe elevation of the
slreamUed by one foo[ For all culverts with a diametcr greuter than 48 inches, and 20 pemenl of the culvert diameter
for eulver[s having a diam¢ter less ihan 48 inches, to ellow low flo�v passage of water and aquatic life. Desfgn und
placemen[ of culverts and other strucNres including temporary erosion cuntrol measures shall not be conducted in a
manner that may result in dis-equilibrium of wetlands or streambeds or banks, adjacent to or upsheam and down
stream of Ihe above structures. The npplican[ is requireA to provide evidence that the equilib�ium is being
meintafned if requested in wri[ing by DWQ. If Ihis condition is unable to be met due [o bedrock or ofher limiting
fealures encountered duriug conslnction, please contact the NC DWQ for guidance on how to pmceed and to
determine whelher or not a permi[ modifica[ion will be required.
2. If mul[iple pipes or bartels are required, [hey shall be designed lo mimic na[ural sheam cross section as closely as
possible including pipcs or bartels at Flood plain eleva[ion and/or sills where appropriate. Widcning Ihe sheam
channel shall Ue avoided Stream channel widening at the inlet or outlet end of structures typically decreases water
velocity causing sediment deposition lha[ requires inereased muintenance and disnip[s aquatic life passage.
3. Riprap shall not be placed in the active [halweg channel or placed in the streambed in a manner thal precludes
aquatic liCe passage. Bioengineering boulders or structures shull be properly desibmed, sized and installed.
Thank you Cnr requesting ow� inpu[ at this time. The DOT is reminded Ihat issuance of a 401 Water Quality Cer[iLcation
requires thxt appropriate measures be instituted to ensure that water quality standards are mct and designated uses are not
degraded or losC If you have eny ques[ions m� require edditional informat[on, pleese contact Rob Ridings a[ 919-733-
9817.
ce: Richard Spencer, US Army Corps of ingineers, Wilmington Field Office
Jim Rerko, Division 6 Eiroironmental Officer
Ken Averitte, DWQ Fayc[tcville 2cgional Office
G�eg'Pho�pe, NCDOT PDEA
lameetah EI-Amin, NCDOT PDEA
File Copy
18

Memorandttm
To: Jay McImiis, PE, NCDOT-PDEA
From: Rusty Thompson, PE, City of Fayetteville�-.tb,,
.�
Subject: Rowan Street Bridge Replacement
Date: November 17, 2011
Additional Documentation
Plans for the project to replace the Rowan Sh-eet Bridge show a constniction easement on the
City of Fayetteville's Festival Park property. Festival Park is located at the comer of Rowan
Sh�eet and Ray Avemie and adjacent to tlus project. Festival Park is a park and is owned and
operated by the City of Fayetteville's Parks and Recreation Department. I am writing to
infonn you that the proposed easement will not adversely affect any activities, feahires, or
attiibutes of Festival Park.
If we can provide additional information, please advise.
cc: Doug Hewett
Craig Hampton
Mike Gibson
Neil Pen�y
Kecia Parker
Tracey Pittman
19

McInnis, Jay
From: Michael Gibson <[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2011 12:37 PM
To: McInnis, Jay
Cc: Neil Perry; Rusty Thompson
Subject: RE: Project Design at
Jay,
I've reviewed the project Design and per our discussion the easement shown for bridge project (B-4490) will have no
adverse affect to Festival Park.
-----Original Message-----
From: Mcinnis, Jay [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2011 10:47 AM
To: Michael Gibson
Cc: Neil Perry
Subject: Project Design at
Michael,
Here's a pdf showing the design of our Rowan Street bridge near Festival Park. Let me know if you have any questions.
Thanks,
Jay Mcinnis
Project Engineer
NCDOT-PDEA
Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third
parties.
20

/ ��,/ / /
:li�.
.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Jay Mclnnis, PE, Project Development Group Supervisor
FROM: Rusty Thompson, PE, PTOE, Engineering & Infrastructure Director
DATE: October 14, 2011
SUBJECT: B-4490 Comments
TMs is in response to our previous meeting for review of the Rowan Street bridge project. The City
was advised to coordinate a meeting with F[lMPO and PWC to provide a summary of items to be
included in the project Our combined requests are as follows:
LED liehtine for the entire oroiect
The NCVP and Bragg Boulevard are illuminated with energy efficient, wMte LED street lighting thus
we seek continuity in lighting for the entirety of B4490. PWC can provide the light poles and fixtures
cuirenTly used on Bragg Boulevard. Our PWC contact is Marc'Iiuistall.
Demolition of existine site
Current plans show demolition extending into the NCVP through Hillsboro Street.
The City requests that the demolition stop at the loop ramp going towards the existing park and only
the aspktalt be removed in the area of the Phase 2 of NCVP. (see attached map)
Landscaoine and Irrieation
Revise all concrete islands to greenscaped islanda Concrete Brick Colored pavers are the preferred
treatrnent where islands are too narrow for use of concrete. At the new intersection of Bragg and
MurcMsoq the city requests the comers be landscaped (see attached map)
Traffic sienals
The City requesTs the metal pole and mast azms be powder coated black In addition, exPand the
project limits to upgrade Ray at Rowan to wider, powder coated black metal poles and mast arms.
Both signals should ktave pedestrian accommodations with Mgh visibility markings. FAMPO requests
that the bridge and approach slabs be widened 45 feet (see attached design). The westem leg of Bragg
Blvd. should also include a pedestrian refuge median.
Additional items
FAMPO is completing the underground pedestdan tunnel from the Cross Creek trail to the park with
Stewart Engineering. See attached plans and estimate.
We propose an undisturbed zone for tree protection for Pktase 2 of the NCVP. (see attached)
21

Lastly, would it be possible to accelerate the utility funding? This would accomplish a couple of
goals: The plans for Phase 2 of NCVP could begin and PWC would have ample time to clear any
transmission lines well before the project is let.
Cc:Doug Hewett
Rick Heicksen,
Greg Bums,
Neil Perry,
N1arc Tunstall,
Craig Hampton
Giselle Rodriguez
22

APPENDIX B
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS RELOCATION PROGRAM/
RELOCATION REPORTS

[THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]

DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS RELOCATION PROGRAMS
It is the policy of NCDOT to ensure comparable replacement housing will be
available priar to construction of state and federally-assisted projects. Furthermore, the
North Carolina Board of Transportation has the following three programs to minimize the
inconvenience of relocation:
• Relocation Assistance
• Relocation Moving Payments
• Relocation Replacement Housing Payments or Rent Supplement
As part of the Relocation Assistance Program, experienced NCDOT staff will be
available to assist displacees with information such as availability and prices of homes,
apartments, or businesses for sale or rent and financing or other housing programs. The
Relocation Moving Payments Program provides for payment of actual moving expenses
encountered in relocation. Where displacement will force an owner ar tenant to purchase or
rent property of higher cost or to lose a favorable financing arrangement (in case of
ownership), the Relocation Replacement Housing Payments or Rent Supplement Program
will compensate up to $22,500 to owners who are eligible and qualify and up to $5,250 to
tenants who are eligible and qualify.
The relocation program for the proposed action will be conducted in accordance with
the Federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of
1970 (Public Law 91-646), and/or the North Carolina Relocation Assistance Act (GS-133-5
through 133-18). The program is designed to provide assistance to displaced persons in
relocating to a replacement site in which to live or do business. At least one relocation
officer is assigned to each highway project for this purpose.
The relocation ofiicer will determine the needs of displaced families, individuals,
businesses, non-profit organizations and farm operations for relocation assistance advisory
services without regard to race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. The NCDOT will
schedule its work to allow ample time, prior to displacement, for negotiations and possession
of replacement housing which meets decent, safe and sanitary standards. The displacees are
given at least a 90-day written notice after NCDOT offers comparable replacement housing.
Relocation of displaced persons will be offered in areas not generally less desirable in regard
to public utilities and commercial facilities. Rent and sale prices of replacement property
will be within the financial means of the families and individuals displaced and will be
reasonably accessible to their places of employment. The relocation officer will also assist
owners of displaced businesses, non-profit organizations and farm operations in searching for
and moving to replacement property.
All tenant and owner residential occupants who may be displaced will receive an
explanation regarding all available options, such as(1) purchase of replacement housing, (2)
rental of replacement housing, either private or public, or (3) moving existing owner-
occupant housing to another site (if possible). The relocation officer will also supply
information concerning other state and federal programs offering assistance to displaced

persons and will provide other advisory services as needed in order to minimize hardships to
displaced persons in adjusting to a new location.
The Moving Expense Payments Program is designed to compensate the displacee for
the costs of moving personal property from homes, businesses, non-profit organizations and
farm operations acquired for a highway project. Under the Replacement Program for
Owners, NCDOT will participate in reasonable incidental purchase payments for
replacement dwellings such as attorney's fees, surveys, appraisals, and other closing costs
and, if applicable, make a payment for any increased interest expenses for replacement
dwellings. Reimbursement to owner-occupants for replacement housing payments, increased
interest payments and incidental purchase expenses may not exceed $22,500 (combined
total), except under the Last Resort Housing provision.
A displaced tenant may be eligible to receive a payment, not to exceed $5,250, to rent
a replacement dwelling or to make a down payment, including incidental expenses, on the
purchase of a replacement dwelling. The down payment is based upon what the state
determines is required when the rent supplement exceeds $5,250.
It is a policy of the State that no person will be displaced by NCDOT's state or
federally-assisted construction projects unless and until comparable replacement housing has
been offered or provided for each displacee within a reasonable period of time prior to
displacement. No relocation payment received will be considered as income for the purposes
of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 or for the purposes of determining eligibility or the
ea�tent of eligibility of any person for assistance under the Social Security Act or any other
federal law.
Last Resort Housing is a program used when comparable replacement housing is not
available, or when it is unavailable within the displacee's financial means, and the
replacement payment exceeds the federaUstate legal limitation. The purpose of the program
is to allow broad latitude in methods of implementation by the state so that decent, safe and
sanitary replacement housing can be provided. It is not believed this program will be
necessary on the project, since there appear to be adequate opportunities for relocation within
the area.

EIS RELOCATION REPORT
REVISED
Nor[h Carolina Departmen[ of Transporta[ion
RELOCATION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
� E.I.S. ❑ CORRIDOR ❑ DESIGN
WBS ELEMENT: 33727.1.1 couNn' CUMBERLAND Alternate 1 of 1 Alternate
T.I.P. No.: B-4490
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: ReplaCe Bfidge NO. 116 On NC 24 / 210
ESTIMATED DISPLACEES I INCOME LEVEL
O O O O O-20M O $0-150 O O-20M O $0-150 Q
ANSWERALLQUESTIONS 20-40m O 150-250 O 20-40m O 150-250 Q
Erplain all "YES" answers ao-�om 0 250-aoo 0 ao-�om 0 25oaoo p
1. Will special relocation services be necessary? �0-100m 0 400-600 0 �0-100m 0 400500 p
2. Willschoolsorchurchesbeaffectedby 100ur 0 600ur 0 100ur 0 600ur p
displacement? TOTAL 0 0 0 0
3. Will business services still be available REMARKS (Respond by Number)
aRer project? # 4: Various Special[y Moves for Businesses
4. Will any business be displaced? If so,
indicate size, rype, estimated number of # 3: Perhaps by various o[her vendors if no[ from displaced
employees, minorities, etc. businesses
5. Will relocation cause a housing shortage?
6. Sourceforavailablehousingpist). #4:�2�Au[omo[iverepair-6employees
7. Will additional housing programs be (1) Au[o De[ail 8 employees (1�Barber Shop
needed?
e. Should Last Resort Housing be 3 employees (1) Res[auran[ 6 employees (2) Nigh[ Clubs
considered? 12 employees (1) Cabine[ Shop 3 employees (1) Compu[er
9. Are there large, disabled, elderlg eta Repair 1 employee (1) Prin[ Shop 2 employees (1) Pho[o
families? S[udio 2 employees (1) O[her / Unknown 2 employees
10. WII public housing be needed for project? (1) Temporary Employmen[ Agency 2 employees
11. Is public housing available?
12. Is it felt there will be adequate DSS housing See Addendum for business names.
housing available during relocation period?
13. WII there be a problem of housing within
fnancial means?
14. FVesuitablebusinesssitesavailableQist
source). # 14: MLS, Classifieds in Newspaper
I5. Number months estimated to complete
NELOCNTION� 24 MONTHS
0927 20��
3

WBS ELEMENT: 33727.1.1
TI P N 0.: B-4490
COUNTY: Cumberland
DESCRIPTION: Replace Bridge No. 116 on NC 24 / 210.
ADDENDUM TO EIS RELOCATION REPORT (REVISED)
NAMES OF DISPLACED BUSINESSES:
1) Vick's Drive In (Restaurant)
2) Trojan Labor (assumed to be a temporary employment agency)
3) Unknown (between Godwin's Beauty Center & Illusions Night club in strip center on Rowan
behind Vick's Drive In)
4) IllusionsNightClub
5) Godwin Beauty Center / Barber Shop
6) Pedro's Auto Body Repair
7) Chief's 25 Plus (night club)
8) Aaron's Tire & Auto
9) Creative Cabinet Solutions
10) American Printing & Embroidery
11) Planet Fresh Studios
12) Computer Repair (next to Planet fresh Studios)
13) Tires to Top Auto Detailing
�