20070862 Ver 1_Application_20070521

f ~.
~~J.y ,w SfA7F
"+ d ~~ ~~
~ r;
.@~~.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
P.~,~
r r~ ~~~'+
~f ~:•~,.

~ ,~ ,~/{d
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ''~?~'~,;~y!`qc;%~
Ar~R$
MICHAEL F. EASLEY LYNDO TIPPE"F'P
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
May 14, 2007
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890
ATTENTION: Mr. Richard Spencer
NCDOT Coordinator
Dear Sir:
075°32
SUBJECT: Nationwide 14 Permit and Section 401 Water Quality Certification Application
for the Palmer Road Extension from NC 211 at SR 1149 (East Palmer Road) to NC
20 at SR 1403 (Oakdale Gin Road). NCDOT Division 8, State Project No.
8.2530301, WBS No. 34979.1.1, T.I.P. No. U-3816.
Please find the enclosed copies of the permit drawings, half-size roadway designs plans, Pre-
construction Notification, and Community Impact Assessment Report for the subject project.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to construct atwo-lane
road on new location referred to as the Palmer Road Extension. The limits of construction are
from the intersection of NC 211 with East Palmer Road to the intersection of NC 20 with
Oakdale Glen Road in Raeford. The new facility will include two lanes, one 14-foot wide travel
lane in each direction, plus 8-foot shoulders, 4-foot of each shoulder will be paved. The
proposed road will utilize a bridge that will span the Rockfish Railroad tracks.
The purpose of this project is to:
1. Improve traffic flow while minimizing social/environmental disruption in the southern
portion of Raeford by providing a continuous route from NC 211 to NC 20.
2. Provide regional connectivity between US 1 and I-95.
3. Provide local connectivity between other circumferential facilities in Hoke County and the
industries that are coming to the project area.
4. Remove from local street truck and other through traffic accessing US 401 and I-95 via NC
20.
5. Provide access for the development to this area of Raeford, including a city park planned for
the northeastern quadrant of the project and an industrial park planned for the southeastern
quadrant.
6. Maintain the functional integrity of Palmer Road to operate as a major collector and major
thoroughfare.
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OP TRANSPORTATION FAX: [phone] CAPITOL BOULEVARD
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS PARKER LINCOLN BUILDING. SUITE 240
1598 MAIL SERVICE CENTER WesSirE: WWW.NCDOT.ORG RALEIGH NC 27699
RALEIGH NC 27699-1598

NEPA Document Status
An Environmental Assessment was approved October 28, 2003. A Finding of No Significant
Impact was approved on March 31, 2005. Existing and projected conditions in the study area
were described including natural systems and wetlands. Alignments were evaluated with respect
to costs, social and economic impacts, and environmental consequences. The EA and FONSI
have been provided to regulatory review agencies involved in the approval process. Additional
copies will be provided upon request.
The subject project is in compliance with 23 CFR Part 771.111(f) which lists the Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA) characteristics of independent utility of a project:
1. The project connects logical termini and is of sufficient length to address environmental
matters on a broad scope
2. The project is usable and a reasonable expenditure, even if no additional transportation
improvements are made in the area
3. The project does not restrict consideration of alternatives for other reasonably foreseeable
transportation improvements.
Indirect and Cumulative Effects
Indirect and cumulative impacts may be associated with this project. Indirect impacts to consider
include the possibility of the development of industrial facilities in the project area. Contacts
with the local planning staff and on-site inspections confirmed that industrial development is
anticipated and encouraged in the project area. The project area has been designated as an
industrial park; the project makes the land accessible for the development. When new businesses
locate along the project area completed, they may bring additional jobs that would require more
workforce in the area. This could create a greater demand for housing and might lead to
increased residential development. The local city planning office should consider the possible
negative effects of urban sprawl on the community in terms of uncontrolled growth and
development along the project corridor. The project design will minimize the impact to the
wetlands. Indirect impacts from the loss of wetlands could include the long-term decline of
sensitive vegetation and fauna. A copy of the Community Impact Assessment Report is enclosed
with this application.
Impacts to Waters of the United States
The project is located in the Cape Fear River Basin (sub-basin 03-06-OS) in Hoke County. This
area is part of Hydrologic Cataloging Unit 03030004 of the South Atlantic-Gulf Coast Region.
An intermittent unnamed tributary to Peddler's Branch (UT1) is located within the project area.
UT1 does not have a separate Best Usage Classification and, therefore, shares the Best Usage
Classification of its receiving waters, Peddlers Branch (DWQ Index # 18-31-16), a Division of
Water Quality Class "B" Waters of the State. There are no impacts to water resources within the
project area.
No designated Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW), High Quality Waters (HQW), Water
Supply I (WS-I), or Water Supply (WS-II) waters occur within 1.0 mile of the study corridor.
There are no streams listed on the Fina12004 303(d) List of Impaired Waters within 1-mile of the
project area.
There are two riverine wetlands located within the project area. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(USAGE) representative Richard Spencer verified the wetlands on January 11, 2001. NCDOT
U-3816 Permit Application
Page 2 of 6

biologists Erica McLamb, Greg Price, and Ashley Cox reviewed the wetlands during a site visit
on January 9, 2007 and determined that there have been no changes to the jurisdictional
wetlands.
Permanent Impacts
Site 1 is located at station 38+20 -L-; a total of 0.21 acre of riverine wetlands will be
permanently impacted in this area. Construction of the new road and 66 inch reinforced concrete
pipe will result in 0.17 acre of permanent fill into the wetland located at Site 1. Mechanized
clearing to allow for construction access will result in the remaining 0.04 acre of permanent
impact.
Temporary Impacts
Site 2 is located from station 49+30 to 50+28-L-. There will be 0.08 acre of temporary impacts
resulting from the placement of temporary fill necessary for the temporary work mats and the
temporary work pad. The temporary work mats will allow a crane access to the temporary work
pad for a work crane. The temporary work pad will be used to support a crane during
construction of the bridge.
Hand Clearing
There will be 0.36 acre of impacts resulting from hand clearing at Site 2 to allow for construction
access.
Utility Impacts
There will be no impacts to jurisdictional wetlands resulting from the removal or relocation of
utilities impacted by this project.
Federally Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered (E), Threatened (T), Proposed
Endangered (PE), Proposed Threatened (PT), are protected under provisions of Section 7 and
Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. As of January 29, 2007, the
United States Fish and Wildlife Service lists six federally protected species for Hoke County.
Table 1 list the species and their federal status.
Table 2. Federally Protected Species in Hoke County, NC
Common Name Scientific Name Federal Status Biological Conclusion Habitat
Present
Neonympha
St. Francis satyr mitchellii E No Effect No
rancisci
red-cockaded

wood ecker picoides borealis E No Effect No
rough-leaved Lysimachia

loosestrife
a erulae olia E No Effect No
American chaffseed Schwalbea E No Effect No
americana
Alligator
American alligator mississippiensis T(S/A) N/A No
Michaux's sumac Rhus michauxii E No Effect Yes
U-3816 Permit Application
Page 3 of 6

Com~ensatory Miti atg_ ion:
The NCDOT has avoided and minimized impacts to jurisdictional resources to the greatest extent
possible as described above. The unavoidable permanent impacts to 0.21 acre of riverine
wetland will be offset by mitigation credit currently available within Hydrologic Cataloging Unit
03030004 from the Little River Bridge Mitigation Site.
The Little River Bridge Mitigation Site was constructed as onsite mitigation for T.I.P R-0210A
US 1 bypass in Moore County. The 14.8-acre site is located in Moore County, 0.75 miles
southeast of the town of Vass and crosses over the Little River. Access to the site is via US 1
South Business on the northeastern boundary. The 14.8-acre site includes 6.4 acres of restoration
and 8.4 acres of preservation of bottomland hardwood forest. The site was monitored in 2006 and
met prescribed hydrologic and vegetative success criteria.
The site was originally debited for R-0210A in July 2002. To offset 0.21 acres of unavoidable
impacts to riverine wetlands due to TIl' U-3816, the Site will be debited 0.42 acres of riverine
wetland restoration based on a 2:1 mitigation ratio. These debits are reflected in the debit ledger
below.
Table 3. Onsite Mitigation Debit Ledger w/ Residual Assets
Site Name HI7C Riverine Wetland Preservation
Credit(+)/Debit(-) Riverine Wetland Restoration
Credit(+)/Debit(-)
Little River 03030004 +8.4 +6.4
R-0210A 03030004 -8.4 ~ -4.8
U-3816 03030004 0 -.042
Total
Remaining
Credit 0 1.18
Schedule
At this time the project is scheduled to let December 18, 2007 (review date of November 6,
2007) with a date of availability of January 9, 2008. It is expected that the contractor will choose
to start construction in January.
Regulatory Approvals
Section 404 Permit: Application is hereby made for the Department of Army Section 404
Nationwide Permit 14 authorizing the above-described activities.
Section 401 Permit: The NCDOT will adhere to all conditions of the General Water Quality
Certifications (WQC) 3627. Written concurrence from the NCDWQ is required. In accordance
with 1 SA NCAC 2H 0.0501(a) and 15A NCAC 2B 0.200 we are providing five copies of this
application to the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division
of Water Quality, for their review and approval.
U-3816 Permit Application
Page 5 of 6

Office Use Only: Form Version March OS
USACE Action ID No. DWQ No. 2 ~ G ~ v ~ 6 2
(If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A".)
I. Processing
1. Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
® Section 404 Permit ^ Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
^ Section 10 Permit ^ Isolated Wetland Permit from DWQ
® 401 Water Quality Certification ^ Express 401 Water Quality Certification
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: NW 14
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here: ^
4. If payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) is proposed
for mitigation of impacts, attach the acceptance letter from NCEEP, complete section VIII,
and check here: ^
If your project is located in any of North Carolina's twenty coastal counties (listed on page
4), and the project is within a North Carolina Division of Coastal Management Area of
Environmental Concern (see the top of page 2 for further details), check here: ^
II. Applicant Information
Owner/Applicant Information
Name: Gregory J. Thorpe Ph.D. Environmental Management Director
Mailing Address: 1598 Mail Service Center
Raleigh NC 27699-1548
Telephone Number: [phone] Fax Number: [phone]
E-mail Address:
2. Agent/Consultant Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter
must be attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name: N/A
Company Affiliation:
Mailing Address:
Telephone Number: Fax Number:
E-mail Address:
Page 1 of 9

III. Project Information
Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of the property with respect to local
landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads. Also provide a detailed site plan showing property
boundaries and development plans in relation to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map
and site plan must include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of all buildings,
impervious surfaces, or other facilities must be included. If possible, the maps and plans should
include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property
boundaries outlined. Plan drawings, or other maps may be included at the applicant's discretion,
so long as the property is clearly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USACE requires information to be submitted on sheets no larger than 11 by 17-inch format;
however, DWQ may accept paperwork of any size. DWQ prefers full-size construction
drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans. If full-size plans are
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that
the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided.
1. Name of project: Proposed construction of Raeford-Palmer Extension on new location from
NC 211 at SR 1149 (East Palmer Rd.) to NC 20 at SR 1403 (Oakdale Gin Rd.)
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only): U-3816
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): N/A
4. Location
County: Hoke Nearest Town: Raeford
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number):
Directions to site (include road numbers/names, landmarks, etc.): see map in permit
drawings
5. Site coordinates (For linear projects, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that
separately lists the coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
Decimal Degrees (6 digits minimum): 34.9664 °N 79.2236 °W
6. Property size (acres): N/A
7. Name of nearest receiving body of water: UT to Peddlers Branch Creek
River Basin: Cape Fear
(Note -this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at http://h2o.em•.state.nc.us/admin/maps/.)
9. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application: The project area is primarily farmland with some business
developments and forested areas.
Page 2 of 9

10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The Palmer Rd. Extension will be constructed on new location. Heav~y excavation
equipment will be used such as trucks, dozers, cranes and other various equipment necessary
for roadway construction.
11. Explain the purpose of the proposed work: To improve traffic flow through the southern
portion of Raeford, provide connectivity between US 1 and IBS, provide connectivity
between facilities in Hoke County and future industries, remove trucks and through traffic
from local streets, provide access for development, and to maintain the functional integrity of
Palmer Road to operate as a maior collector and thoroughfare.
IV. Prior Project History
If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested and/or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include
the USACE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and
certifications were issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits,
certifications or other useful information. Describe previously approved wetland, stream and
buffer impacts, along with associated mitigation (where applicable). If this is a NCDOT project,
list and describe permits issued for prior segments of the same T.I.P. project, along with
construction schedules. N/A
V. Future Project Plans
Are any future permit requests anticipated for this project? If so, describe the anticipated work,
and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current application.
VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project. Each impact must be
listed separately in the tables below (e.g., culvert installation should be listed separately from
riprap dissipater pads). Be sure to indicate if an impact is temporary. All proposed impacts,
permanent and temporary, must be listed, and must be labeled and clearly identifiable on an
accompanying site plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial)
should be shown on a delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems.
Wetland and stream evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate.
Photographs may be included at the applicant's discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for
wetland or stream mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. If additional
space is needed for listing or description, please attach a separate sheet.
Page 3 of 9

1. Provide a written description of the proposed impacts: Please refer to attached cover letter.
2. Individually list wetland impacts. Types of impacts include, but are not limited to
me;chanized clearing, grading, fill, excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams,
separately list impacts due to tenth structure and flnudinu.
Wetland Impact
Site Number
(indicate on m~ip)
Type of Impact Type of Wetland
(e.g., forested, marsh,
herbaceous, bog, etc.) Located within
100-year
Floodplain
(yes/no) Distance to
Nearest
Stream
(linear feet) Area of
Impact
(acres)
1 Permanent Fill Riverine Yes 110 0.17
1 Mechanized Clearing Riverine Yes 100 0.04
2 Temporary Fill Riverine Yes 100 0.08

Total Wetland Impact (acres) 0.29
3. Li~;t the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property: 0.88 acre
4. Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts. Be sure to identify temporary
impacts. Stream impacts include, but are not limited to placement of fill or culverts, dam
construction, flooding, relocation, stabilization activities (e.g., cement walls, rip-rap; crib
walls, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is proposed,
plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams
must be included. To calculate acreage, multiply lenuth X width, then divide by 43.560.
Stream Impact
Number
indicate on ma.
(' )
Stream Name
Type of Impact
Perennial or
Intermittent? Average
Stream Width
Before Im act Impact
Length

(linear feet) Area of
Impact

(acres
)

Total Stream Impact (by length and acreage) 0 0
Page 4 of 9

5. Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic
Ocean and any other water of the U.S.). Open water impacts include, but are not limited to
fill, excavation, dredging, flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
Open Water Impact

Site Number
(indicate on map)
Name of Waterbody

(if applicable}

Type of Impact Type of Waterbody

(lake, pond, estuary, sound, bay,
ocean, etc.) Area of

Impact
(acres)

Total Open Water Impact (acres) 0
6. List the cumulative impact to all Waters of the U.S. resulting from the project:
Stream Impact (acres): 0
Wetland Impact (acres): 0.66
Open Water Impact (acres): 0
Total Impact to Waters of the U.S. (acres) 0
Total Stream Impact (linear feet): 0
7. Isolated Waters
Do any isolated waters exist on the property? ^ Yes ®No
Describe all impacts to isolated waters, and include the type of water (wetland or stream) and
the size of the proposed impact (acres or linear feet}. Please note that this section only
applies to waters that have specifically been determined to be isolated by the USACE.
8. Pond Creation
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ^ uplands ^ stream ^ wetlands
Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.):
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic,
local stormwater requirement, etc.):
Current land use in the vicinity of the pond:
trout pond,
Size of watershed draining to pond: Expected pond surface area:
Page 5 of 9

VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts
were minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts. Please refer to the attached
cover letter
VIII. Mitigation
DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, mitigation may be required by the NC
Division of Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to
freshwater wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total impacts to perennial
streams.
USAGE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Federal Register on January 15, 2002, mitigation will be required when
necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. Factors
including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted
aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
mitigation as proposed. Examples of mitigation that may be appropriate and practicable include,
but are not limited to: reducing the size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland
and/or upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as streams; and replacing losses of
aquatic resource functions and values by creating, restoring, enhancing, or preserving similar
functions and values, preferable in the same watershed.
If mitigation is required for this project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached in order
for USAGE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any application
lacking a required mitigation plan or NCEEP concurrence shall be placed on hold as incomplete.
An applicant may also choose to review the current guidelines for stream restoration in DWQ's
Draft Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, available at
http://h2o. enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/stnngide.html.
Page 6 of 9

Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide
as much information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions
and/or map, if offsite), affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet)
of mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc.), and a
description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach
a separate sheet if more space is needed.
Mitigation is required for the proposed permanent impacts to riverine wetlands resultin fg rom
mechanized clearing and the placement of permanent fill within portions of the wetlands
Wetland impacts will be offset by mitigation credit currently available within Hydrologic
Cataloain~ Unit 03030004 from the Little River Bridge Mitigation Site.
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (NCEEP). Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCEEP at
[phone] to determine availability, and written approval from the NCEEP indicating
that they are will to accept payment for the mitigation must be attached to this form. For
additional information regarding the application process for the NCEEP, check the NCEEP
website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.usJwi-p/index.htm. If use of the NCEEP is proposed, please
check the appropriate box on page five and provide the following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet): 0
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet: 0.
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): 0.21 acre
Amount ofNon-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): 0
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres): 0
IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
1. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of
public (federal/state) land? Yes ® No ^
2. If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Note: If you are not sure whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ® No ^
3. If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please
attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter. Yes ® No ^
Page 7 of 9

X. Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (required by DWQ)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
1. Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Neuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 02B .0243 (Catawba) I SA NCAC
2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please
identify )? Yes ^ No
2. If "yes", identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers.
If buffer mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the
buffer multipliers.
* Impact Required
Zone ,_______ r__,~ Multiplier ,~,~;,;~~,;~„
1 ~ ~ 3 (2 for Catawba)
2 1.5
Total
* Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendicular from the top of the near bank of channel; Zone 2 extends an
additional 20 feet from the edge of Zone I .
3. If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e.,
Donation of Property, Riparian Buffer Restoration /Enhancement, or Payment into the
Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as identified
within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or .0244, or .0260.
NA
XI. Stormwater (required by DWQ)
Describe impervious acreage (existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site. Discuss
stormwater controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands downstream from
the property. If percent impervious surface exceeds 20%, please provide calculations
demonstrating total proposed impervious level. N/A
XII. Sewage Disposal (required by DWQ)
Page 8 of 9

r
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of
wastewater generated from the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
XIII. Violations (required by DWQ)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ^ No
Is this an after-the-fact permit application? Yes ^ No
XIV. Cumulative Impacts (required by DWQ)
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in additional
development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality? Yes ® No ^
If yes, please submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with
the most recent North Carolina Division of Water Quality policy posted on our website at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands. If no, please provide a short narrative description:
XV. Other Circumstances (Optional):
It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).
None
f.
Applic~ntlA~nt's Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
5~•~y~~
Page 9 of 9

North Carolina Department of Transportation
Office of Human Environment
Public Involvement and Community Studies
COMMUNITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT
State Project No. 8.2530301
TIP No. U-3816
Submitted to:
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Office of Human Environment
Public Involvement and Community Studies Unit
1583 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1583
Prepared by:
Parsons Brinckerhoff
909 Aviation Parkway, Suite 1500
Morrisville, North Carolina 27560
January 2003

r s
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................. 5
1.1. Findings ........................................................................................................................................... S
1.2. Key Issues ......................................................................................................................................... 6
2.0 Community Profile .................................................................................................................................. 8
2.1. Geographic and Political Location .................................................................................................. 8
2.2. Project Study Area and Definition ................................................................................................. .. 8
2.3. Race, Ethnicity, and Age ................................................................................................................ 10
2.4. Population By Age ......................................................................................................................... I1
2.5. Income and Poverty Status and Housing Characteristics .............................................................. 12
2.6. Business Activity/Employment Centers .......................................................................................... 13
2.7. Public Facilities, Schools, Institutions, and Historic Sites ............................................................. 13
Schools .......................................................................................................................................................... 13
Churches ........................................................................................................... 13
.............................................
Historic Sites ....................................................................................................
.. 13
.
..........................................
Public Transportation .............................................................................................. 13
.....................................
Government ................................................................................................................................................... 1 S
2.8. Police, Fire, Emergency Medical Service, and Public Services ..................................................... 1 S
2.9. Existing and Future Land Uses; Present and Future Zoning ........................................................ 1 S
Residential ............................................................................................................... 1 S
......................................
Commercial ................................................................................................................................................... 1 S
Industrial ......................................................................................................... 16
..............................................
Future Development ...............................
....................................................................................................... 16
Zoning ........................................................................................................................................................... 16
2.10. Local and Regional Land Use and Development Plans ................................................................. 16
2.11. Community and Neighborhood Description ................................................................................... 18
ii
Review Draft-Community Impact Assessment U-3816

3.0 Project Impact Assessment ................................................................................................................... 20
3.1. Consistency with Local and Regional Plans .............................................................. .................... 20
3.2. Economic Development Opportunities ....................................................................... .................... 20
3.3. Traffic Congestion and Safery .................................................................................... .................... 21
3.4. Accessibility and Parking ........................................................................................... .................... 21
3.5. Transit Considerations ............................................................................................... .................... 21
3.6. Bicvcle, Pedestrian, and Greenway Considerations .................................................. .................... 21
3.7. Business, Institutional, and Residential Relocations and Impacts ............................. .................... 22
3.8. Community Stability and Neighborhood Cohesion .................................................... .................... 22
3.9. Tax Base Changes and Changes in Employment ....................................................... .................... 22
3.10. Visual Impact ............................................................................................................. .................... 23
3.11. Farmland Impact ........................................................................................................ .................... 23
3.12. Scenic Rimers and Water Supply Watersheds ............................................................. .................... 23
3.13. Title VI and Environmental Justice ............................................................................ .................... 23
3.14. Indirect/Cumulative Impacts ...................................................................................... .................... 25
3.1 S. Community Impacts Assessment Legal Authorization ................................................ .................... 26
3.16. NCDOT Environmental Justice Position Statement ................................................... .................... 27
3.17. Local contacts ............................................................................................................ .................... 27
3.18. List ofRejerences and Technical Reports .................................................................. .................... 27
CIA Appendix: 2000 Census Data .................................
Review Draft-Community Impact Assessment
iii
.................................................................. 3
U-3816

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1.2000 Population by Race and Hi~anic Origin ............................................................... 10
Table 2. 2000 Population by Ag_e ................................................................................................. 11
Table 3. 2000 Income Measures and Persons Living below Poverty Level ................................. 12
Table 4. 2000 Housing Characteristics ......................................................................................... 12
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Project Location Map ...................................................................................................... 7
Figure 2. Project Study Area Map ............................................................................................... 14
Figure 3. Zoning Map ................................................................................................................... 19
Figure 4 Hydrology Mau .............................................................................................................. 24
iv
Review Draft-Community Impact Assessment U-3816

North Carolina Department of Transportation
Office of Human Environment
Public Involvement and Community Studies
COMMUNITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT
State Project No. 8.2530301
TIP No. U-3816
January 24, 2003
To Jennifer Safron, PE, PDEA Project Engineer
From Tonya Caddle and Reggie Scales, Parsons Brinckerhoff
Through Carl Goode and Ann Steedly, PE, Office of Human Environment
Re TIP No.U-3816, Palmer Road Extension - City of Raeford and Hoke County
1.0 Executive Summary
1.1. Findings
TIP project number U-3816 consists of two proposed improvements:
Palmer Road Extension (SR 1149)
Oakdale Gin Road (SR 1403) realignment at NC 20, Figure 1
The Palmer Road Extension involves an extension of existing Palmer Road from NC 211 to
NC 20. This improvement is 0.9-mile (1.45 kilometers) long and would be a connector road to
relieve traffic congestion within the City of Raeford and complete the southern portion of an
outer loop for the community. The project as proposed would have signalized intersections at
both termini of the Palmer Road Extension project. The proposed improvements are within the
City of Raeford and its one-mile Extra Territorial Jurisdiction [ETJ] territory. 'The Impact
Assessment Area, as shown in Figure 2, includes the areas within approximately one-half-mile
of the project.
Census figures show, when compared to the State, a high percentage of minorities in the
demographic study area and Hoke County. However, the study area Census information is
~ The one-half-mile study area encompasses adjacent neighborhoods and businesses which
would be directly or indirectly impacted.
5
Review Draft-Community Impact Assessment U-3816

somewhat misleading. The population within part of the Census Block Groups (See Figure 1) is
in the Town of Raeford and would not have direct access to the project corridor.
Hoke County has a manufacturing based economy, with several industries located near the
project area. There are no schools in the project area. However, there are about 16 buses that
travel NC 211 and NC 20 twice a day. Based on historic surveys and site visits, there are no sites
eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) within the project study area. There
are two churches on NC 20. The City of Raeford Public Works buildings are adjacent to the
proposed Palmer Road Extension project corridor.
Traffic congestion, safety, and accessibility associated with NC 211 and NC 20, are
problems for the local community. Industries do not have good access for their trucks to get in
and out of the City of Raeford. With a new area to develop, the city tax base could increase
along with employment due to new employers setting up operations in Raeford.
1.2. Key Issues
• Palmer Road Extension will be the final piece that completes the City of Raeford's
highway loop.
• The area surrounding the new road has been designated as an industrial park.
• The City of Raeford has new water lines in the proposed area which were installed in
anticipation of future growth.
• NCDOT should pay close attention to the wetlands around the railroad crossing.
• The City of Raeford has made the request that the alignment of Palmer Road Extension
be coordinated with a planned city park and that the project have bicycle lanes.
• NCDOT should integrate bicycle plans into the proposed design and work with local
officials to provide trail connectivity with the proposed park, and the corporate limits.
Review Draft-Community Impact Assessment U-3816

t
Figure 1. Project Location Map
Hoke
.-
ou y
_ _ ,
-i ~ r n
~h~. L~ "rf.f..~T~,~ ~-~ ~ ~ - FortBraa
~y. ~ ~ 0
f ~' 1 ~f ~~r~`i ~ ;
To F~yelrevlll<
Fon Bngq
To Sourllem Plno
PInMUnI
Nc 2~t
ttteford ~ ~I
s~ozoot
0703004
v _
9703005
v
9704001 f
6
To LSUrInWq ~ ~p `
~ Z
n
N
.v ~ ~C?
O
L
"lowmore
DYhdatraah
T a.d Spnnpo
\ ~LUmEerlon
N
A 1 D 1 Mile
Corridor
~ Streams/ Rivers
~, Roads
Corporate Limits
~ Demographic Study Area
North Carolina Department
of Transportation
~ Division of Highways
i~~. Project Development And
"""~"~~ Environmental Analysis &anch
Figure 1 Project Location Map
Raeford, Hoke County, North Carolina
Palmer Road Extension from
NC 217 at East Palmer Road (SR 1749)
to NC 20 at Oakdale Gin Road (SR 1403)
T.I.P. Project No. U-3616
Review Draft-Community Impact Assessment
7
U-3816

}
2.0 Community Profile
2.1. Geographic and Political Location
Hoke County is in southeastern North Carolina and is bounded by Richmond County to the
west, Robeson County to the south, Cumberland County to the east, Scotland County to the
southwest and Fort Bragg (Harnett County) to the northeast. Fort Bragg Military Reservation is
located in the northern third of the county, which makes up approximately one-third of the
county's land area. The City of Raeford is the county seat and is located in the center of the
county.
2.2. Project Study Area and Definition
TIP project number U-3816 proposes two improvements:
• Palmer Road Extension (SR 1149)
• Oakdale Gin Road (SR 1403) realignment at NC 20, Figure 1
The Palmer Road Extension begins at Palmer Road from NC 211 and continues to NC 20.
This improvement is 0.9-mile (1.45 kilometers) long, and would serve to both relieve traffic
congestion within the City of Raeford
and to finish the southern portion of an
outer loop. The loop would wrap
around the City of Raeford and help
keep truck traffic frequenting the
industrial area off the downtown
roads. The new road will have a speed
limit of 45 mph. The proposed
extension would be entirely on new
location.
The second part of the project has
two alternatives and includes the
realignment of Oakdale Gin Road at
NC 20. The first alternative realigns existing Oakdale Gin Road, sharply east and around the
Faith Deliverance Holiness Church into the Oakdale Cotton Gin's storage area. In the second
alternative, Oakdale Gin Road would pass west of the existing Oakdale Gin Road and into the
open farm field beside where Palmer Road Extension is being proposed.
Community Impact Assessment 8 U-3816

The realignment of Oakdale Gin Road is necessary to relieve anticipated traffic congestion
at the new intersection of NC 20 and Palmer Road Extension (see Figure 2). The project, as
proposed, would have signalized intersections at both NC 211 and NC 20. The two proposed
improvements are in the City of Raeford and its one-mile Extra Territorial Jurisdiction [ETJ].
Figure 1 shows the study area for this project. For the purposes of formulating the
demographics of the area, U.S. Census Block Groups were used. Census Block Groups that are
within or touch the one-half-mile radius of the project were examined. Census Block Groups,
that are only partially within one-half-mile of the project, were not used if the population from
those block groups appeared to be out of the general project area. These Census Block Groups
make up the Demographic Study Area for the project.
Census Block Groups used to define the Demographic Study Area include block groups:
9702001, 9703004, 9703005, and 9704001.
9
Review Draft-Community Impact Assessment U-3816

Table 1.2000 Population by Race and Hispanic Origin
Demographic Study

Area
Hoke County
North Carolina
Number % Number % Number
Total Population - 2000 5,924 100.0 33,646 100.0 8,049,313 100.0
Total Hispanic 204 3.4 2,415 7.2 378,963 4.7
White 3,020 51.0 14,982 44.5 5,804,656 72.1
Hispanic (White) 79 1.3 994 3.0 157,501 2.0
Black 2,234 37.7 12,664 37.6 1,737,545 21.6
Hispanic (Black) 12 0.2 128 0.4 14,244 0.2
American Indian 419 7.1 3,852 11.% 99,551 1.2
Hispanic (American

Indian)
4
0.1
55
0.2
4,218
0.1
AsianlPacific Islander 59 1.0 330 1.0 117,672 1.5
Hispanic (Asian/Pacific
Islander)

-

0.0

19

0.1

2,091

0.0
Other 192 3.2 1,818 5.4 289,889 3.6
Hispanic (Other) 109 1.8 1,219 3.6 200,909 2.5
Total Minority 2,983 50.4 19,658 58.4 2,402,158 29.8
2.3. Race, Ethnicity, and Age
As noted in Table 1, Census figures, when compared to the State, show a high percentage of
minorities in the demographic study area and Hoke County. ~ However, the study area Census
information is somewhat misleading as the population of a portion of the Census Block Groups
(See Figure 1) is located with the Town of Raeford and would not have direct impacts to the
project corridor. The project study area has about half the percentage of Hispanics compared to
the county and only slightly less than the State's percentage of Hispanics. The black population
in the project study area seems to be close to the county's black percentage. Both are about 16
percent higher than the State's black percentage. The white population percentage in the project
10
Review Draft-Community Impact Assessment U-3816

t
area is seven percent higher than the county's 44.5 percent; both are substantially lower than the
State's 72.1 percent white's population. In sum, the project study area has 50.4 percent total
minority with the county having 58.4 percent minorities. The State's percentage is 29.8 percent,
lower than the project area and the county. The minority ratio for both the project area and Hoke
County exceed 50 percent. The minority population should be monitored to insure there are not
any environmental justice issues during the length of the project.
Table 2.2000 Population by Age
Demographic
Stud Area Hoke County North Carolina
Number % Number % Number
Total Population - 2000 5,924 100.0 33,646 100.0 8,049,313 100.0
0 to 18 1,729 29.2 10,471 .31.1 2,073,849 25.8
19 to 64 3,516 59.3 20,577 61.2 5,006,416 62.2
65 or above 679 11.5 2,598 7.7 969,048 12.0
~ Total minority is the sum of all persons other than white-non-Hispanic.
2.4. Population By Age
The largest age group in the demographic study area is the 19-to-64-years-old age bracket at
59.3 percent. The next largest age bracket is under 18 years of age; they comprise 29.2 percent
of the study area population. The smallest age group in the study area is 65 years of age and
older, comprising 11.5 percent of the population. Hoke County has close to the same breakdown
with its elderly population being the smallest at 7.7 percent, the 19-to-64 age group is largest at
61.2 percent, and the smallest group individuals from 0 to18 years of age at 31.1 percent. (Refer
to Table 2.)
Review Draft-Community Impact Assessment
11
U-3816

}
Table 3. 2000 Income Measures and Persons Living below Poverty Level
Demographic Study

Area Hoke County North Carolina
Number % Number % Number
Median H.H. ~
Income2 $33,121 84.5 $33,230 84.8 $39,184 100.0
Per Capita
Incomes $15,553 76.6 $13,635 67.1 $20,307 100.0
Persons below
poverty level'` 928 16.2 5,731 17.7 958,667 12.3
Persons below
50% of poverty
level3
~• 391 6.8 2,571 7.9 431,894 5.5
H.H. =Household.
ZPercent based on difference between the demographic study area and county and the same figure for the State.
3Percent based on persons for whom poverty status is detennined.
2.5. Income and Poverty Status and Housing Characteristics
The 2000 census shows that the median household income in the project area is $33,121;
this is close to Hoke County's median of $33,230. both median household income are lower than
the State's median income level of $39,184. Per capita income in the study area is $15,553; the
county per capita income is $13,635. Both are significantly lower than the State's per capita
income of $20,307. The percentages of people living below the poverty level are higher for the
county and the study area than for the State. The study area has 16.2 percent of people below
poverty, and the county has 17.7 percent.
Table 4. 2000 Housing Characteristics
Demographic Study Area Hoke County North Carolina
Median Home Value $81,701 $83,900 $108,300
Homeownership Rates 76.7% 75.0% 69.4%
Median Rent $476 $504 $548
teased on occupied housing urrits.
In the study area, the 2000 census shows that the median home value is $81,701; the median
home value for Hoke County is $83,900. These two values are substantially lower than the State
at $108,300. The median rent for the study area is $476, and the county's median rent is $504.
Both amounts are lower than the State's $548 median rent.
12
Review Draft-Community Impact Assessment U-3816

2.6. Business Activity/Employment Centers
Hoke County has amanufacturing-based economy. The major industrial firms in Hoke
County are: Unilever USA-HPC, Burlington Industries, the House of Raeford, INC., Tar Heel
Turkey Hatchery, Unify, and Hoke Rubber Products, Inc. These companies provide most of the
employment in Hoke County. Other businesses and professional firms provide the bulk of non-
farm employment.
2.7. Public Facilities, Schools, Institutions, and Historic Sites
Schools
There are no schools in the project area. There are 16 school buses that travel within the
project area servicing students at West Hoke Middle School and Hoke High School. The Palmer
Road Extension project should create a more efficient route for school buses.
Churches
There are two churches located on NC 20:
The Dundarrah Community Church is just outside the project area (located beside The
House of Raeford facility).
The Faith Deliverance Holiness Church is at the future intersection of the Palmer Road
Extension.
The project would not directly impact either church.
Historic Sites
Based on historic surveys and site visits, there are no sites eligible for the National Register
of Historic Places within the project study area.
Public Transportation
Public transportation for the project study area is provided by Hoke Area Transit Services
(HATS). HATS provides services in Hoke County by subscription, demand response, and
occasional group transportation. General public use is on aspace-available basis. Also, medical
related trips are made outside Hoke County_ HATS is used extensively for Senior Services
offered throughout the county to help seniors get to doctors' appointments and for other medical
needs.
13
Review Draft-Community Impact Assessment U-3816

'' J
Figure 2. Project Study Area Map
Ncr~ `.
~,
-
~
- ~ -' -_ Dundarrah Community

~ Church
. ~ '~ ~ '.SY'i ~ House of

7 S'~ ~ ~
t ".r _-__ ~ ~~~.
yy
~'~
,. ~ y
~~ , as ,
~ ~
n `~
o
awtlncMark3 p
stPalmer Rd ,roakdalecDr
Citgo ~' ,1laderBNPs ;~ Gin
Oil Bargain e.
~a
.Strap Mall
Oa
'a~
,
~~~~'pay
~ Faith Delivera~e
~~ ~'}h,
°ao. ' Holiness Church
,,,
' ,
s"
N '000 0 200D Feet
A
Corridor
- ---- Roads
Impact Assessment Aroa
MORfN CAIIOl1NA DEPARTNEI
OFTr1AN3PoRrATON
OMSION of NIGNwAV3
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND
RNbrq Neb Ceunq
PNmer Noetl Eal.mtlon Item
NC N 1 N SR 1713 (Erl Mhrier Reetll m NC 30 N SR 1103
to.Na.te as Re.tlt
Community Impact Assessment 14 U-3816

Government
The City of Raeford Public Works buildings are located adjacent to the proposed Palmer
Road Extension project corridor within the one half mile impact area. The buildings are
accessed from NC 211. The land that the city owns abuts the proposed Palmer Road Extension
project corridor west of NC 211 and north of the corridor. The Impact Assessment Area, as
shown in Figure 2, includes the areas within approximately one-half-mile2 of the project, where
these buildings are.
2.8. Police, Fire, Emergency Medical Service, and Public Services
There are no public service facilities near the project corridor. Once the project is complete,
Emergency Medical Service and Fire Department vehicles will have a faster response time.
2.9. Existing and Future Land Uses; Present and Future Zoning
Residential
There are scattered single-family residences in the project area. There is one house adjacent
to, and immediately south of, the Citgo service station on NC 211. There are two older homes
located on NC 20, directly across from where the Palmer Road Extension will terminate. There
also are two homes west of NC 20 and approximately 200 feet north of the project corridor.
There are several homes southwest of the proposed Oakdale Gin Road realignment along
NC 20 that would not be impacted by the project.
Commercial
There is some commercial development along NC 211 (See Figure 2). There are several
service stations including a BP Oil northwest of the project area and a Citgo on the southwest
corner of NC 211 and Palmer Road. Raeford Body Shop is just north of the project on NC 211.
The City of Raeford has additional commercial development further north on NC 211 in the
downtown area.
2 The one-half-mile study area encompasses adjacent neighborhoods and businesses which
would be directly or indirectly affected by the project.
Community Impact Assessment 15 U-3816

Industrial
The project area has several key employers:
• The House of Raeford is located northeast of the project on NC 20 and employs 1,100
people;
• Oakdale Cotton Gin which is at the intersection of Oakdale Gin Road and NC 20 and
employs between 5 and 25 people;
~ Unilever (employment numbers are unavailable) which is inside the city limits of
Raeford and directly north of the project corridor;
• The city's Public Works Department on NC 211, which employs 740 people (see
figure 3). The City of Raeford has a dominant industrial sector developed and wants
to continue this growth by designating the land adjacent to the Palmer Road Extension
as an industrial park.
Future Development
The City of Raeford is encouraging development for the immediate area surrounding the
project. This area is zoned for farmland uses. The proposed comdor is undeveloped and has
been designated as part of a future industrial park. The area has access to rail and City of
Raeford has recently installed new water lines in preparation for development associated with the
improvement. The City of Raeford is planning a city park north of the Palmer Road Extension
Zoning
Zoning in the project area is shown in Figure 3. East Palmer Road intersects NC 211. At
this intersection, the zoning is predominantly neighborhood businesses; the southeastern
quadrant of the intersection is designated as residential agriculture while surrounded by
neighborhood business zoning. Moving east through the proposed project corridor, all zoning
changes to farmland, with industrial uses at the eastern end of the project at NC 20.
2.10. Local and Regional Land Use and Development Plans
The City of Raeford has a Land Development Plan that was adopted in 1974. The overall
goals of the plan are to:
1. Promote and protect the health, safety, economy, convenience, appearance, and
general welfare of the planning area.
Community Impact Assessment 16 U-3816

' A
2. Include the general public and their representatives in all phases of the
continuous comprehensive planning process.
3. Place commercial development so that it is economically feasible to operate a
business and provide goods and services to the planning area in a clean, attractive,
safe, and convenient manner.
4. Promote and encourage industrial, warehouse, and wholesaling development
adequate to provide a stable economic base by setting aside a balanced
distribution of land which will be suitable for the expansion of present industries
and the attraction of new industrial activities.
5. Provide educational and cultural facilities and programs of varied types to meet
the needs of the planning area.
6. Provide public utilities and services at a level consistent with sound planning area
development.
7. Protect the natural resources of the City of Raeford and surrounding area.
8. Provide park and recreation facilities and programs to meet the variety of needs of
a growing population.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) produced the Thoroughfare
Plan for Hoke County in 1974. The
plan recommends for the Palmer
Road Extension to be 24 feet wide
and have a 100-foot right of way.
However the design alternatives for
this project exceed those standards
(right of way at 120 feet with up to
four lanes).
Hoke County has an Economic
Development Commission which is
actively involved in recruiting new
industry. The Commission has
focused a great deal of its efforts on
or near the project corridor.

Community Impact Assessment 17 U-3816
Farmland along the proposed corridor with
House of Raeford in the background.

Hoke County does not have a land use plan or zoning ordinance.
2.11. Community and Neighborhood Description
The proposed corridor primarily consists of farmland with scattered commercial and
industrial uses and a few homes in the project area. There is one house adjacent to, and
immediately south of, the Citgo service station on NC 211. Two older homes are located on NC
20, directly across from the termination point of the Palmer Road Extension. There also are two
homes with two shell buildings used for storage west of NC 20 and approximately 200 feet north
of the project corridor. The 0.9 mile-long project corridor, starting at the western point at East
Palmer Road, has commercial and retail development. East of this point, there is industrial
development and then farmland. Toward NC 20 on Palmer Road and on the east side of NC 20,
there is predominately industrial development.
Community Impact Assessment 18 U-3816

Figure 3. Zoning Map
Tq City of Raeford
~id~" NC2t1
l
To
~ , ', ~, N~ .gaib~. 1
~~ ~
~~, To Lumberton 2000

"""` +.m... ~S.Peuls I
~,..,.
-~„ .~~\
0
N
A
2000 Feet
Fi
3
Project Area Zoning
gure
T.I.P. Project No. U -3816
Project Area Zoning
0 IL - Industrial ® R-g - Farmland
'-"` °^ Extraterritorial Jurrisdiction
RMH -Manufactured Housin
0 9 ~ RA-20 -Residential Agriculture Corridor
8 NB - Neighberhood Business Q Unzoned/ Hoke County ------------ Roads
_
Raeford Municipal Boundary
Community Impact Assessment
19
U-3816

3.0 Project Impact Assessment
3.1. Consistency with Local and Regional Plans
The proposed new alignment is consistent with local plans. The Palmer Road Extension is
listed as a part of the local Land Development Plan and the Thoroughfare Plan. The
improvements should further the efforts of the City's Land Development Plan, listed as follows:
• Place commercial development so that it is economically feasible to operate a business
and provide goods and services to the planning area in a clean, attractive, safe, and
convenient manner.
• Promote and encourage industrial, warehouse, and wholesaling development adequate
to provide a stable economic base by setting aside a balanced distribution of land
which will be suitable for the expansion of present industries and the attraction of new
industrial activities.
The City of Raeford supports a loop around the city to ease traffic congestion. The southern
portion of the loop is the Palmer Road Extension. The Thoroughfare Plan states that the loop:
• Will be created so that trucks will not be on the residential streets;
Will relieve traffic problems on residential streets.
The project should encourage local economic development and provide a more efficient route for
trucks servicing the industries south of City without using local (City of Raeford) streets.
3.2. Economic Development Opportunities
Economic development opportunities exist in the project area. The new extension would
help the City of Raeford and Hoke County economic development commission in their efforts to
attract new industry. The City of Raeford indicated that a loop, particularly the southern portion,
(the Palmer Road Extension) would spur more industrial growth in the area. With existing
industrial employers eliminating jobs, the City of Raeford has focused a great deal of its efforts
for attracting new development around the Palmer Road Extension industrial park.
Community Impact Assessment 20 U-3816

3.3. Traffic Congestion and Safety
Traffic congestion and safety are problems for the City of Raeford. As noted on Figure 2,
the project corridor has commercial/industrial facilities located along NC 211 and NC 20, which
would be connected as a part of the project. Currently, employees, patrons, and delivery trucks
travel to downtown Raeford to access businesses, creating congestion and safety problems for
the downtown area.
Field inspections revealed narrow streets (approximately 10 feet in width) within the
downtown area. Truck traffic is a primary concern as it creates congestion and safety concerns
throughout the City. The Palmer Road extension should alleviate many of the problems.
3.4. Accessibility and Parking
Accessibility is a problem for existing industries and the local governments' efforts to
recruit new industry. Currently, industries do not have adequate access for trucks to service their
facilities without experiencing the congestion within the City. The Palmer Road extension would
provide an alternative to the downtown route. Accessibility is a key issue in the recruitment of
industry. Completion of the project should increase the economic viability of the area for
industrial development.
Parking is not anticipated to be a problem for the project area. Most businesses have on-site
parking which would not be impacted by the project.
3.5. Transit Considerations
The transit system for Hoke County is Hoke Area Transit Services (HATS). This system
does not serve a public routing system, so the project should not impact the HATS facilities or
system operations.
3.6. Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenway Considerations
The project has not been proposed with any pedestrian crossways or bicycle lanes. Local
officials have requested that NCDOT include bicycle lanes as a part of the project. The City of
Raeford is planning a city park north of the Palmer Road Extension and has asked that NCDOT
locate the project as close to the southern border of the park as possible to avoid unusable
remnant parcels between the southern boundary and the proposed road. NCDOT should
Community Impact Assessment 21 U-3816

integrate bicycle plans into the proposed alignment and work with local officials to provide trail
connectivity with the proposed park, which would be located along the corridor, and the
corporate limits
3.7. Business, Institutional, and Residential Relocations and Impacts
A relocation report has not been completed for this project. The following items were noted
during the on-site inspection:
• An unoccupied, dilapidated building on NC 211 maybe located in the proposed
corridor.
• The BP Oil service station across from Citgo service station might have to be
relocated.
• The former location of Trader Bills Bargain is in an unused building.
• Faith Deliverance Holiness Church might be in the proposed alignment of the Palmer
Road Extension and the Oakdale Gin Road realignment. The church might have to be
relocated.
3.8. Community Stability and
Neighborhood Cohesion
Since there are very few homes in
the project area there should be little
change to the stability and
cohesiveness to the homes in the
project area.
3.9. Tax Base Changes and Changes
in Employment
Completion of the project should
create new development opportunities
for the community. With more land
accessible for development, the City and County tax base should increase with more employers
setting up operations in Raeford.
Community Impact Assessment 22 U-3816

3.10. VisualImpact
As the proposed corridor is primarily undeveloped, the Palmer Road Extension's visual
impact to the area should be minimal.
3.11. Farmland Impact
There are no prime and important farmland soils in the project area.
3.12. Scenic Rivers and Water Supply Watersheds
There are no wild and scenic rivers in the project area. There is a small stream at the
northern part of the project which would parallel the proposed right-of--way. NCDOT Hydraulics
section has asked that the project be pushed slightly south to avoid the stream. In addition to the
stream, there are some wetlands around the railroad. The City of Raeford has stated that any
wetland mitigation necessary might be integrated into the design of the proposed industrial park,
but show no mitigation in their project design.
The project is not located in a State designated Water Supply Watershed. The project does
fall into the Cape Fear and Lumber River hydrology. (Refer to Figure 4)
3.13. Title VI and Environmental Justice
This assessment finds no evidence or indication of benefit, harm, or disproportionate impact
to any social group. As noted in Table 1, Census figures show a high percentage of minorities in
the demographic study area and Hoke County than the State's percentage of minorities.
However, the study area's Census information is somewhat misleading since the Census Block
Group population comprising the majority of the proposed corridor (See Figure 1) would be
located on undeveloped property. The block groups used for the demographic data include a
residential section of the City of Raeford that is predominately minority and is not truly impacted
by the project.
Community Impact Assessment 23 U-3816

Figure 4 Hydrology Map
~.h t'~otK@
~ 1 _ ~ w • ~` '~ -Fart drape ~' County
,u",i~~~•a ~ •r,s• r s
rF~~+~
. ~
_-.~~- -~
.. ~~~
* ~.
,~ _...
~,
~,-_
i° ^_,.~ ., FAr
~,. ,., r •- ti. h ~ 2
~, i
ti ~
t L
i ~ J
y i
,,. f 5 x ..
/,' ti ~ EF '~ t .
t
,y y ~-ry
J ~° xrr,a
i
~ .. ~ - ,. ~Y~,
,, ~ ~ . .
__ '+a. _.
_ - -_
,~ -_.
,. '~,
,y, `,~
F ~
l y .. s
-
•,_
~~~~~~ ,
~,.. F ,;,---~ ,F 4 1
r*-...-y- c ~ - ~4_i~
ry ~ Y_
~,.
. , '+~..
~~ ~, x
.a,R
1 !F -
~, -", j
•, ~ f „1 ,.
.fix. +. a `t ,... 1
fY
1ti,
J
1 rwies
a ~
~I f
*~^~ _...
Rro)eet Gorfidor
OamaQraphc Study Area
Impact Assestment Area
lumber River Hydrology
... Cape Fear River Hydrology
Corporate Limits
Fla,,«
NC>9TF1 .^.ARf'rtlhlA EJEPARTNENT
OF TRAAISPORTATX3H
i,~^<~ p~tl&FON Q~ NK3HWw1';3
PRC~ECT DEVEI[~k1EUT RAID
ENVIRC1Nw1E-+iTAI. ANAL'tgtS 9RAAJ.^,H
Raeford, Hoka County
Patrnar Road Extension from
NC 211 at SR t 149 to NC 2D at SR 1443
T.t.P. Projcc! No. tJ-3@t6
Community Impact Assessment 24
U-3816

3.14. Indirect/Cumulative Impacts
Indirect impacts might be caused by the actions of individuals that would occur as a result of
the proposed transportation improvement. Based on the analysis presented under " 3.0. Project
Impact Assessment" (beginning on page 20), the following was concluded regarding indirect
actions associated with the roadway extension and realignment project.
Two types of actions are considered:
• Change in the Rate of Development along the Project Corridor;
• Change in the Character along the Corridor.
Change in the Rate of Development alon thg a Project Corridor
Among the major considerations in an indirect impact assessment of new or improved
roadways are the effects of the activity on the pace and location of local and regional
development. Often, a functional relationship can be shown to exist between these events.
Although improved roadways often result in accelerated or new development, this impact is
neither consistent nor predictable. However the improvement of the roadway might accelerate
the rate of development along the corridor.3
Indirect impacts to consider include the possibility of the development of industrial facilities
in the project area. Contacts with the local planning staff and on-site inspections confirmed that
industrial development is anticipated and encouraged in the project area. The project area has
been designated as an industrial park; the project makes the land accessible for development. If
these facilities were to develop, the city would have to recognize the need for increased services
for the development and future employees.
The completion of this project, as well as the rest of the loop around the City of Raeford,
might have positive indirect impacts on local economic development efforts. This could spur
economic development opportunities both in the project area and in areas outside of the project
within the City of Raeford.
When new businesses locate along the project are completed, they might bring additional
jobs that would require more workforce in the area. This could create a greater demand for
housing and might lead to increased residential development. The local city planning office
3NCHRP, 1998
Community Impact Assessment 25 U-3816

should consider the possible negative effects of urban sprawl on the community in terms of
uncontrolled growth and development along the project corridor. In order to prevent such an
occurrence, local planning departments should work with NCDOT's statewide planning branch
to explore possibilities that can ensure the continued viability of the community.
Indirect impacts from the loss of wetlands could include the long-term decline of sensitive
vegetation and fauna. NCDOT should consider a design which avoids or mitigates the impact to
the wetlands. The City of Raeford has stated that any wetland mitigation necessary might be
integrated into the design of the proposed industrial park.
3.15. Community Impacts Assessment Legal Authorization
This report has been prepared under the authorization and is intended to meet the
requirements of the following laws and regulations:
• Transportation Efficiency Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21);
• National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA);
• Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and related statutes;
• Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1970, 23 USC 109(h);
• Environmental Impact and Related Procedures (1987), 23 USC 771;
• Guidance for Preparing and Processing Environmental and Section 4(f) Documents,
TA 6640.8A (1987);
• Executive Order (EO) 12898 on Environmental Justice (1994);
• Department of Transportation Order on Environmental Justice (1997);
• Farmland Protection Policy Act (1981), as amended in 1994 (7 CFR 658);
• Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act (1970,
referred to as the "Uniform Act"), as amended in 1987;
• Federal Highways Administration Environmental Policy Statements (1990 and 1994);
• Recommendations of the President's Council on Sustainable Development.
Community Impact Assessment 26 U-3816

3.16. NCDOT Environmental Justice Position Statement
Environmental Justice (EJ) embraces the precept that all people and communities are
entitled to equal protection under our environmental, health; employment, housing,
transportation and civil rights laws. The three basic principles of EJ are to:
1. Engage low-income and minority populations in the transportation decision-making
process.
2. Identify and address "disproportionately high and adverse" impacts of transportation
programs, policies, and activities on low income and minority populations.
3. Evaluate the benefits and burdens upon low income and minority populations of
transportation programs, policies, and activities.
3.17. Local contacts
• Mike Lucas -City of Raeford Public Works Administrator. [phone]
• Randall Bell -Hoke County Planning Department. [phone]
3.18. List of References and Technical Reports
National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP). 1992. Report 403: Guidance
for Estimating the Indirect Effects of Proposed Transportation Projects. Transportation
Research Board, National Research Council. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.
Community Impact Assessment 27 U-3816

c
Q
~;
Q ~
rd ~
V
Z ~
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O f~ ~ O CD N N E 111 O LO L17 O
o O ~ N N O ~ O ~ O [~"7 N O
O 1` N N
~ `r' M `~ o v v i ° ° ti ~ o ° °

~
(+"i t
O
~ ~
n
t.fl
4L"1
~fl
N n
~f7
N
C.O a~
O
OD
~ ~
n
~ '00' ~ O lf] CY7
~
~ 60] ~ R N OOD O O
V O C~'i OD r t~ N N V_
t O U"l N
0
Z
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O N LIS O CO V ~' N O ~- V CO C'
o~ oo r~ ~ c+' i m o •- o n o Sri [* i

~
o CQ ~ 6~ 67 CO c- OD [~'7 O N CD
o M N V N ('~ l ~ 6~
2
0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
~ 0
o 0
o 0
o O C 0 lTl t` N ~--~ S O O N OD V
~ o ni ~ m o r~ o ~ o c*i ~ o
~
~ N ~ O ~ ~V N
~ 61 V ~ O ~ O OmD

Q 61
7 N O
C* N V ~
4L ] N N
a
UJ
0
p • 0 0
p 0
p 0
G . 0
p 0
~ 0
1 0
~ 0
~ 0
\ 0
~ 0
p\
0 0 (.O OD ~7 N N O CO O N O N
0 0 N 0 O M O N O O O N .- O
0 u
,~ ~
O c N CO ~ V ~ ~ N O ~ O 67
p m
O t O (
O N O
O
O
N _ . _
R
O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O OO 4] N OD t- C'~7 O CTJ O N ail R
0 0 ~f] N O O ~ O ~ O l17 C+ i O
0 ~
O ~ 4Ci E
" N O `_ N O N O V [MT7 OOD
O 61 LC
l N C'7
M
O
6f
0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0~
o rt ~t, ao m m ~„ N ~ o v v m
0 oo ~ri ~ ~ m o cri o c~i o v ~-i ~

M" R ~ N O V O
D M N O 0 ~ ~
p 4
l
M I
-
1~
U'7 D C~
'1 4
'] [
9
L4
O
M .-
O
R
O
0
`o`er 0
~ 0
o 0
~ 0
o~ 0
0 0
0 o
0~ e
~ o
o o
~ e
0 o
0
O a7 O .- V N O O N O ~ CO N ;
~° O ~- M ~ ~ O 1~ O O O N O ~
O ~
m ao m m ~ o cn o m o '
o ~ ~ ~
N
O
R
O
o s is io - $ •

~ ~o `~ s
~ to m
=
= ~
O a
~ s C
Vi m A ~ C
2 v v
• im = v' H v
• ~•
~ '_ c v ~ ~ v _
~"
O
~ H y ~ O l0 ~ ti ~
= a a ~ a i
iv ~
~, .~ ~o
H L.1
•
_
O

2

°
O
O 0
do
N 0
N
(NO 0
O
N

o 0
0
00 0
0
00 0
M
N 0
~fi
U7
~ m m
~ co ao
O ch ~ v
~ r~ r- v
~ M V M ~
0
U 67
O C~')
O pLO
O T
0 a O
~ O
~ O
~
~
0
7 ~
~ O N Lf'l t
r
0 ~

~ 0
Z
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0~
O ~ N R O ~ R O
° n 9 " g R4 ~ R
0 c c o
a c
v R rn ° ° `r'

y
CD r~
Y r
-
I.i/
Id)
~
a~
N c
ri
LD m
1~ r~
Lf7
O O N ~fi N
M = ~ ~
~e~° 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
o O N V It l o ~f i CO N 00
N ~ °`^ ~ C
O C.O C.O
p ~Ci R

~ ~ ti lI') CO m ~ ~ ill ~ 67
`~ u~ ~ m d t+r'i ~n

~
a cn
~
~
UJ U7
o
O 0
~ 0
o 0
o 0
~ 0
o 0
OD V O N CO 4l 6f
O O 67 ° O ~ ~f i CO
O N LO

O
p a~o v rn ° `- m m rn

O m In N
_ a m ~ OD ~ N
O ~
N O ~ ~
~ ~ 69 69
c 0 ~ ~ 0 0 0 0
O I` .- N 67 ~ N ~
o O N t~"] o M N O 'st
O CO O
0 ~ N ~ ~ M O 60i v
0 m O

O O
O) 67
'. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
p u, N m m cq rn R
o N T O o ~ ~ O O
V O
C
lC
N ~ m ti ~ V R ~ ~ N ~ N
~
f7 (

C O .--- O ~
D
C ~ ~ 69 69 ~

C
r7
` 0
o 0
~ 0
~ 0
o~ 0
0
' 0
0 0
0
C o N O O CO C+
i 1~. OO ~

o m
y

__
C _.. ~
H
' ~ N N ~ O ~ N ~ ~ y
-
S7 ! 00 6
i
~fi 4C7 07 ~ [y7 ~
O [.Q ~ CD
N ~

~ N
O .-- N
O O
N N
6

%J
O
61 ~ 9
n O ~ ~ 7 O ~ 7
«
+ O ~ d O
O 07 td
' ~ +O" ~
p ~ -
o
~
.~+
o

'_
o a~
~
as
~
~ s
3
d
O
~
A V a
u
- = y o ~
~ a~ o ~ o
~ t o u~ °~
d w
o
o

7 = a
y
y ~
O

H
H d

~.; ~ a a c o ~
Ys
C
O
a~
._
O
s
as
.Q
cs
O
C
O
O
A
K

The project area was evaluated on June 5, 2002 and August 17, 2005 for potential habitat for
federally listed species in Hoke County. Suitable habitat is not present within the project area for
the red-cockaded woodpecker, St. Francis satyr, rough-leaved loosestrife, American chaffseed, or
the American alligator. Biological Conclusions of "No Effect" were given in the EA.
Suitable habitat is present. for Michaux's sumac. All areas containing suitable habitat were
surveyed for Michaux's sumac on June 5, 2002 and .August 17, 2005, no specimens were
observed. A biological conclusion of "no effect" was given in the EA. Based on comments
received from USFWS in a letter dated December 31, 2003, the biological conclusion was
changed to "may affect, not likely to adversely affect." However, due to changes in terminology
and protocol the biological conclusion was changed back to "no effect."
A review of the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program database on March 16, 2007 revealed
no occurrences of Michaux's sumac, St. Francis satyr, rough-leaved loosestrife, American
chaffseed, or the American alligator within 1.0 mile of the project area. There is a NCNHP
elemental occurrence of the red-cockaded woodpecker located approximately 0.9 mile from the
project, however, according to NCNHP records the cluster was destroyed and all the nesting trees
were cut. Therefore, biological conclusions of "No Effect" remain valid for all federally
protected species in Hoke County.
Avoidance, Minimization, and Compensatory Mitigation.
Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation: The NCDOT is committed to incorporating all
reasonable and practicable design features to avoid and minimize jurisdictional impacts, and to
provide full compensatory mitigation of all remaining, unavoidable jurisdictional impacts.
Avoidance measures were taken during the planning and NEPA compliance stages; minimization
measures were incorporated as part of the project design.
According to the Clean Water Act (CWA) §404(b)(1) guidelines, NCDOT must avoid, minimize,
and mitigate, in sequential order, impacts to Waters of the US. The following is a list of the
project's jurisdictional stream avoidance/minimization activities proposed or completed by
NCDOT:
Avoidance/Minimization:
The bridge over the railroad at Site 2 was lengthened to span the wetlands.
• The fill slopes were steepened to 1.75:1 at station 45+50 -L- lt. to 49+00 -L- to avoid the
wetlands.
• Temporary work mats will be used in wetlands at Site 2.
• Preformed scour hole located at Site 1 will be used dissipate energy of stormwater discharge
• prior to entering wetland.
• The 66-inch reinforced concrete pipe will be buried one foot at Site 1.
Based on the above considerations, it is determined that there is no practicable alternative to the
proposed construction in jurisdictional Waters of the U.S. and that the proposed action includes
all practicable methods to avoid and/or minimize jurisdictional wetland impacts that may result
from such use.
U-3816 Permit Application
Page4of6

OI-FEB-2007 08:44
r:\hydraulics\permit\u3816_hyd_prm_tsh.dgn
bllpscomb AT HY221522
C011lTRACT:
°

o ~n
o ~
0
n
~ -v
~
n
~ IV
o O
o
0
s Z

N
o °o
°o
b
~y
y~

n~ b b
b
N o ~
~'
b
n co a
~
~~
; w ~ a
~$oa
r~l ~
o~
y
F

O n
y
y %~
~C ~~,
[~i ~
G~
a y
~ C
n ~
,,
°`
a
n
~ u
c
w°
~"
~°
a
a
C o
Q ~ n ~
~~ ~x ~
L7
G 'j
~°

b
~~
~~ ~~
~~ ra
~
v ~
m~
"+ ~
~$
b

r`b y(~
~ A

~
~
~
~ ~ 1+
x
N
y
y ~

t~t7 ~a
o
y
O
~ y
~~
~~
~ y
x
N ~ ~~
~

~~ 0
~~
~~
~
y
b
~n y
~a a
~ ~
~y
OZ
Z
D
0
z
D n
r 0
~z
m ~
O ~
~ C
1 ~
C7 -
~z
m ~
~m
1 A
C1 ~
D ~'
r r
p cn
-al "rl
cm
3 ~
O
N
lD
~ II

0
S
0
w
0 0°
o
A
o
0
o°
8
3 ~
z ~
-~'i
.~
f ~q
(!) ~ !~
D ~~
r
m
i
o ,.._, ~
N
~ i%
O/
O
~><i
3
m
~~ : ~ ~ ~
`,
..
~ ~, ~ 1,
d ~ ~-`
I
= w iCl
N
'_ (]
~ ~ ! I
~ ~ I /
f
F~-~

W O V
L~1
_~~(,

-. ~ C71
I Q ~;\
~
m
~<~
I ..
~:I7
(n N
m m V ,,
o ~ ~i
~ ~
[n v ~-y /
in ~+
,
ro ~
`I n
<
~ N ~
cn ~-,
N i= ~
TIP PROJECT: U-3816
0 0
~ M .~
i~
-..
g ~' r :
C
~ ~r g ~J
~ ~ ~~,~
hLzy~ ~~
j $ Fr~FI peRi • e
'-7 ~ r~x
~ ~ ~ '
.~d
,_ ,
~ -
~ _
--,
~-
b _, ,,,
~ 8
by u ~
o ~~ `Ul
~ ~~ .m
o=
3 s
~~
.t' ~~ ~f~
O
y~
~~
z `~ y
d
y~
O
0
_a ny
N ~'
oy
y~
~" O
~~
w
n
ti
i
i _
Q ~
~ ~
f ` '
io
0
C
n
O
1
~,

® ~~
~.
~:
~~
~ ~
~ ~
a.
n ~
/C11~ ~
W
AJ
~_
'Ion

V
f
V I Utl:l7
tcs\per mit\u3816_hyd_pr m_psh6.dgn
A7 uv.,1S??
MATCHLINE STAa 37 f00o00 -L - SEE SHEET 5
\ 'Cg
\ k k=
e~M" ~
ki
\ \k k 1
~k k ~
k k
O \ k
N ~ k
l k
O \
O ~~ yy py~
>• }}~ p~pid ~{[ pp~
m~ Y~ 9~~ > S~ \
77 ~8
~~ ~~ ~
° ~"
a g
5o t -
o°~
-~
g ~
om
n N ~
~ ~:
6
a
~~
1
a
;_
E
_~
H
rn
~i~
O I
~~ /t/~~
at ~ a
~ ,~ O
k 'f/
k/
I~ CJ1
' \ li
~v~
//
r~
J
~~~~
O/k k ~
/ k k %
k
1 k ' I
I I Ik i
1 k
^~ 1` r ~ k x
' I I k k k
~ ~ k
r k
z
~.~ ~~ ~ I ~ I k k k
F .{ k
~~ ~? m ' I I k kk ~~
E = N' k
c ~ ~ I k k k
I I k k
\ k
1 k
I k k
' I 1 k k
1k
k ~
/ ` Ik I~
Al ~ I ` ~ I =
r r ~/~k /1x
I ' k k k /
k {
/. k k
Q~ ~^ a / /0~ k k k 't/~ 45
' 8 ~ k k
+ 1 k
k k -~" `
fMO~P~ ~~ ~ N- k N. /
k ,/ /
o ~~ ' ~~ ~ I I k k k k H' t
~5~n ~ ~- k ~t~
k kk k
~~ ~ I X
n ~ I I k k ~ ~u~
o - I ;
~_ ~ I{• I k ~ X ~~~
A ~ k k
k X
s I }tt kk I~~~
j I ~ k k; X
• ~ IL_
`' I k k
,~ ~ k ~
k k k
~ G
02 02 ' I k X ~' ~C
k
MATCHLINE STAo 48fD0o00 -L - SEE SHEET 7 ~ ~
~~
~~
~v
_~ ~
$~~ r
r
~I
a~
8
z
a
~~

a
z
0
I
40
Z
DZ
o~
-~ ~~Z.
~v
~o
N

'7
ws\~e mgt\u3816_hyd_prm_psh6.dgn
~T HV 991E>7

=~
$ ~
s ~ ~
~
~ I
~
~,
l-~~
~ ~ ~ z _
~
.
°. a~ r '~
..5~
i `~
~z
~
~
~
y

i
1 V :VJ
a\ erm~t\u3816_hyd_pnn_psh7.dgn
8/17/99
MATCHUNE STAo 48 f00o00 -L - SEE SHEET 6
~ ~ +~
N ~« ,~' 3
00 - ~' ~
O ~- - -9lM ~ 3 a
_ ~ ~ ~ dN
- ~ k k IF y.
'r - - ~ k k It µ K' k ~' ~ 7P M "
~ ~ k N- It k N- IE ~ M
It ~ µ ~ ~ ~ k ~ ~ ~ ~ ' µ
N ~ M N-
~ k k k It ~ 9
~ K' ~K. µ ~' ~ ~ ~ !t It ~ It
k ~ N' ~ ~ ~ ~ µ k, +M
N- ~ 111~~~ IE
IE K. ~ µ ~, ~ ' µ ~
µ ~
N- N. ' "j17~i
k IE ~K" ~ i
~~ I r..~i

~1" ,~y H511Y~ u ~
~ / /
~ / S
I
T
I
K
~~ F
.~ , I
g ~ N
O
I
m I ~
~ I
n
I
{, a A
I4j
I
' f\
-g i :~ /,
4 I .gam V $~Fg
Ra au: a ~ 4
I N
~~~~ ~
~ ~~ D I 1
s~ m^~
h I ~~•..-
m~
bo
y O N
~ N ~
~ ~~~
~ ~ "fir
~~YYyy~~ • ~4~
. -1
A
4
H
55
r
'"v
t ~~~
C ~Nr
o ~,
~ m
"~ gmc .~
N r
~p~
~ ~tiO
a • • ~
~ ~~

ue~:~i I
I p ..; D
I oZ
IIF A
~O
I ~ i-~~ ~
lJ~
I I Y
~~ h , ~~
~~ r ~~
~ I I ~
~ ~
I
MATCHLIIVE STAB 60 ~OOo00 --L- SEE SHEET 8
^' 8 Cam"
0 s..
~~
~ az
$, ~ ~ ~
~~ + ~ r
S ~ ~
~, I. ~$ III ~ i `~~Ir
.s~ si ,„ o m ~.
fJ YI ~ ~ If ~ X +/
N L
m
~ ~ s ~ ~~ I ~` ~~y
~s
k ~X
!t
7~
i
~- ~,,.,

J
7 0~:0~
cs~ ermit\~3816_h~d_p~m_psh7_enla~ged.dgn
m Z
°
z ~o m
o nz
mm N ro
te
N z D rn
r
-
a,i =m ~o
z... m3 z=
o~ ~.~ ~D
°
D
~ o
z o
z

O
m
iz
b

N

0

0 0
~

F o
N

a ~, ~ cv
a ¢ "' N
~' 3
z
~ ~~ a
~"x o~
G. w
O U '_'
~"_
z
o
w x~; ~
o ~~
~ Q
¢
Q ~'
F
~ U W
z ~
z C°
0

c
m

r
M
N
U
Z

~
~ c
m
m
o
M ~
N -o
~
M z Q
U
Z -o ~
N
~ ~
~ ~
O
m ~ m
LLI
~
O
~
~ ~
~ d
U ~
U ~
~
'

N
N ~
~
=
O m
~

~ _
m
Cn
W
'~
~
Q
v
oo
c°o
r-
0
.--
N
L
d

3
O -~
o
~+
~
~ -
~
a~
a ~ z
Q
L W
~ p
_ N
~~ '0
~ Y
U
a ~ 7 J ~
U LL
G1 m ~ N m

tC
d
J _
c N
a~

Q
O .>
o
Z
~

t
L3-Y ttl-CVU/ IU:3tl
r:\roedvoi\ ro \u3816_rdy_pnhl4.dgn
'i$g E11SF~S3
MATCHLIIVE -Y2 - ST,go 26 fD0o00
SEE SHEET g
i T
''
/' ~ ~

JCEN$q,~~ /
~1 ISBRD /
J A&1No
N~~;~
4~
a
~ Q~~~4 ~~
~ ~~ ~ N
~o~~oD~
nnllnuv~
~ O
~~~~ ~
$~~~ ~ ~
~~~
lOd lY -LAg-

~~~~N
•cax7-~
~~rrn ~^pncox

I /
9056'
N g.~0'i7
/''
~~
// /,,
~~
~~
g
8
s
a
e
Q
0
x
~~
J
C I"I m
i I
r I
~ I I N
I I
;I I
I
1 I I T
I
I
I I
I
I ~ T '^Y~ cLL ~~Y LAC
I I
I
I
I

i
s
r CO'CVU/ IU:JI
-oadweyy\p oII\u3616_rdy_pshl 3,dgn
:¢1ISFR RI~MC¢1F¢¢
'~B6 ~qp.
1}~,
tiq~ e~R~o
9S
r \
(WM e_em~.. \ .
ASS ~ Ht~ ~M.Y llC
- S
to
O
'`° MAT CHLINE -Y2 - ST Ao l7 +OOo00 SEE SHEET 9
ASS ~~'~'BEII F~~
7 vg~p~
8/V/99
\~9
~\
f
ro \
ylY llC
!5

8 ti
sr
~~
"x
~r
~~

D
N z ~!?
o m
r

o w
~
o ~

~ +
N
~ ~
p
N
r O
O ~

1-
~
W
~. ~ N
~ 2
.. ~
C7 ~~
c
m ~ ~ ~

co
o p m ?1 3

v V ~ 7 7
~
a
m
N
7
O p CC
<D T1 ~
f
O p »
j =
~
nom
~ p _
.
.
_ C
~ <
m
--i
m
~ '-
z
~
_~ v
~
~,
._ ~ .. ~
a o
~' ~ ~
D
m
~~
~ ~ -i
~
o ~ ~ ~ m d
A >>N
~ v
N
a ~
m

g ~ 3
h
. ~
rn ~ c
i N ~
~• 7
a
y co ~
D
v C7
m
~~
~ .i
~
~ ~ ~ ~ C
_. ~
7 ~
~, a
~
~~
~ ~
~
~
~
~
... n
~° D
y ~
m

v
~
~ ~ x
~
3
~ ~ ~ D
m
n
i
.
v ~ ~ > > ~
y m ~
~
_
~ ~ ? X
_
" n
~
~p f7 7 7
~ (D cp
Q (~ Z
N
~ N
~
. N
~... ~ ~ ~

i i
23-FEB-2007 10:37
r:\roadwayy\ ro \u3816_rdy_tsh.dgn
$$$$USERNAM~$$~$
09/08/99
CU11tTRAC.~': __________ TIP PRafECT: U-3816__
~~ ~
n ~ c b
e ~ ~ n G~ O
~ c ~ c N c y ~~
~ ~ ^.
~ y
N G F~
O
~~y b ~ ~b y~
'•l
~~~cyb~~$~ ~~
~~, n u n u u u
n °' rj
~n~°a~~°w ~ b~
~ ~ $ ~ ~ ~O
~ ~~ o
I
y
~ ~
~ ~ ~~
n ~ ~ tV
y ~
~ ~ ~~
~ n ~ ~ y
~~~ ~~
n
O y
h b
y ~ ~ ~ ~
~~y ~ ~
q ~ ~ O
'" °~` n b
u ~ a,~
~. o
w
a

C ~
o
~~ ~
~
y4y ~
jn L1 7e ~

~ ~ 8
Y `°e
o 1~
~' ~
~
V ; ~k
d
, ~ ~

= O

~ O
b

l:f w
~ 8
~ ~
'y

p

~
~

N
~

y
~ V
oy
~~
~~
~o
~~
y~
~~

s
~, ~ ~
~' ; M
:
I^ .
~~ ~ - .

' ' `
g ~~
C

r
_:
~ a
pp ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
z
~3 ~
'~
,~~ ...' .
~C
.~ '
~ ~ ~ --- ~-
~ a ~ t~
_~
'~
0
ci, - -
~
~ ~
S~

~~

~~
~ ~
~°~ ~z
~~
~~ e~
~ ~r
~y i,
i ~
~ i
C

0
n
b
~~
b
V J
n
0
~ b
~7
b ~
~~
ny
o~
~~
yy
yo
w yO
a
n
MN..
0
n
0
z
0
k

~~
~:
~~

a•
C ~
I~ ~
~~
~°~
ai ~
!~

23-FEB-2007 12:45
r:\roadway\pro `u3816_rdy_psh4.dgn
B/l7/99
11..1 II
II I!
II I I
ii:: I II
I1.. I II
II' I I
I :: I II
I I I I I
I I
~~~ ~ ~ ~ ,II I I .
tv~~ ~I I • . , I I I
K nl I I
~ _al ' : 11 I' : I '
Imo. I I
I I . ' II I`I y
-------- ----
I :. .. ..
I I .. ..
I1 ~I II
1
II:. ~I I~
I1 ' II II .
II'"
II~ II II n (~
11:: it II z ° m
I I' ~I II g} z
ml I. ~ II II O ~K
$ ~
~l a I I I j `~
2 zr .. _ _ _ F'I I` ~ I I I ~~
~ sa ~ w. ~
~ II I I
~- , I I ~
N~! _; ~__1 I i°' L
g ~ it I ,~ ~
m F ~' ' I y
~~ ~ I I) I
~* `~ ~ I I l5
~ ° ~I I ~ C
I I
i 1 II ! W
I ~ I .I ~
z2au• .. .. .. i I II ~I Ol
'~"o1zr11•w ~I };I
~n
II I I
II II II
/ II I
I~) I I I
toc5 II I
3yrGb9 Llt 30 I I I
~~ ~ ~I II it Z
w r °~' I 1 I DZ
a~ ~ ;~ I II I I m" -~
' ~ `~' 1 II I r-~~
0
I I ~ ~
I
I i~ i r
I: ~~ ~ ((i
I im I f
I 1
'a~°w I I' I ~ I
: r I
I i I ~ 1 ~~
I I ~~
I I< 1 I ~~
I. 1
.~`~ 9s / i I i I 1
I I is• I 1
~// II I 1 1
~~ I I ~
. ~ it I ro I~
r 1 I
~g~ II ~ 1
~t I j ~ e: I
88~ O II ~ I ~ 1 ~
} ~ ~~r
~ ~ II' I ~ 1
'~' m0 ~ III I ~ ~m
n n
T ~~rn I I ~~
r I '•
8 ~~ °~n i~ I I 1 ~ ~~
M.5E,9SOON
C i ~~j .6L'£6V ~
~ ~ o, = 1e<.7r - I £'88+ ~NI ZOI -lH-
501.3v53•w I I 1
+ / n c I I I
~ ~~oo. %~ ~ ~ I
~ y ~ / / mvc ~ I I
O ,~ / /~ I I I' O
~~a ~ I I
/
~e ~~~, / m + I €
~~n `
m N ~, ~/ I I =~
/ / G+9fS ! I ~ ,'6
OrVn g / L S CONC I ~~ ' °
./ / r I
O / / ~~ m m ~
// a
// RrN ~
~~~ ~ li I
mN ~~~ , ~
N~
g 18s.50~ 72'CXL ~u a
dV 3SBw I ~ S p
v ~ 3.65,20.105 ~ - - - %m ~ b
.61'161 i ~ ~
i ~ a I ~ S~ ~ C
>. ~
~ z ~ ~
MATCHLINE STAo 24f00o00 -L- SEE SHEET 5 ~ ~~
~~ 4~
x> ~~ ~
~ A ~ ~

C,J' ~ t
r;~YO
1' ~
I N
r
A
H ~~~ \ ~
~ _,-,
MATCHLINE STAo 24f00o00 -L- SEE SHEET 4
- / ~~
m ~ ~
I •N~
k IN I ~~
~ 3.6f9 OZS ~ ~ I ~' VyL.. ! ~
o ' ~
s'~ ~ I I
"N I I -~ O AI a° ~
A T N I I V ; ~ dt :~
H~ ~ I~ I L A n g "~~
~ ~~ ~ I I I. ~~ 25
r I I I I O R.,
a.ez.esoos
I i •~
~ .52'62
~ ~, ~ I o
~ I ~ I
~>~ d ~ II
O~~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~~ ~ II A O
8 ~ l l I ~ I
/ ~ ~" i I I
~~~ I 1j I
F~~~ O I i I
6wr m II i I I m I ~~yyy~ g
~i ~ I" I I 1 (' a ,~ ~ e
~ Ilr I I ~ e
~ ,~ I I ~ I ' ~ ~~ I so.oo 5 . ~ ~ ~E
b 1 ~' I I I ~ / ~" + '~
T !E I I pp I ~~.~ „ !~
o .. ~ ~
o s ~ I ~ ~xl
i i N
~ II I I ~ ~ °' w y°~ y5B b3dV 16~ ~.0
0
~ ti
~ ~ ~
~ ~~ ~
p f~ S'10 ."~ 99C S 1 ~ ~ \ \ ~ ' I I ' I' ~ I OD
Q :~ L~ ~ I ~duw 5 ~r~ pLL' \\
W~

OaP P
W ~
~,~ ~
~ ~
~` ` \ A

~NV~
_
~
.
~~~
~Q
:v ~`°~ 3
~- ~ o
~ z N .~
~~~~~:
rn ~ ~ ~ ee
1 ~ ~ ~:
~~~ w
~\--i ~~
D ~
z
~ ~, ~ s~ vWS~ ~
i ~
rn+~ w ~
~~~wN
~~
'~~
~~

~. .
,,
- ;, ~'~
P
' F
~r~ i

~G~~1
\ ~ ~N~
. ~~
v
I~
/i P/1/'
`.
Oo
~l ~ ~ _
.~'K
~~
G
x~- y ~,, ~. - , i
'' ; ~ ~' gee
~ h ' ~ c!+,
i O
1 J
~ . b $ ~' H ~ ! j5e
N ~ ~~ ~,
N S' N / ~ ~
8/17/99
EI
,~
'/
1
~~ '," ~ '' ~ l 1 1
v
Q
oZ
n
-_~~~
~o
cD
~ ~ ~~fi 1 O ~ ~ ~ ~
N. ~~ ~ ~ k ~
~~ g N ~ ~ //
~ ~YN , l10s o.
~y~ Ma~.QO~ ~ 1 H
N ~ ~~ .r ~u - ~ /
Vl ~ '~ ~ ' .eo'oo`
~ e ~tr
~ ~ ~ ~~
~~
;~~
~~ I
~ ~.
I ! ~a
~~ //
d ~ ~~~~ 35
O I m ~ f.NS ' ~~
~ Ie °5 ~/
~ ! ii ~~
I i !I ~~
o ,.
$a i o ,~~
A
I ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~¢a"".
~ ~ ~ /x
~ N ~' a
MAT CHLINE ST Ao 3T f00e00 -L - SE-E SHEET 6

C,~ ~
g g ~, ~ g
N
I
cNnO CN ~~
~ O
~g
~ ~ _ ~,-
112 ~N o° o°
000 ~~ gn
gn
00
~ ~
v, a , _~"'..~
T
~~
~

~
8
~
:
~ ~~
P ~~
t~
~~ ~-~

Qb

~~ ~

zz ~
~i~i
a

z
MAT CHLINE ST Ao 37 ~-00°00 -L - SEE SHEE '~ 5
e~M^ ~
~ _"e~
~ M v
\ ~~ ~ ~
k '~
\ \K IF
N K
N ~
O \ ~ /
~ 4~~
NJO~'9\ ~~9~6/y. \w'
?~~ ~,
~; as \ ~~ I,
o "g
~ •;
Q y }~
d O
~~
~~ ~ I-
_L s
o ~gYTBF~
~ om
(~ N ~
pC7 ~ T
1 µ
a ~
y
~o~~
r ~
y. O
~ o
N
~'
1
ys
~, ~\O
~ ~.
~ I~
I
~~
~µ
~~
S01
O

I
LI I
~~ f ~ 1~
oO I ~ I It ~ µ,
~~ ~ Itl
G ~ ~ M
fV ~~ W ~ It
~ Q ~A ~ ~ µ
~ ~^ I ~ ~ "~
p~ I ~
~ I ~
J ~ 8 ~ ~
~ ~ ~c
I ~ I I ~ ~.
+ m 1~ ~ ~~°
K ~
1 K. k n ,
I k µ
1 ~
.oa.oo 1 K ~
N
Iw
_ 1 ~'~
8 + ~` ~ ~ + ~
~ ~ x
~ :. J
/ ~ It /
~y IF }
\ / N, K
~ ~
~ r
Q I ,v' {{
~ ~ +
sMO.w ~ ~ ~. µ ~ /
1 ~. µ ~ ~.
M }
I µ
~ K~ k
I I k X
K
1 •Ib JN~ 9 l ~zzY~
' ~8. k ~ilw
~ ~ ...777777 ~
~ ~ I k : IYY
I_ ~ ~ ~ I ~e
C~
p _~
W ~
~~
~~
~~
2
DZ ~~j
0('~
~' mG'1
~O
~D
J
S~9jB~~,
A
$~'+
45
~b
N N
~ I~ ~P~
,I ~ ~ .
m
~ i ~~
I~
MATCHLIIVE STAo 48 f00o00 -L - SEE SHEET 7
2
a
^
Z
3Q
f`~
O/ ~ ~
lD ~
N. ~ X
µ ~ ~ y
I! k
lµ ~ ~ I
I
I ~~
1
.I
~~ /+/
r
/+/ {,,s
}
8 ~,
~r
~~
~~
~~
x
~~
~ ~

i
7.dgn
v~
MAT CI ll._lNE ST Aa 48 (00.00 -L - SEE SHEET F~
1 t
8 ~ ~ ~~ ~I ~ M ~ x ~` ~~~~'`~
N IV Y ~~
m S ~ \~1 i•
v ~a Qe ~ ~ µ ~ ~ x ~ / 4 s~l~~~
~ d6 ~~ I I~ µ 7~ wOS~`i ^I~ '
Q~~ ~ ik ~~ ~.~ ~.
~p A m i µ °~ x//
`Y~ ` ~ ~ 3
~ -- f
_ O ~r_ - -91M~ ~ ~ µ µ ~ ~ ' ~ dN d
'~ ~- ~. k N- µ µ k ~ k k M' y. ~
YF k IF ~ ~ K' ~ R
~ J ~ k. k If k k ~ N. N- e0 µ H' Its ~ ~ M'
k M µK" ~ M ~ ~ k It ~ IF IF K- ~ ti/ti N`~51X3 ~' q/yam ' V ..
~ It IF kM ~. µ ~' µ 'aa~ ' C V6
11~ M k ~ C m
It k ~ M ` l~~~ B M
Ih N' ~ ~ WLB ~ s !M
/ ~ m
k ~ mm '~
S~,W.~ S
~.
r
SQ
~~ / ~
Y
i
~~~m~
~~`"a~
y
~~ w~~
~~ g

/ m
H
:e ~
P ~}3 ~ a~
o ~~ ~
~~ ,
8~ ~` A'` g
s m
i~an a`L
s r
}
F'
jEN
~~ ~ ~$"" m
-~ ~L a~ I
{' ~ N
I ~ O
~ ~I
F m
m ~ ee
6~
y
~ I
~ .~
~„ ~ti~op~
~~ / nu°ur~
y ~~~~ 0
~~~ ,
~~ ~
~
~ o ' ~Ild 6 $~°
~
IIh
V
/
~~F

IS'
N
I
.oom
N !:~!N'
~~i;E~

I
I
I ~ ~~
f

Y ~

I IL-

I O1
°o
~~ u

~~
F
~ F
~~
~ ! ~
~
.. I
~+ 02
I a
I N

I
MATCHLINE ST Ao 60 f00o00 -L - SEE SHEET 8
m~
~ b~
~~x ~o
~ ~~~
a
u s v ~~r-
o ~~v
'P
S
S5
~~
~~-~
'b ~ ~~~
~I~ ~~m
8R~ ,I g
,~ b~A
I$ ~#6
is ' x

~d.
6~~0/ y ~ m ~ I
M ~~ N cn

aa
A O
b
8 ~ ~'~ w
a ~~ ~~
a ~~ ~
~ az ~ ~
~ ~~c
~z ~~ ~~
i
i
A'

FEB
~'

~~

~~ b
8~
7a a
~G~
V S ~
c-~y
Y y
~ 8 7D
~~
~~ ~
MATCHLINE ST Ao 60 -}-00°00 -L - SEE SHEET ~ i

i i
23-FEB-2007 10:38
•\roadva \ o "3816_rdy_psh9.dgn
ciaci icco ~n~i~c~
7
,a~
r~Y
~~ ~~
~ ~~ ~ ~
~~ ~ ETC j~~~NE Sl
~ ~~ ~0 7/ f~~ ~
~ ~~~oD~ ~ ~ ~ -L
\y ~(~ m u u11 a uv~ ~~ .~E
'l~ ~~ ~ ~~~~~~ ~ ~~ + oD~ ~ Sy El
E E 8
a a a a ~
OX~ ~ ~~ 1 ~~~j~` ^ ~ ~ ~ ~
00 \ ~ ~~ ~
~~~oD~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
oO ~ uaauuQ ~ C7
~V ~~~~
p~il~$ lD I
~ O~ ~
~ ~ I-
~
~ ~
~~w
\ ~ ~ ° ~ m
~ a p ~, ~
~'9r ~ ~~ ~

N I
! ~ ~a~~,
~~ QDy ~ ~
a~+,atiti~ww aaaaa%~

W ~ ~
~ O

K I
~l
f~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ti~ ~ ^~`~O
~ ~ 1 ~~ '^I
Z
~ \~ ~~ ~ Q ~
~.n ~ \ ~ C ~
g ~ ~ a esz , _
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ S.
N ~ ., ~ ~ ~ .
I ~ r OS ~ " d~%'" j'~
.~
~.. ....
I -.- ----- - _ ~(~
l- - _.
- 3 i71.S0 SZ S _
N --- --_ ----~--------------~-l= ~
~~_~~ sne xies
+, ~ +
~ a o ~ ~ JD
+ +
O I ~ I
O X I ~ ~ ~ 311J .8Y/M 3wM JNOJ 1 1
I ' ~
I ~ ~ ~ lH .Bb/M '1lvM 7NOJ
C/> ° ~ ~
rn 6 i w JNOJ 1 N ll
(~ ,~,~•+ / ~\ L---~ ro =cam
` , J' -I I
rn ~~~ ~ ~ p
Raa ~ A
~ ~~~ ~ d
~ ~ lg ~ ~
N
~~
i t .o,.o, o D
°~'• -i-
••~ _ o
S N ,~
~n 'E N 0
•, ~, ~- ro ~ls~x 0
~~ ~~ =~ ~ ~
~ -". ~/ 1
1
_ -- ~ N rn
_ _ _ rn
~- In ~`y~y,~11S1~ '~ n 1 ` 1
~ O
_ ~ y ~:3,_ / / ,~ ~ ~
~ /
11 ~ ti~ ~
1
L B 11 m ~ ~.
I I a ~ ~ ~ iEri
1 1 ~ ~\ ~
~_ ~ ~ ~ 0
II ~ N R
~ O ~F
1 - ~
i'
ll; ~~ a
~ ~I i ~ I ~
li ~ ~ ~
bi a ~ ~3
N
.7w
i ~
LOS
c•.cc.9Z5 r.~--- N
.9f'Sl ~ X a ~ `l~! W
s~ i ~ ~ ~ O
O 'c I ~I ~i
z~ ~?~ °o°~ zoo o0
no ~~\ Rng ~g
z~ ~ ~~
D goo z~~ o z
~~On ,~ ~n
~ OZ ~N
_~~ ~ ~ .Q
gO og oo °p
~ ~~ ~
~a $ ° S
w °
a2 ~ I" III f
on2 1 19 r
II
~~~ i I~ I I 9
11' A
I ~ 1 1 I
O " I I ~ ~ ~I
I I `~
~ 'f
a~~oD~ 1 A
uapuacn
h4 V
O~W~N 11+ ~ ~~ 111
g~~ ~1 ~S ~NI ~~ g~
~~ ~2g~d ~~ ~~
~„ ~~ ~0 ~} ~ z ~ ~
~b
~~~NS ~z
0

J
\roadwa0\ ~r~o3\u3816_rdy_pshl0.dgn
8/17/99
~~~cy~/
E s~q 8
2~~D~o
~~ S
~oy~oD~ ~~ ~~ ~s
O
w y c~, ~
~ ~r ~1
1 I ~ ~°~~b
~~~ I ~ l 9
i ~~ ~~ ~ ~
0
~ ~I ~~ °~
I I s
I ~
I I
I ~ , I
I
I ~ I
~ i I`
I ~~ 85
t
I ~ ~'.
I
~, N I
1
II• +
I~ N
1
I I ~ + O
I I I .
I I.
I I I •.
I
I NNI'' I~,
l ~I
O 8~ f` I I ^
~~~ I ~
Q@ p
y I '.
~~~ a t.l I
~ I
I
I Ii
I I I~
IZ I I ,
f'~~II.
~I
L I
F^
I ~I
,N,~^3gV3 * 9~~0
- V~ v
I I
3404 ~~ a ' '~na.a I
H
m~ ~ m ~ l x
R Q ~~ ~
NSA ~N P ~ I i
N ~ ~I ~
I
>xa~ I ~
RNs I ~
a ~ I
fi
11'
~ ~, ~ ~
s I o i&
~~ ~q~
/ ~ ~] i n ~ s~ ~~ w
~I i ~ 8 ~ r ~~ ~ m ~
I I C ~~ ~
~ ~ ~ i i ~ ~c
N~ I I ~i , cr
~y ~ o ~

i i '
t.d9~
8/17/99
MATCHLINE ST Ae 27 ~OOo00 -Y - SEE SHEET 5
--~
\ ~m ~ ~
\ ~ ~~ ~ i i ~ g ~ ~~, ~~ I
q ~ m'
J~ ~ ~.
m
~ 4
~ _I
B: ~ ~ T
S~f ~ \ 2WJ<'
\ ~ . \ I I. ~ t ~~' TT~9'11•E m M ~~ 7•E ro
O
~~
~Aq iBi..~(fA.~
O
~~\ V
~~
~\

~~
\ \ Nss~yo
~ ~~~'
~'~
~>~~\
~ ~~ /
~ ~
~ ~ ~.
B•~ ~p~C
Jl \
~ QEp EAD ~°~ ~ fM
D \
1111 1
lltl ~__
111 '-~,
~I
to
hu
Su
Nq~C
~a
M> ~~ [ fOD
CJ~ ~
O ~
~~
O ~ ~`° f~
csd~~ z-e-asn
lOd z -IAB-

A
i
~ '17
8~ ~<
=r
~ ~~ ~
az ~
~b

~
z

r
FEB
dy_pshl2.dgn
~-~~NS ~~ ~NI
g ~S ,d~
o ~~- ~2 d
0~ ~
\ .3r N ~ \ J
9,0
N~ y \
•^ ~ \
4
~ ~~ a
~~ ~\
~ ~
t
LL f1 YL
O I
I 1
~ I
I
I I
nl ~n
~~~OD~ ~ f
~ I
~ ~ ~ 1 Il/~
s, ~ , • w ~ ~
a ~~~ I
I I
~/ '
I /
/ / /
/ / /
/ //// /
/ /
~~ ~ ~
~/ : i ~,t
,,~
~ ~'i
~~ ~ i /

~p9'~
SsS
:~ ,, ~
~Q ,/
/
y //
/ / P
/ FENCE CORtf

ll f iJ~y l~G ~ / ~ ~ ~ ~u~ ~EE~N
1 ~ ~

~ / ~-~•~~~. i
A ~ ; ~ ~r~°,•~
8 ~~ ~ /
~ /
/: - /
0
o , -cerES ~ s~ ~ W ~°.
vex °G ~
//~~2 roes
P /
a 1 od
yea ~
i ~ ~ \
tD
O
d
i
STS ~ ~~T
~~~~OC'y~i~,
~s ~
s
n
ti ~
a`
~~ .
~~
o`
3/17/99
~y
s ~~
~~T
/ ~~ f -I~.Y 1.1.E
// ~,r,NES ~ ~~ ~Myb
~i! w
/
/ O
/ ~
/
NA ~ ~R/p
0 g3 j9s

B~ C
v zC+

~ ~z
8
k
~

~r

xz
9