20150035 Ver 1_Application_20150113

PAT L. MCCRORY
GOVERNOR
M P mr,
"Num')
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
January 13, 2015
Mr. John Thomas
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Ware Forest, NC 27587
ANTHONY J. TATA
SECRETARY
SUBJECT: Application for Section 404 Nationwide Permit 14 and Section 401 Water
Quality Certification for the relocation of SR 1221 (Old Beatty Ford Road)
from SR 1210 /SR 1221 to SR 1337 (Lentz Road) Rowan County, North
Carolina.. Division 9. Federal Aid Project No. HISP -1221 (18), TIP No. W-
5516.
Debit $570.00 from WBS 44105.I.FDI.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) Division 9 Office proposes
the relocation of Old Beatty Ford Road (SR 1221) from its intersection with SR
1210 /Bostian Road (SR 1221) to Lentz Road (SRI 337) near Kannapolis, Landis, and
China Grove (TIP W -5516) in Rowan County, a distance of approximately 3.1 miles. The
study area crosses the study area for the Interstate 85 widening project (TIP 1- 3802).
The project will construct a two -lane road on new location with a new grade separation
over 1 -85. The existing Old Beatty Ford Road will be closed on both sides of I -85. The
bridge carrying existing Old Beatty Ford Road over I -85 and the adjacent 3 barrel culvert
over Coldwater Creek will not be removed as part of this project; rather they will be
removed as part of I -3802 as they will be utilized for construction activities associated
with I -3802. There will be 0.01 acre of permanent fill in wetlands. There will be 1,087
linear feet (If) of permanent stream impacts (880 If fill and 207 if bank stabilization), and
189 If of temporary stream impacts. See table 1.1 for how the Permit Site Numbers
correspond to stream and wetland identification numbers from the Environmental
Assessment and Jurisdictional Determination.
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
DIVISION NINE DIVISION OFFICE
375 SILAS CREEK PARKWAY, WINSTOWSALGM, NC 27927
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]

Permit
Site
No
Lnv ronmental Assessment
and Jurisdictional
Determination ID
Station
(Fromffo)
Structure
Size /Type
1
Sc
-L- 22 +58 TO 24 +35
30" RCP -III
2
SA
-L- 31 +00 TO 32 +16
2 Q 11'x8' RCBC
2
HUB
-L 31 +00 TO 32 +16
2 Q 11' x 8' RC BC
3
SB
-L- 37 +08 TO 37 +50
48" RCP -N
4
SG
-L- 58 +66 TO 58 +86
LATERAL T BASE DITCH
5
HUF
- L -89 +70 TO 90 +66
LATERAL V DITCH
6
SJ
-L- 99 +26 TO 99 +30
35 " RCP -III
7A
SE
-L- 107 +80 TO 108 +17
1 1 Q 8' x 7' RCBC,
7B
SF
-L- 108 +30 TO 109 +21
1 FLOODPLAIN PIPE 72" RCP -III
Table 1.1: Permit site nos and jurisidictionaf identifiers
Mitigation will be provided by NCEEP. A copy of the Mitigation Acceptance Letter dated
December 3, 2014 is attached. See table 1.2 for mitigation ratios. During the planning
stage, NCDOT committed to investigate on -site mitigation opportunities at the existing
crossing of Cold. Water Creek. After reviewing the files and visiting the Old Beatty Ford
Road site on May 28th, 2014, NCDOT has determined that the site is not feasible for
wetland restoration. The existing wetland is maintained as a hay pasture and does not
represent a high quality system. The existing causeway that will need to be removed is
approximately 50 feet wide, 25 feet deep and 300 feet long. There will need to be an extra
75 feet of partial causeway removal at a 3:1 slope to stabilize the bank. These dimensions
equal approximately 14,000 cubic yards. According to the 2013 NCDOT bid averages for
Division 9, fill excavation averages $6.95 per cubic yard. Using this estimate, it will cost
NCDOT approximately $97,300 to reconnect the wetlands along both sides of the
causeway. The removal of the causeway will restore approximately 5,000 square feet of
wetlands or 0.11 acre. These figures do not include the cost of purchasing any extra right
of way, planting, monitoring or further construction cost that may be needed to connect
the wetlands.
W -5516 Nationwide Permit Application Page 2

Table LL• Impact and mitigation totals for W -5516 in Rowan County
`Unimportant streams don't require mitigation from the USACE
°Temporary impacts require mitigation from either USACE or DWR
Total linear feet of stream mitigation required by USACE with ratio 1076
Total I €near feet of stream mitigation required by DWR 828
During the permit application site review with the resource agencies on November 14,
2014, additional information was requested regarding the ditches and length of the stream
work at permit Site 6. The following was provided by the design engineer:
The only way to eliminate the ditch would be to revise the roadway grade. The
current grade is undercutting the natural ravine, requiring the use of special cut
ditches to prevent the drainage area from being diverted to the culvert at permit
Site 7a. The special cut ditches requires the invert end of the 36" pipe to be
placed 4' below existing ground, thus requiring the 130' long tail ditch to allow
the pipe /ditch system to daylight to natural ground. Eliminating these special cut
ditches would require a sag and crest to be added to the vertical grade from
approximately 99 +00 to 102 +00. In order to add the sag and crest to the vertical
grade and maintain design speed, the grade over the culvert at Sites 6 to be
increased, and the grade over culverts 7a and 7b would have to be doubled. This
would result in substantially longer culverts and more jurisdictional stream
impacts than the current design with the tail ditch.
W -5516 Nationwide Permit. Application Page 3
impacts
Requiring
Stream
USACE
USACE
DWR
Permit Site
Name /11)
Permanent
mitigation
Mitigation
Impacts requiring
mitigation
Temporary
No.
PacketlD
I/P
Impacttype
Impacts(ft)
ft)
Ratio
DWR mitigation
ratio
impacts
Ur to Town
1
Branch /SC
I
pipe
158
158
1:1
158
1:1
61
UT to Town
bank
1
Branch /SC
I
stabilization
11
0
11
i1
Town Branch/
2
SA
P
pipe
140
140
2!1
140
1:1
31
Town Branch/
bank
2
SA
P
stabilization
88
0
88
1 :1
LIT to Town
3
Branch /SB
P
Pie
182
182
21
182
1:1
39
UT to Town
bank
3
Branch/ SB
P
stabilization
IA
0
14
1:1
Coldwater
4
Creek/ SG
P
ditch
18
18
2:1
0
UT to Cold
Water Creek/
pipe and
6
Si
l (unimportant*)
ditch
223
0
223
1:1
23
UT to Cold
Water Creek/
bank
6
S!
I (unimportant" )
stabilization
12
0
12
1:1
UT to Cold
Water Creek/
7a
SE
P
pipe
79
79
2:1
0
32
UTta Cold
Water Creek/
bank
7a
SE
P
stabilization
44
0
0
UT to Cold
Water Creek/
7b
5
pipe
80
SD
1:1
0
23
UT to Cold
Water Creek/
bank
7b
SF
I
stabilization
38
0
0
Totals 1
1087
fi57
87.8
0°
Table LL• Impact and mitigation totals for W -5516 in Rowan County
`Unimportant streams don't require mitigation from the USACE
°Temporary impacts require mitigation from either USACE or DWR
Total linear feet of stream mitigation required by USACE with ratio 1076
Total I €near feet of stream mitigation required by DWR 828
During the permit application site review with the resource agencies on November 14,
2014, additional information was requested regarding the ditches and length of the stream
work at permit Site 6. The following was provided by the design engineer:
The only way to eliminate the ditch would be to revise the roadway grade. The
current grade is undercutting the natural ravine, requiring the use of special cut
ditches to prevent the drainage area from being diverted to the culvert at permit
Site 7a. The special cut ditches requires the invert end of the 36" pipe to be
placed 4' below existing ground, thus requiring the 130' long tail ditch to allow
the pipe /ditch system to daylight to natural ground. Eliminating these special cut
ditches would require a sag and crest to be added to the vertical grade from
approximately 99 +00 to 102 +00. In order to add the sag and crest to the vertical
grade and maintain design speed, the grade over the culvert at Sites 6 to be
increased, and the grade over culverts 7a and 7b would have to be doubled. This
would result in substantially longer culverts and more jurisdictional stream
impacts than the current design with the tail ditch.
W -5516 Nationwide Permit. Application Page 3

During the site review, the resource agencies also noted the presence of bedrock at
Site 2. As the design calls for two l l' by 8' reinforced concrete box (four - sided)
culverts, the agencies wanted confirmation that the presence and location of the
bedrock had been considered. The design engineers confirmed they were aware of the
bedrock, but based on the typical exploratory geotechnical information; do not believe
that there is enough to warrant a bottomless culvert or an at -grade crossing. As is
typical, additional geotechnical investigations will be performed prior to construction
to establish depth to bedrock throughout the impact site, which are anticipated will
reveal the vast majority of the bedrock is at least one foot from the surface.
Also at Site 2, while it is recognized that low flow would be directed to only one of
the 1 I' by 8' culverts, it was recommended that sills and baffles be installed that
would provide a 5 -foot low flow channel, which was the width of the low -flow
channel estimated during the site review. However, based upon design files generated
by NCDOT, the average low flow channel was 10 -11 feet. As such, the RCBC were
designed such that a 2 -foot sill was placed over one of the culverts to restrict the low -
flow to one, I l -foot wide culvert. It should also be noted that I -foot sills were placed
at the inlet and outlet of the Iow flow culvert, as well as two additional sills within the
culvert, in order to allow natural material fill in throughout the bottom. This NCDOT
approved design and associated model has been approved by FEMA, and any
alterations will require a significant delay.
During the site visits of Sites 7a and 7b, it was agreed that some of the bank
stabilization impacts at the outlet ditch on the upstream 7b culvert needed to be
considered permanent impacts, which is reflected in this application and permit
drawings. Also, a detail was added to show the material proposed for lining of the
ditches.
Threatened and Endangered Species
As of November 4, 2014, Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii) is the only
federally protected species currently listed for Rowan County. The Bald and Golden
eagles are protected in every county of North Carolina under the Bald and Golden Eave
Protection Act. A 2014 Natural Resources Technical Report (NRTR) included a survey
for Schweinitz's sunflower and no specimens were found. It was therefore concluded that
Schweinitz's sunflower will not be impacted by the subject project. There is also one
Candidate species for Rowan County, the Georgia aster (Symphyotrichum georgianum).
Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act
As part of the 2014 NRTR, the study area was surveyed for suitable nesting habitat and no
bald eagles or nests were observed. A review of the NCNHP database revealed no known
occurrences within one mile of the study area. Additionally there are no known
occurrences of bald eagles at Lake Fisher. Due to the lack of habitat, known occurrences,
and minimal impact anticipated for this project, it has been determined that this project
will not affect this species.
W-5516 Nationwide Permit Application Page 4

Northern Long -eared Bat
A US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) proposal for listing the Northern Long -eared
Bat (Myotis septentrionalis) as an Endangered species was published in the Federal
Register in October 2013, The listing may become effective as soon as April 2015.
Furthermore, this species is included in USFWS's current list of protected species for
Rowan County. NCDOT is working with the USFWS to understand how this proposed
listing may impact NCDOT projects. NCDOT will continue to coordinate appropriately
with USFWS to determine if this project will incur potential effects to the Northern long -
eared bat, and how to address these potential effects, if necessary. No tree removal (not
including grubbing) or structure demolition for this project shall be completed between
April 15 and October 15, of any year, so that habitat for the Northern long -eared bat is not
disturbed during the roosting season.
Based on the results of surveys conducted in 2014, proximity to known occurrences of
NLEB, potential foraging and roosting habitat within the study area, and using currently
available guidance from USFWS, if the NLEB becomes listed as an protected species
under the Endangered Species Act, the proposed project will have a biological conclusion
of May Affect -Not Likely to Adversely Affect for NLEB. Prior to being afforded protection
under the Endangered Species Act, we conclude that the proposed project is not likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of the NLEB. NCDOT requested concurrence with the
USFWS in a letter dated January 12, 2015.
Environmental Documentation
An Environmental Assessment (EA) for W -5516 was completed in May 2014. A Finding
on No Significant Impact (FONSI) for the project was completed in August 2014. Both
documents were distributed shortly after completion. Additional copies are available upon
request.
The ICE Screening Report (February 14, 2014) examined the potential for indirect and
cumulative effects; there are no notable indirect effects expected from the subject project.
Cumulative effects resulting from the subject project, from other actions such as a
potential future I -85 /Old Beatty Ford Road interchange, and any accompanying private
development actions will have the potential to minimally impact water quality in the study
area. As such, one of the FONSI Project Commitments is that the eastern section of the
project draining to the Dutch Buffalo Creek water supply watershed (WS -II, HQW) will
be designed according to the Design Standards in Sensitive Watersheds (DSSW).
Cultural Resources
Cultural resources were reviewed during the NEPA process. A November 5, 2013 letter
from the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) recommended surveys for historical
architecture and archaeological resources. Surveys were conducted in which several
historical buildings and archaeological sites were found. A May 13, 2014 letter from
SHPO, however, stated that none of these resources were eligible for listing in the
National Register of Historic Places. Therefore, the subject project has been determined
to have no effect on historic architectural or archaeological resources.
W -5516 Nationwide Permit Application Page 5

Construction of this project is projected to commence in Fall of 2015 with a proposed let
date of September 16, 2015.
Please find enclosed the Pre - Construction Notification (PCN), US Corps of Engineers'
Notification of Jurisdictional Determination, NCDWR stream call letter, N.C. Ecosystem
Enhancement Program (EEP) mitigation acceptance letter, Indirect and Cumulative
Effects (ICE) Screening Report, SHPO concurrence letters, USFWS concurrence request
letter, Stormwater Management Plan, and permit drawings, for the above - referenced
project.
Thank you for your assistance with this project. If you have any questions or need
additional information, please contact Ms. Amy Euliss at [e-mail] or
(336) 747 -7802.
Sincer Py, ",visio Ain ulis , vi ronmental Officer
NCDOT Division 9
cc. Alan Johnson, NCDWR, e -copy
Amy Chapman, NCDWR, e -copy
Marla Chambers, NCWRC, e -copy
Jason Mays, USFWS, e -copy
Beth Harmon, NCEEP, e -copy
Brett Abernathy, NCDOT Division 9
Michael Wood, The Catena Group
Mark Reep, ICA Engineering
W -5516 Nationwide Permit Application Page 6

NlAT�9 Office Use Only:
i o y Corps action ID no. IX
DWQ project no.
° Form Version 1.4 January 2009
Pre - Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A.
Applicant Information
1.
Processing
1 a.
Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps:
®Section 404 Permit El Section 10 Permit
1 b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 14 or General Permit (GP) number:
1 c.
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
® Yes
❑ No
1 d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
® 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification -- Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
1 e. Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ 401
Certification:
❑ Yes ® No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑ Yes ® No
1f.
Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation
of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank or in -lieu
fee program.
® Yes
❑ No
1g.
Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer lh
below.
❑ Yes
® No
1 h.
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes
® No
2.
Project Information
2a.
Name of project:
Relocation of SR 1221 (Ofd Beatty Ford Rd)
2b.
County:
Rowan
2c.
Nearest municipality 1 town:
China Grove
2d.
Subdivision name:
not applicable
2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no:
T.I.P. W -5516
3.
Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
North Carolina Department of Transportation
3b.
Deed Book and Page No.
not applicable
3c.
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable).
not applicable
3d.
Street address:
375 Silas Creek Parkway
3e.
City, state, zip:
Winston - Salem, NC 27127
3f.
Telephone no.:
(336) 747 -7802
3g.
Fax no.:
(336) 703 -6693
3h. Email address:
pivey @ncdot.gov

4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is:
❑ Agent ❑ Other, specify:
4b. Name:
not applicable
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
4d. Street address:
4e. City, state, zip:
4f. Telephone no.:
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address:
5. AgentlConsultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name:
not applicable
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
5c. Street address:
5d. City, state, zip:
5e. Telephone no.:
5f. Fax no.:
5g. Email address:

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1 a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
not applicable
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude: 35.534757 Longitude: - 80.568921
(DD.DDDDDD) (- DD.DDDDDD)
1 c. Property size:
477.9 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to
Cold Water Creek,Town Branch, and Dutch Buffalo Creek
proposed project:
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
WS -IV (Cold Water Creek and Town Branch); WSII;HQW
Dutch Buffalo Creek
2c. River basin:
Yadkin -Pee Dee
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
Existing Old Beatty Ford Lane is a two lane road. The land use in the project vicinity is residential areas, agriculture,
fallow fields, mixed hardwoods, mixed pine forests, cutover forests, and commercial property.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
3.15
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
6,777
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
To improve vehicular safety on Old Beatty Ford Road and to improve the deficient bridge over I -85.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The project involves improving or relocating Otd Beatty Ford Rd (SR 1221) from its intersection with Bostian Road (SR
121011221) to Lentz Road (SR 1337). The project will construct a two -lane (26 -foot paved) road on new location with a
new grade separation over 1 -85. The bridge carrying existing Old Beatty Ford Road over 1 -85 will be removed with
construction of 1 -3802. A new five -span bridge with concrete girders will be constructed on the new location. The
proposed project is approximately 3.1 miles long. Standard road building equipment, such as trucks, dozers, and cranes
will be used.
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property
®Yes El No El Unknown
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
Comments:
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
❑ Preliminary ® Final
of determination was made?
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
AgencylConsultant Company: The Catena Group, Inc.
Name (if known): Chris Sheats
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
September 11, 2014
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
❑ Yes ® No ❑ Unknown
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.

6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project? ❑ Yes ® No
6b. If yes, explain.

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
® Wetlands ® Streams - tributaries ❑ Buffers
❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
2b.
2c.
2d.
2e.
2f.
Wetland impact
number —
Type of
Type of wetland
Forested
Type of jurisdiction
Area of impact
Permanent (P)
impact
(if known)
(acres)
or Temporary
T
Site 2 ® P ❑
Culvert
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
® Yes
® Corps
0.01
T
El No
El DWQ
Site 2 ❑ P ®
Culvert
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
® Yes
® Corps
<0.01
T
❑ No
❑ DWQ
Site 2 ❑ P ®
Culvert
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
® Yes
® Corps
0.02
T
❑ No
❑ DWQ
Site 5 ❑ P ®
® Yes
® Corps
T
Excavation
Headwater Wetland
❑ No
❑ DWQ
0.02
Site 5 ❑ P ❑
El Yes
El Corps
T
Choose One
Choose One
❑ No
❑ DWQ
Site 6 ❑ P ❑
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
T
Choose One
Choose One
❑ No
❑ DWQ
O.01
2g. Total wetland impacts
Permanent
0.05
Temporary
2h. Comments: no wetland mitigation required
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
3b.
3c.
3d.
3e.
3f.
3g.
Stream impact
Type of
Stream name
Perennial
Type of
Average
Impact
number -
impact
(PER) or
jurisdiction
stream
length
Permanent (P)
intermittent
(Corps - 404, 10
width
(linear
or Temporary
(INT)?
DWQ — non -404,
(feet)
feet)
(T)
other)
Site 1 ® P ❑
T
Culvert
UT Town Branch (SC)
❑ PER
® ENT
® Corps
❑ DWQ
1 -2
158
Site 1 ❑ P ®
T
Culvert
UT Town Branch (SC)
❑ PER
® INT
® Corps
❑ DWQ
1 -2
61
Site 1 ® P ❑
T
Stabilization
UT Town Branch (SC)
❑ PER
® INT
® Corps
❑ DWQ
1 -2
11
Site 2 ®P ❑
T
Culvert
Town Branch (SA)
®PER
❑ INT
®Corps
❑ DWQ
12 -16
140
Site 2 ❑ P ®
® PER
® Corps
T
Culvert
Town Branch (SA)
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
12 -16
31
Site 2 ® P ❑
T
Stabilization
Town Branch (SA)
® PER
❑ INT
® Corps
❑ DWQ
12 -16
88
Site 3 ® P ❑
Culvert
UT Town Branch (SB)
0 PER
® Corps
5 -8
182

T
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
Site 3 ❑ P ®
T
Culvert
UT Town Branch (SB)
® PER
❑ INT
® Corps
❑ DWQ
5 -8
19
Site 3 ® P ❑
T
Stabilization
LIT Town Branch (SB)
® PER
❑ INT
® Corps
❑ DWQ
5 -8
14
Site 4 ® P ❑
T
Excavation
Cold Water Creek (SG)
® PER
❑ INT
® Corps
❑ DWQ
20
18
Site 6 ® P ❑
T
Culvert
UT Cold Water Creek (SJ)
❑ PER
® INT
® Corps
❑ DWQ
2 -3
223
Site 6 ❑ P ®
T
Culvert
UT Cold Water Creek (SJ)
❑ PER
® INT
® Corps
❑ DWQ
2 -3
23
Site 6 ® P ❑
T
Stabilization
UT Cold Water Creek (SJ)
❑ PER
® INT
® Corps
❑ DWQ
2-3
12
Site 7A ® P
❑ T
Culvert
LIT Cold Water Creek (SE)
® PER
❑ INT
® Corps
❑ DWQ
6 -8
79
Site 7A ❑ P
® T
Culvert
UT Cold Water Creek (SE)
® PER
❑ INT
® Corps
❑ DWQ
6 -8
32
Site 7A ® P
❑ T
Stabilization
LIT Cold Water Creek (SE)
® PER
❑ INT
® Corps
❑ DWQ
6 -8
44
Site 7B ® P
❑ T
Culvert
UT Cold Water Creek (SF)
❑ PER
® INT
® Corps
❑ DWQ
6 -8
80
Site 7B ❑ P
® T
Culvert
UT Cold Water Creek (SF)
❑ PER
® INT
® Corps
❑ DWQ
6 -8
23
Site 7B ® P
❑ T
Stabilization
UT Cold Water Creek (SF)
❑ PER
® INT
® Corps
❑ DWQ
6 -8
38
1087
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
Perm
189 Temp
3i. Comments: see table 1.2 for mititagtion ratios
4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then in ividually list all o en water impacts below.
4a.
4b.
4c.
4d.
4e.
Open water
Name of
impact number
waterbody
Type of impact
Waterbody type
Area of impact (acres)
— Permanent
(if applicable)
(P) or
Temporary T
01 ❑ P ❑ T
Choose One
Choose One
02 ❑ P ❑ T
Choose One
Choose One
03 ❑ P ❑ T
Choose One
Choose One
04 ❑ P ❑ T
Choose One
Choose One
M. Total open water impacts
X Permanent
X Temporary
4g. Comments:
5. Pont! or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below.

5a.
Pond ID
number
5b.
Proposed use or
purpose of pond
5c.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
5d.
Stream Impacts (feet)
5e.
Upland
(acres)
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
P1
P2
5f. Total
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit
required?
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit I no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:

S. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer,
then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list
all buffer
impacts below. If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a.
❑ Neuse El Tar-Pamlico
El Other:
Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman
6b.
6c.
6d,
6e.
6f.
6g.
Buffer impact
number—
Reason for impact
Buffer
Zone 1 impact
Zone 2 impact
Permanent (P) or
Stream name
mitigation
(square feet)
(square feet)
Temporary T
required?
B1 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ No
B2 ❑P ❑T
El Yes
❑ No
B3 ❑P ❑T
El Yes
❑ No
6h. Total buffer impacts
6i. Comments:

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
Impacts were minimized in the project design by proposing a longer bridge over 1 -85 that will also span Cold Water Creek.
The alignment also avoids wetlands and parallel streams where possible. Stream crossing footprints were reduced by
adjusting roadway grade.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Will follow NCDOT construction guidelines and BMPs, including no staging of construction equipment or storage of
construction supplies in jurisdictional areas; Installation of temporary sediment control fences, earth berms, and
temporary ground cover during construction; 2A fill slopes utilized in wetland and stream areas where possible.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
® Yes ❑ No
If no, explain:
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
® DWQ ® Corps
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?
❑ Mitigation bank
® Payment to in -lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank: not applicable
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type
Quantity
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
® Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
828 linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
® warm ❑ cool ❑cold
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4f. Non - riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4h. Comments: see table 1.2 for mitigation ratios
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.

6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
buffer mitigation?
❑ Yes ❑ No
fib. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.
Zone
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier
6e.
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1
3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2
1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
fig. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in -lieu fee fund).
6h. Comments:
10

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1.
Diffuse Flow Plan
1 a.
Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
❑ Yes ® No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b.
If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If not, explain why.
Yes No
❑
Comments: NIA
2.
Stormwater Management Plan
2a.
What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
NIA
2b.
Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
® Yes ❑ No
2c.
If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
2d.
If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
Narrative and plan are attached.
❑ Certified Local Government
2e.
Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
❑ DWQ Stormwater Program
® DWQ 401 Unit
3.
Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a.
In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
not applicable
❑ Phase lI
3b.
Which of the following locally- implemented stormwater management programs
❑ NSW
❑ USMP
apply (check all that apply):
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c.
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ❑ No
attached?
4.
DWQ Stormwater Program Review
❑ Coastal counties
4a.
Which of the following state - implemented Stormwater management programs apply
❑ HQW
(check all that apply):
❑ ORW
❑ Session Law 2006 -246
❑ Other:
4b.
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached?
❑ Yes ❑ No nla
5.
DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a.
Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
® Yes ❑ No NIA
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
® Yes ❑ No NIA
11

F. Supplementary Information
1.
Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1 a.
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal /state /local) funds or the
® Yes ❑ No
use of public (federal /state) land?
1 b.
If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
® Yes ❑ No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPAISEPA)?
1 c.
If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
® Yes ❑ No
letter.)
Comments: Documentation will be provided upon request.
2.
Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a.
Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H.1 300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
❑ Yes ® No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b.
Is this an after - the -fact permit application?
❑ Yes ® No
2c.
If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3.
Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a.
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
❑ Yes
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
® No
3b.
If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
ICE Report included
4.
Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. 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.
not applicable
12

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
® Yes ❑ No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
® Yes ❑ No
impacts?
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
❑ Raleigh
® Asheville
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
NCNHP, USFWS, NCDOT, Field Surveys
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes ® No
fib. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
NMFS County Index
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
❑ Yes ® No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
NEPA Documentation
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA- designated 100 -year floodplain?
®Yes ❑ No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements: NCDOT Hydraulics Unit coordination with FEMA
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? FEMA Maps
Pat Ivey, P.E.
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
4te
Applicant/Ag 's Signature
(Agent's signature is valid only if antafithorization letter from the applicant
is provided.)
13

t.ad-Winal&o�e 0 W 1E
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS D fm
WILMINGTOhN DISTRICT 0
Action Id. 201301905 County: Rowan U.S. ' '
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINAT ��10E OF NATURAL ENVIRONMENT
Property Owner /Agent: Mr. Richard W. Hancock, PR / Deanna-Riff
Address: NC DOT
1598 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1598
Telephone No.: 919 707 -6148
Property description:
Size (acres) Nearest Town Landis
Nearest Waterway Cold Water Creek River Basin Rocky
USGS HUC 03040105 Coordinates N 35.526355 W - 80.573354
Location description SR 12211 Old Betty Ford Road from SR 1210 to SR 1337 Lentz Road in Rowan Count
adjacent to Cold Water Creek Landis forth Carolina. TIP W -5516
Indicate 'Which of the Following Apply:
A. Preliminary Determination
_ Based on preliminary information, there may be wetlands on the above described property. We strongly suggest you have
this property inspected to determine the extent of Department of the Army (DA) jurisdiction. To be considered final, a
jurisdictional determination must be verified by the Corps. This preliminary determination is not an appealable action
under the Regulatory Program Administrative Appeal Process ( Reference 33 CFR Part 331).
B. Approved Determination
There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described property subject to the permit requirements of
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Unless there is a change in the law or
our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.
X There are waters of the U.S. including wetlands on the above described project area subject to the permit requirements of
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published
regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
_ We strongly suggest you have the wetlands on your property delineated. Due to the size of your property and/or our
present workload, the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner. For a more timely
delineation, you may wish to obtain a consultant. To be considered final, any delineation must be verified by the Corps.
X The waters of the U.S. including wetland on your project area have been delineated and the delineation has been
verified by the Corps. We strongly suggest you have this delineation surveyed. Upon completion, this survey should be
reviewed and verified by the Corps. Once verified, this survey will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to
CWA jurisdiction on your property which, provided there is no change in the law or our published regulations, may be
relied upon for a period not to exceed five years.
_ The wetlands have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat signed by the Corps
Regulatory Official identified below on . Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present on the above described property which are subject to the
_ permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our
published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.
The property is located in one of the 20 Coastal Counties subject to regulation under- the Coastal Area Management Act
(CAMA). You should contact the Division of Coastal Management in Washington, NC, at (252) 946 -6481 to determine
their requirements.
Page 1 of 2

Action ID:
Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US and/or wetlands without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). If you have any questions regarding this
determination and /or the Corps regulatory program, please contact John Thomas at 919 554 -4854 ext. 25.
C. Basis For Determination
There are stream channels within your proiect site which are tributaries of Cold Water Creek which flows into the Pee
Dec River and the Atlantic Ocean.
D. Remarks
E. Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations as indicated in
S. above)
This correspondence constitutes an approved jurisdictional determination for the above described site. If you object to this
determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR part 331. Enclosed you will find a
Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) fact sheet and request for appeal (RFA) form. If you request to appeal this
determination you must submit a completed RFA form to the following address:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division
Attn :Jean Gibby, Project Manager,
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for
appeal under 33 CFR part 331.5, and that it has been received by the District Office within 60 days of the date of the NAP.
Should you decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address by November 11, 2414.
* *It is m
not necessary to subit an RFAt form to the Dis ict Office if you do not object to the determination in this
correspondence.**
Corps Regulatory Official: S
Date 09/11/2014 f Expirgiion Date 09111/2019
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we continue to
do so, please complete the Customer Satisfaction Survey located at our website at http : / /regulatory.ttsacesurvev com/ to
complete the survey online.
Copy furnished: Chris Sheats, The Catena Group, 410 -b Millstone Drive, Hillsborough, NC 27278
Page 2 of 2

NOTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND
= REQUEST FOR APPEAL
Applicant: NCDOT SR 12211 Old Betty Ford
Road from SR 12I0 to SR 1.221 (Lentz Roadt in
File Number: SAW 2013
01905
Date: September- 11, 2014
Rowan County TIP W -5516 / Deanna Riffe
Attached is:
See Section below
-9
INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard. Permit or Letter of
permission)
A
PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission)
B
PERMIT DENIAL
C
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
D
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
E
SECTION I - The following identifies your rights and options regarding an administrative appeal of the above
decision. Additional information may be found at http : / /www.usace.army. rail /inet /functions /ew /cecwo /reg or
Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331.
A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit.
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature
on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the pert-nit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the
permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit.
• OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request that the
permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to the district engineer. Your
objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will forfeit your right to appeal
the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your objections and may: (a) modify the
permit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your objections, or (c) not modify the permit
having determined that the permit should be issued as previously written. After evaluating your objections, the district engineer
will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in Section B below.
B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature
on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the
permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit.
• APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered pen-nit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you
may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form
and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of
this notice.
C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by
completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer
within 60 days of the date of this notice.

D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or
provide new information.
ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within GO days of the date of
this notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approves{ JD.
APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers Administrative
Appeal Process by completing Section 11 of this form and sending the form to the district engineer. This form must be received by
the division engineer within GD days of the date of this notice.
E: PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the Corps
regarding the preliminary JD. The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an approved
JD (which may be appealed), by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. Also you may provide new
information for further consideration by the Corps to reevaluate the JD.
SECTION II - REQUEST FOR APPEAL or OBJECTIONS TO AN INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT
REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your
objections to an initial proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional information to
this form to clarify where your reasons or objections are addressed in the administrative record.)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record, the Corps
memorandum for the record of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the
review officer has determined is needed to clarify the administrative record. Neither the appellant nor the Corps
may add new information or analyses to the record. However, you may provide additional information to clarify
the location of information that is already in the administrative record.
POINT OF CONTACT FOR QUESTIONS OR INFORMATION:
If you have questions regarding this decision If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you
and /or the appeal process you may contact: may also contact:
John Thomas @ 919 554 -4884 ext. 25 Administrative ,Appeal Revicw Officer
CESAD- ET -CO -R
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, South Atlantic Division
60 Forsyth Street, Room 9M15
Atlanta, Georgia 30303 -88471
RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel, and any
government consultants, to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process. You
will be provided a 15 day notice of any site investigation, and will have the opportunity to participate in all site
investigations. _
Date:
Telephone number:
Signature of 22pellant or agent.
For appeals on Initial Proffered Permits and approved Jurisdictional Determinations send this
form to:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division, Attn :dean Gibby, Project Manager, Raleigh
Regulatory Field Office, 3331 Heritage Trade Drive , Suite 105, Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587

For Permit denials and Proffered Permits send this form to:
Division Engineer, Commander, U.S. Army Engineer Division, South Atlantic, Attn: Mr. Mike Bell,
Administrative Appeal Officer, iCESAD- ET -CO -R, 60 Forsyth Street, Room 9M15, Atlanta,
Georgia 3+0303 -8801

_ i+
�.A,�w1'..-
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Pat McCrory
Governor
September 29, 2014
Chris Sheats, PWS
THE CATENA GROUP
410 -B Millstone Drive
Hillsborough, NC 27278
Subject: NCDOT TIP # W -5516, Rowan County
Yadkin -Pee Dee Basin
Dear Sheats:
John E. Skvarla, III
Secretary
On January 14, 2014, NC Division of Water Resource (Alan Johnson) staff, conducted an on -site determination to
review drainage features located for the subject project for applicability to the mitigation rules (15A NCAC 2H
.0506(h)). During review of one of the sites "SJ" an additional drainage feature locate upstream of wetland WG was
noted. Given the recent weather events it was decided to return at a later date for consideration. On January 21,
2014, a follow -up site visit was conducted. In conjunction with Ms. Aimee Euliss, the feature was determined to be
intermittent.
Based on the site visit conducted on January 14th and 21St, the attached map properly indicates the streams reviewed
and investigated. Also, this letter only addresses the sites specifically marked on the attached map and does not
apply to reaches of the channel [or drainage feature] outside the boundary of the NCDOT project area, or to any
other drainage features in the vicinity.
This letter. only addresses the applicability to the mitigation and does not approve any activity in the Waters of the
United States, or Waters of the State. Any impacts to wetlands, streams and buffers must comply with the 4041401
regulations, water supply regulations (15A NCAC 2B .0216), and any other required federal, state and local
regulations.
Landowners or affected parties that dispute a determination made by NCDWR or Delegated Local Authority that a
surface water exists and that it is subject to the mitigation rules may request a determination by the Director. A
request for a determination by the Director shall be referred to the Director in writing c/o Amy Chapman, NCDWR
Wetlands /401 Unit, 1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699 -1650.
Individuals that dispute a determination by NCDWR or Delegated Local Authority that "exempts" a surface water
from the mitigation rules may ask for an adjudicatory hearing. You may obtain the petition form from the office of
Administrative hearings. You must file the petition with the office of Administrative Hearings within sixty (60)
days of receipt of this notice and the date the affected party (including downstream and adjacent landowners) is
notified of this decision. A petition is considered filed when it is received in the office of Administrative Hearings
during normal office hours. The Office of Administrative Hearings accepts filings Monday through Friday between
the hours of 8:00am and 5:00pm, except for official state holidays. The original and one (1) copy of the petition
must be filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings.
The petition may be. faxed-provided the original and one copy of the document is received by the Office of
Administrative Hearings within five (5) business days following the faxed transmission.
The mailing address for the Office of Administrative Hearings is:
Transportation and Permitting Unit One
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699.1617 NorthCarofina
Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone] L FAX: [phone]`��
Internet: www.ncwateroualiiy.org
An Equal Opparlurity 1 Affirmative Action Employer

Office of Administrative Hearings
6714 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -6714
Telephone: (919)- 431 -3000, Facsimile: (919)- 431 -3100
A copy of the petition must also be served on DENR as follows:
Mr. John Evans, General Counsel
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
1601 Mail Service Center
'Phis determination is final and binding unless you ask for a hearing within 60 days.
If you have any additional questions or require additional information please call me at 704- 663 -1699 or
AIan,Johnson @ncdenr.gov.
Sincerely,
eSr. an so
ecialist
Attachments
cc: Sonia Carrillo, Wetland Transportation Unit

0.

NDENI
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Pat McCrory Michael Ellison, Director John E. Skvarla, III
Governor Ecosystem Enhancement Program Secretary
December 3, 2014
Ms. Amy Euliss
NCDOT Division 9 Environmental Officer
North Carolina Department of Transportation
375 Silas Creek Parkway
Winston- Salem, North Carolina 27127
Dear Ms. Euliss:
Subject: EEP Mitigation Acceptance Letter:
Division 9 Project, TIP W -5516, Relocation of SR 1221 (Old Beatty Ford Road) from
SR 1210 / 1221 (Bostian Road) to SR 1337 (Lentz Road), Rowan County; WBS Number
44105.1.FD1
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) will provide the
compensatory stream mitigation for the subject project. Based on the information supplied by you on December 2,
2014, the impacts are located in CU 03040103 of the Yadkin River basin in the Central Piedmont (CP) Eco- Region, and
are as follows:
Yadkin
Stream
Wetlands
Buffer (Sq. Ft.)
03040103
Non-
Coastal
Cp
Cold
Cool
Warm
Riparian
Riparian
Marsh
Zone 1
Zone 2
Impacts (feet/acres)
0
0
828.0
0
0
0
0
0
*Some of the stream and wetland impacts may be proposed to be mitigated at a 1:1 mitigation ratio. See permit application for
details. USACE requires mitigation for 657 feet of stream impact and NCDWR requires mitigation for 828 feet of stream impact.
This impact and associated mitigation need were under projected by the NCDOT in the 2014 impact data. EEP
will commit to implement sufficient compensatory stream mitigation credits to offset the impacts associated with this
project as determined by the regulatory agencies using the delivery timeline listed in Section F.3.c.iii of the N.C.
Department of Environment and Natural Resources' Ecosystem Enhancement Program In -Lieu Fee Instrument dated
July 28, 2010. If the above referenced impact amounts are revised, then this mitigation acceptance letter will no longer
be valid and a new mitigation acceptance letter will be required from EEP.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Beth Harmon at 919 - 707 -8420.
Sin ly, �j
d .
Jame B Stanfill
EEP Asset Management Supervisor
cc: Mr. John Thomas, USACE — Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
Mr. Dave Wanucha, NCDWR — Winston -Salem Office
Ms. Amy Chapman, NCDWR
Ms. Linda Fitzpatrick, NCDOT — PDEA
File: SR 1221 Relocation (W -5516) — Division 9
1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699 -1652
Phone: 919 - 707 -89761 Internet: www.ncdenr.gov
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmafive Acton Employer — Made in part by recycled paper

FTo-- Brett Abernathy, PE
Division 9 Project Manager
NCDOT Division 9 Office
375 Silas Creek Parkway
Winston Salem, NC 27127
Drew Joyner, PE, Section Head
NCDOT PD &EA Unit
1598 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1598
We are forwarding the following items
I ca
Engineering
Transmittal
Date: February 19, 2014
Subject: State TIP Project W -5516
Rowan County
Relocation of Old Beatty Ford
Road
(X) Enclosed ( ) Under Separate Cover
Quantity
Description
1
W -5516 Final Indirect and Cumulative Effects Screening Report
1
Responses to comments on the W -5516 Draft Indirect and Cumulative Effects Screening
Report
1
Copy in track changes mode to indicate changes from the draft version.
These are transmitted as checked below:
() Approved (X) For Your Approval
() Approved as Noted () As Requested
() Not Approved () For Your Use
() Revise and Resubmit () For Your Files
Remarks:
Attached for your approval is an electronic copy of the final Indirect and Cumulative Effects
Screening Report for the W -5516 Relocation of Old Beatty Ford Road project. Also included
are responses to comments from the draft report and a copy of the text showing the tracked
changes that were made. If you have questions or need other information, please contact me.
Sincerely,
ICA Engineering, Inc.
4'
Mark L. Reep, PE
Cc: Harrison Marshall, HEU Section; Tris Ford, HEU Section
Leza Mundt, AICP, PDEA Unit; David Waller, PE, ICA Engineering, Inc.

Indirect and Cumulative Effects
Screening Report
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Relocation of Old Beatty Ford Road (SR 122 1) From
SR 1210 /SR 1221 to Lentz Road (SR 1337)
Rowan County
TIP No. W -5516, WBS No. 44105.1.FD1, Division 9
OF N ©RrH eq�
v z
a �O
NT
OF TRANS
Prepared by:
I
Engineering
February 2014

TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Executive Summary ............................................................................................ ...............................
1
II. Project Overview ................................................................................................ ...............................
3
III. Future Land Use Study Area .......................................................................... ...............................
4
IV. Time Horizon .................................................................................................... ...............................
5
V. Other Transportation and Infrastructure Projects ........................................ ...............................
5
VI. Transportation Impact Causing Activities ..................................................... ...............................
5
VII. Population Trends and Projections ............................................................... ...............................
8
VIII. Job Trends and Projections .......................................................................... ...............................
8
VIX. Municipal Utilities ......................................................................................... ...............................
9
X. Notable Features ................................................................................................ ...............................
9
XI. Development Regulations ................................................................................ ...............................
10
XII. Available Land ................................................................................................ ...............................
12
XIII. Market for Development ............................................................................... ...............................
13
XIV. Indirect Screening Matrix Methodology and Matrix ................................. ...............................
13
XV. Screening Matrix Results ............................................................................... ...............................
14
XVI. Indirect Effects Summary ............................................................................. ...............................
15
XVII. Cumulative Effects Summary ..................................................................... ...............................
16
XVIII. Sources ......................................................................................................... ...............................
18

INDIRECT AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS SCREENING REPORT
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Relocation of Old Beatty Ford Road (SR 1221) From
SR 1210 /SR 1221 to Lentz Road (SR 1337)
Rowan County
STIP No. W -5516, WBS No. 44105.LFD1, Division 9
February, 2014
L Executive Summary
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to improve or relocate Old
Beatty Ford Road (SR 1221 /SR 1210) from its intersection with Bostian Road (SR 1221) to Lentz
Road (SR 1337) in Rowan County. This project is approximately 3.1 miles long. It is included in
the 2012 -2020 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) as W -5516 and is scheduled for
right of way acquisition in fiscal year (FY) 2014 and construction in FY 2015.
Two build alternatives are being considered — Alternative 1 improves the existing alignment and
Alternative 2 is on new alignment.
This project is needed to reduce lane departure and frontal impact crashes along Old Beatty Ford
Road between Bostian Road and Lentz Road.
The purpose of this project is to improve vehicular safety on Old Beatty Ford Road by reducing the
frequency of lane departure and frontal impact crashes that have resulted in fatal and non -fatal
injuries. A secondary purpose is to improve the deficient bridge.
The time horizon for this analysis is through the year 2030. This time frame is consistent with
locally adopted transportation and land use plans and population projections from the North Carolina
Office of State Budget and Management. It is also within the design year (2035) for the proposed
project.
Local officials and developers are anticipating a future I -85 interchange with Old Beatty Ford Road
will be constructed near the project study area as a separate project. Although there are no specific
development plans on file or under review at this time, local officials expect commercial and
industrial development to occur adjacent to a new interchange. W -5516 does not include an
interchange with I -85, but it does not preclude the construction of one in the future. Since one is not
included in this project, the indirect effects of a new interchange will not be analyzed. However, it is
considered a foreseeable future project and will be included in the cumulative effects discussion of
this document. The location of an interchange has not been determined at this time. The proposed
project is not expected to interfere with any development plans.

Based on County projections from the North Carolina Office of State Budget and Management, the
population of Rowan County is expected to decrease between 2010 and 2030 with a net loss of about
630 people over 20 years (less than 0.1% per year). Population growth trends within the Future
Land Use Study Area (FLUSA) can be expected to be similar to those projected for Rowan County.
It is estimated that the FLUSA will experience an annual job increase of 2% between 2010 and 2020.
Job projections past the year 2020 were not available at the time of this assessment.
Notable human environmental features include: residential subdivisions, an elementary school,
places of worship, a community center, baseball stadium, rock quarry, and other various businesses.
Notable natural environmental features include: two water supply watersheds, streams, and Lake
Fisher.
In addition to federal and state development regulations, the FLUSA falls under the Yadkin -Pee Dee
River Basin -wide Water Quality Plan are water supply watershed regulations. Zoning ordinances
from Rowan County and the local municipalities include development regulations.
The screening results indicate further analysis in the form of a Land Use Scenario Assessment
(LUSA) is not necessary due to moderate or low concern regarding the scope of the project,
accessibility, public policy, and notable features.
No notable indirect effects are expected from the proposed project alone. The major factors
contributing to this result are a lack of travel time savings, a lack of existing water and sewer
infrastructure, stagnant development growth, and a population that is projected to decrease over the
next 20 years. The need for this project is to provide a safer roadway that will help reduce the
amount of fatal and serious injury crashes along this portion of Old Beatty Ford Road. Other
transportation projects are planned for this area, including widening I -85 and a potential I -85/ Old
Beatty Ford Road interchange. The combination of the subject project and a future interchange will
have an effect on the rate and type of development, but this project alone should not result in
considerable indirect effects.
There have not been any notable past actions. No development actions are presently underway;
therefore, it is reasonable to assume there has been very little cumulative effect on environmental
resources. Past actions, such as the construction of I -85 and a trucking facility and automobile
salvage yard in the northwest corner of the FLUSA, have not resulted in considerable cumulative
effects on environmental resources. The ongoing construction of homes along Lentz Road includes
relatively few homes on large lots and is not likely contributing to cumulative effects on
environmental resources. Based on the findings and conclusions of this report, cumulative effects
resulting from the proposed project and primarily from other actions such as a potential future I -85/
Old Beatty Ford Road interchange and any accompanying private development actions will have the
potential to minimally impact water quality in the FLUSA.
Oil

II. Proiect Overview
The North Carolina Department of Transportation ( NCDOT) proposes to improve or relocate Old
Beatty Ford Road (SR 1221 /SR 1210) from its intersection with Bostian Road (SR 1221) to Lentz
Road (SR 1337) in Rowan County (see Figure 1). This project is approximately 3.1 miles long. It is
included in the 2012 -2020 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) as W -5516 and is
scheduled for right of way acquisition in fiscal year (FY) 2014 and construction in FY 2015.
The proposed project is located in an unincorporated area of Rowan County, just outside the town
limits of Landis and the city limits of Kannapolis (Cabarrus County). Rowan County is located in
the heart of the Piedmont region of North Carolina, halfway between the Triad (Greensboro- Winston
Salem -High Point) and Charlotte. Greensboro is approximately 50 miles northeast, and Charlotte is
about 40 miles southwest.
This project is needed to reduce lane departure and frontal impact crashes along Old Beatty Ford
Road between Bostian Road and Lentz Road. A 2007 NCDOT Road Safety Review for an
approximate 16 -mile portion of the road identified higher than average fatal and non -fatal injury
crash rates when compared to similar roadways statewide.
The purpose of this project is to improve vehicular safety on Old Beatty Ford Road by reducing the
frequency of lane departure and frontal impact crashes that have resulted in fatal and non -fatal
injuries. A secondary purpose is to improve the deficient bridge. Proposed safety countermeasures
include:
• improving horizontal and vertical curves to increase sight distance
• increasing the roadway width
• widening and paving shoulders
These countermeasures have been shown to reduce crashes by more than 70% according to
NCDOT's Regional Crash Reduction Factors released in 2010.
The project proposes to provide a 22 -foot roadway width (two 11 -foot wide lanes) on 60 feet of right
of way, two -foot wide paved shoulders (for a total paved width of 26 feet), a straighter horizontal
alignment, improved vertical alignment, improved intersections, and a new bridge over I -85. It will
have no control of access, and the proposed design speed is 50 miles per hour (mph). According to
the traffic forecast for the adjacent STIP project, W -5313, the current (2010) Annual Average Daily
Traffic (ADDT) estimates for existing Old Beatty Ford Road is 2,400 vehicles per day (vpd). For
the design year 2035, the highest AADT volume on any segment of this project is approximately
3,600 vpd.
Two build alternatives are being considered (see Figure 1). Alternative 1 generally follows existing
Old Beatty Ford Road from Bostian Road to Lentz Road, straightening curves to improve the
roadway alignment. Alternative 2 begins near the Old Beatty Ford Road/ Bostian Road intersection,
extends east on new location to Lentz Road, and follows Lentz Road for approximately 0.7 mile to
its intersection with Old Beatty Ford Road. With Alternative 2, the existing Old Beatty Ford Road
3

bridge over I -85 will be removed and cul -de -sacs will be constructed on both sides of the interstate.
Both alternatives are approximately 3.1 miles long.
The proposed project is not expected to affect economic development in the area or serve a specific
development. Local officials and developers are anticipating a future I -85 interchange with Old
Beatty Ford Road will be constructed within the project study area as a separate project. Although
there are no specific development plans on file or under review at this time, local officials expect
commercial and industrial development to occur adjacent to a new interchange. This project does
not include an interchange with I -85, but it does not preclude the construction of one in the future. It
is not expected to interfere with any development plans.
At the time of this document, it is expected the proposed project will require an Environmental
Assessment (EA).
III. Future Land Use Study Area
The Future Land Use Study Area (FLUSA) is the area surrounding a project that could be indirectly
affected as a result of the proposed project and other actions. This study area encompasses all of the
areas examined for potential increases in development pressure as a result of project construction.
Although it is the focus for data collection and analysis contained within this report, it is not meant
to infer that land use effects will be felt throughout the FLUSA. The area outlined in orange and
black on Figure 1 is the FLUSA for the proposed project.
The FLUSA is generally bounded by the border of Census Tract 514/ Block Group 1 from the
2010 US Census on the east, west, and south sides. The north side of the FLUSA follows Daugherty
Road (SR 1243) and Pine Ridge Road (SR 1232/ SR 1339). Based on 2010 US Census data, the
FLUSA includes four jurisdictions — Landis, China Grove, Kannapolis, and Rowan County.I
The FLUSA has been defined based on the following reasons:
The project is a short 3.1 -mile safety improvement project, and it does not include an
interchange with I -85.
The FLUSA boundary was defined so that potential land use nodes at major intersections could
be included in the analysis. It also accounts for a large amount of undeveloped land to the east
and north of the proposed alternatives.
Part of the block group border was conservatively chosen as the FLUSA boundary because
indirect development pressure from the proposed project is not expected to extend past, or even
to these limits.
1 Unincorporated parts of Rowan County make up the majority of the FLUSA followed by China Grove and Landis. The
portion of the Kannapolis extra territorial jurisdiction (ETJ) is only a very small fraction of the FLUSA.

IV. Time Horizon
The time horizon for this analysis is through the year 2030. This time frame is consistent with
locally adopted transportation and land use plans and population projections from the North Carolina
Office of State Budget and Management. It is also within the design year (2035) for the proposed
project.
V. Other Transportation and Infrastructure Projects
The following are lists of other notable projects underway or foreseeable in the area (see Figure 2).
NCDOT's 2012 -2020 State Transportation Improvement Program Projects
• I -3802B proposes to add additional lanes to I -85 from north of Lane Street (SR 2180)
(Exit 63) in Cabarrus County to the US 29/ US 601 Connector (Exit 68) in Rowan County.
Right of way acquisition is to begin in FY 2018 with construction in FY 2020.
• I -3610 proposes to revise the I -85/ US 29/ NC 152 interchange area (Exit 68). This project is
included in I- 3802B. Right of way acquisition is to begin in FY 2018 with construction in
FY 2020.
• W -5313 proposes to widen existing two -lane Old Beatty Ford Road to a multi -lane facility
from Lower Stone Church Road (SR 2335) to Lentz Road. Right of way acquisition is to
begin in FY 2014 with construction in FY 2015.
• P -5206 proposes to restore a second railroad track from north of Kannapolis to south of
Salisbury. Right of way acquisition is to begin in FY 2013 with construction in FY 2014.
I -3804, a new interchange at Old Beatty Ford Road, had been in a previous version of the STIP as
part of I -3802 but was removed because land use and traffic projections did not support the need for
a new interchange. It is included in the Cabarrus -Rowan Metropolitan Planning Organization's
(CRMPO) current 2035 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) and the draft 2040 LRTP (as a
2016 -2025 horizon year project) and is scheduled to be reevaluated in NCDOT's upcoming
Prioritization 3.0. Since an interchange with I -85 is not included in W -5516, the indirect effects in
the form of change in land use resulting from an interchange will not be analyzed. However, it is
considered a foreseeable future project and will be included in the cumulative effects discussion of
this document. The location of an interchange has not been determined at this time.
Infrastructure Projects
According to local officials, there are no infrastructure projects planned in the FLUSA.
VI. Transportation Impact Causing Activities
Travel Time Savings
Travel time is unlikely to change considerably. Since Alternative 1 proposes to improve the existing
alignment, it should not affect travel time much, if at all.
5

Depending on the origin and destination, Alternative 2 could decrease travel times slightly or
increase them. As discussed earlier, both alternatives are approximately 3.1 miles long.
Alternative 2 includes 2.4 miles on new location and 0.7 mile on existing location (Lentz Road).
Given this, the time to travel from Bostian Road to the Old Beatty Ford Road/ Lentz Road
intersection should be equal regardless of the alternative. However, motorists approaching
Alternative 2 on Lentz Road from the north would travel 0.7 mile less than they do today. Assuming
the existing speed limit of 45 mph, the travel time savings would be less than one minute. Very few
motorists would benefit from this travel time savings because it is reasonable to assume most
approaching Alternative 2 from the north would likely choose to turn on Daugherty Road to reach
US 29 instead of a relocated Old Beatty Ford Road.
As a worst case scenario with regards to increased travel time, residents living on the east side of
I -85 would have farther to drive to destinations on the west side of I -85. For example, residents
along Ivory Lane (off of Old Beatty Ford Road and adjacent to I -85 on the east side) would have to
drive approximately 3.4 miles farther than they currently do to reach US 29 west of I -85. They
would get to US 29 by driving east on existing Old Beatty Ford Road, north on Lentz Road, and
west on Alternative 2. Using a 45 mph speed limit, 3.4 miles adds nearly five minutes to their trip.
Conversely, residents living on the west side of and adjacent to I -85 wanting to go to Bostian
Elementary School would experience similar travel time increases.
Property Access
With the exception of the construction period, there should be minimal, if any, impacts to property
access associated with Alternative 1. Since Alternative 1 is mostly on existing alignment, it should
not result in new access to properties that currently do not have access. Access already exists for
properties along the new location portions of Alternative 1.
If Alternative 2 is selected as the preferred alternative, access to some Old Beatty Ford Road
properties will change. With Alternative 2, the existing Old Beatty Ford Road bridge over I -85 will
be removed and cul -de -sacs will be constructed on both sides of the interstate. In this scenario, I -85
will essentially act as a barrier and will cause some property owners to take a more circuitous route
to their property.
The new location portion of Alternative 2 will likely provide access to two parcels fronting I -85 on
the east side that currently do not have direct access to any road. However, these two parcels
currently belong to the same owner as adjacent parcels that do have access. Other than these two
exceptions, the new location route will likely modify or potentially increase access to some
properties.
Travel Patterns
The proposed project is unlikely to change travel patterns considerably. Alternative 1 is mostly on
existing alignment and should not affect travel patterns. Alternative 2 will have a minimal effect on
travel patterns for residents living along and off of existing Old Beatty Ford Road since it will dead
end on either side of I -85. Once construction is complete, travel patterns for most users should
return to the current state.
G

The local routes people use to travel to their homes, work, or to go shopping could be minimally
affected if Alternative 2 is selected as the preferred. With this alternative, the existing Old Beatty
Ford Road bridge over I -85 will be removed and cul -de -sacs will be constructed on both sides of the
interstate. Residents living on the east side of I -85 would have farther to drive to destinations on the
west side of I -85. For example, residents along Ivory Lane adjacent to I -85 would have to drive
approximately 3.4 miles farther than they currently do to reach US 29 west of I -85. Under this
scenario, they would get to US 29 by driving east on existing Old Beatty Ford Road, north on Lentz
Road, and west on Alternative 2. Conversely, residents living on the west side of I -85 wanting to go
to Bostian Elementary School would drive approximately 1.3 miles farther than their current trip
[west on existing Old Beatty Ford Road, north on China Grove Road (SR 1238), east on Alternative
2, and south on Lentz Road]. Travel patterns for people living along and off of Old Beatty Ford
Road will change, and they may feel inconvenienced by the longer trips, but there is no indication
this alternative will alter overall travel patterns. Commuters and other users of the road would use
Alternative 2 instead of Old Beatty Ford Road.
For both alternatives, some routes may be temporarily impacted during construction. In these cases,
traffic will be maintained by providing alternative access. During construction, Daugherty Road and
Moose Road could serve as alternate routes between Lentz Road and Bostian Road to points further
west along US 29.
Property Exposure
The amount of property exposure will depend on which alternative is selected as the preferred.
Alternative 1 proposes to improve the existing alignment and is not expected to increase or decrease
exposure to properties along its alignment. All but one property affected by this alternative already
front Old Beatty Ford Road. The exception is a property that is likely to be acquired for new right of
way. Alternative 2 will increase exposure for currently undeveloped properties along its new
alignment location — making them more attractive for development. In the absence of an interchange
with I -85, the development would most likely be low- density residential.
For both alternatives, if an interchange with Old Beatty Ford Road is built as a separate project in the
future, properties immediately adjacent to the interchange may become more attractive for highway
commercial development that would benefit from passing traffic (gas stations, fast food restaurants,
etc.). Properties further removed would be more likely to experience residential development since
I -85 would become more easily accessible.
Land Use and Transportation Nodes
W -5516 is a proposed safety project and is unlikely to alone alter land use patterns or create
transportation nodes (a transportation related destination such as a transit station). Rowan County's
land use plan, Land Use Plan Areas East of I -85 (January 2012), indicates a future "regional node"
at Old Beatty Ford Road and I -85. However, this is predicated on an interchange being built in this
location in the future. According to the land use plan, examples of land uses in a regional node
include: shopping complexes, grocery stores, convenience goods, gas stations, office complexes,
restaurants and health care services. If one is built, an interchange in this area could become a
7

transportation node. A land use or transportation node is unlikely to occur without the construction
of an I -85/ Old Beatty Ford Road interchange.
In addition to the regional node, a "community node" is proposed in the land use plan at the
intersection of Old Beatty Ford Road and Old Concord Road. Examples of land uses in a
community node include: convenience stores, gas stations, office space, restaurants, and retail/
service businesses. There is currently a convenience store/ gas station and church (Ebenezer
Lutheran Church) at this location. Due to its scope, the proposed project is unlikely to facilitate the
development of this intersection into a community node.
No other FLUSA intersections are expected to become land use or transportation nodes.
VII. Population Trends and Proiections
According to the US Census Bureau, Rowan County's population increased by slightly more than
six percent between 2000 and 2010, or less than one percent annually. Based on county projections
from the North Carolina Office of State Budget and Management, the population of Rowan County
is expected to decrease between 2010 and 2030 with a net loss of about 630 people over 20 years
(less than 0.1 % per year).
Population growth trends within the FLUSA can be expected to be similar to those projected for
Rowan County up to the time horizon of this study.
VIII. Job Trends and Proiections
According to data from the North Carolina Department of Commerce — Division of Employment
Security (DES), the number of Rowan County jobs decreased by 2,210 between 2002 and 2012, a
-0.5% annual reduction rate. The FLUSA is part of the Centralina Workforce Development Board
(WDB). The DES's projections for this WDB between 2010 and 2020 show the number of jobs
increasing by 50,860, or 1.6 % annually.
Annual job growth rates for the FLUSA were estimated using the WDB employment projections and
population percentages from the 2010 US Census data. The WDB total projected employment
growth (50,860 jobs) was distributed to Landis, China Grove, and Rowan County (minus Landis and
China Grove) based upon their percentage share of the total Centralina WDB population in 2010.
Landis and China Grove comprised approximately 0.4% and 0.5 %, respectively, of the total
2010 population in the Centralina WDB. Rowan County accounted for about 16 %. The projected
employment for Landis, China Grove, and Rowan County was then distributed within the FLUSA
based on the percentage of area of each in the FLUSA and professional judgment. This distribution
assumed that the FLUSA contained approximately nine percent, four percent, and two percent of the
employment bases for Landis, China Grove, and Rowan County, respectively.
Based on the methodology described above, it is estimated that the FLUSA will experience an
annual job increase of 2% between 2010 and 2020. Job projections past the year 2020 were not
available at the time of this assessment.
ri

VIX. Municipal Utilities
There are no water or sewer services within the FLUSA. Areas west of US 29 and just outside the
FLUSA boundary are provided with water and sewer services by Salisbury -Rowan Utilities (SRU).
The northeast corner of the FLUSA is included in SRU's "Long Range Service Area" for water
services, and about half of the FLUSA (roughly from west of Lentz Road and north of Old Beatty
Ford Road) is within the Long Range Service Area for sewer services. These future service areas
represent areas where water and sewer services could be extended. However, according to a SRU
official, there are currently no plans to extend services anywhere inside the FLUSA in the
foreseeable future.
The City of Kannapolis provides water and sewer services to most citizens and businesses within its
city limits. Kannapolis water and sewer services do not extend into the FLUSA and there are no
plans for extension.
Current SRU and Kannapolis policies are development driven — meaning developers would have to
pay for services to be extended to their sites. An exception to those policies would occur if an
I -85/ Old Beatty Ford Road interchange is built in the future as a separate project. According to a
SRU official, multiple utility providers (including SRU and Kannapolis) would be interested in
extending their services to the potential interchange location.
SRU's water supply comes from its water intake facility at the confluence of the South Yadkin and
Yadkin Rivers. The plant produces an average of 8.5 million gallons of water per day (MGD) and
peaks at nearly 12 MGD during summer months. The water plant is permitted to treat up to
24 MGD. SRU has two wastewater treatment facilities which are permitted to process a combined
total of approximately 12.5 MGD. On average, they treat a combined six MGD.
Kannapolis' water supply mainly comes from Kannapolis Lake, which has a 1.35- billion - gallon
maximum capacity and is filled from a 10.6 square -mile drainage area. The average daily demand
for water in Kannapolis is four MGD. Lake Don T. Howell in Cabarrus County and Second Creek
in Rowan County are two supplemental water sources. Kannapolis averages approximately
4.5 MGD of discharge at its wastewater treatment plant. The plant is permitted to process
26.5 MGD.
X. Notable Features
Human Environmental Features
Notable human environmental features include (see Figure 3):
• Various residential subdivisions throughout the FLUSA.
• Bostian Elementary School located along Lentz Road.
• Places of worship including: Highest Praise Family Worship Center along Bostian Road; Oak
Grove Freewill Baptist Church along Chastity Lane; and Pine Ridge Baptist Church along Old
Linn Road (SR 1232).
• The Kannapolis Moose Family Center along Old Beatty Ford Road.
9

• Fieldcrest Cannon Stadium (home to a Class A minor league baseball team) located north of
the I -85/ Lane Street interchange.
• Martin Marietta Aggregates Kannapolis Quarry along China Grove Road.
• Various businesses along US 29.
Natural Environmental Features
Notable natural environmental features include (see Figure 3):
• The FLUSA contains parts of two water supply watersheds — Cold Water Creek (WS -IV) and
Dutch Buffalo Creek (WS -II). Lentz Road is the approximate boundary between the two water
supply watersheds. Part of a critical area of the Cold Water Creek (WS -IV) is inside the
FLUSA. The FLUSA contains no streams that are within the Dutch Buffalo Creek (WS -II)
water supply watershed.
• All streams in the FLUSA are in the Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin. Streams in the FLUSA
include Cold Water Creek, Town Branch, unnamed tributaries to Cold Water Creek, and Lake
Fisher. All have been assigned a best use classification of WS -IV by the North Carolina
Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). The classification WS -IV indicates freshwaters used as
sources of water supply for drinking, culinary, or food processing purposes where a WS -I, II or
III classification is not feasible. These waters are also protected for Class C uses. WS -IV
waters are generally in moderately to highly developed watersheds or protected areas. Part of
Cold Water Creek and also has the classification of CA. Waters carrying the CA classification
are within a "critical area" adjacent to a water supply intake or reservoir where the risk
associated with pollution is greater than from the other portions of the watershed.
• Lake Fisher, a recreational lake used for boating and fishing and a source of water for Concord,
is located downstream.
No features within the FLUSA have been designated as Outstanding Resource Water (ORW) or as
trout waters. There are no designated anadromous fish waters, Primary Nursery Areas (PNA), or
designated High Quality Waters (HQW). There are no impaired waters identified on the North
Carolina 2012 Final 303(d) list. According to the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), there
is no essential fish habitat within the study area.
XI. Development Regulations
State and Federal Regulations
According to the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ), as a result of storm water
rules enacted by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 1999, construction or land
development activities that disturb one acre or more are required to obtain a National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) storm water permit and site plan. An erosion and sediment
control plan must also be developed for these sites under the state's Sedimentation Pollution Control
Act (SPCA) administered by the NC Division of Land Resources. Local governments may review
and enforce the erosion and sediment control plan within their jurisdiction, but the program has to be
as strict as the Division of Land Resources program. Site disturbances of less than one acre require
the use of NCDOT's Best Management Practices (BMPs), but a site plan is not required.
10

According to the March 1997 NCDOT Best Management Practices for Protection of Surface Waters
report, BMPs include activities, practices, and procedures undertaken to prevent or reduce water
pollution, such as: on -site detention areas, vegetative buffers, culverts, inspections and enforcement,
and erosion control. Site disturbances greater than one acre require both the application of BMPs as
well as a site plan.
In 1972, the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES) program was established
under the authority of the Clean Water Act. Phase I of the NPDES stormwater program was
established in 1990. It requires NPDES permit coverage for large or medium municipalities with
populations of 100,000 or more. The Phase II program extends permit coverage to smaller
(< 100,000 population) communities and public entities that own or operate a municipal separate
storm sewer system (MS4) by requiring them to apply for and obtain an NPDES permit for storm
water discharges.
The FLUSA is almost entirely in an area that has been automatically designated by the EPA as a
Phase II permittee. Consequently, as required by the Federal regulations, local governments must, at
a minimum, develop, implement, and enforce a storm water program designed to reduce the
discharge of pollutants from the MS4 to the maximum extent practicable using the six minimum
control measures of the Phase II program. Each of the six minimum controls requires the use of Best
Management Practices (BMPs) and measurable goals (i.e., narrative or numeric standards used to
gauge program effectiveness). Among other things, the developed storm water program will provide
regulatory controls for future developments using post construction storm water management
techniques such as planning and growth controls, site -based local controls (e.g., impervious surface
limits), as well as miscellaneous storage, vegetative, and infiltration practices. The County, City of
Kannapolis, and the Towns of China Grove and Landis do implement Watershed Protection and
Storm Water Management Plans. Potential impacts to water quality throughout the project area
should be minimized due to the presence of state and local water supply watershed protection
regulations, the creation and implementation of the various governments' Phase II storm water plans,
and land use plans /zoning regulations enforced by the various municipalities throughout the FLUSA
(including riparian buffers and the preservation of open space /natural land).
Basins and Water Supply Watershed Regulations
The FLUSA falls within the Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin. The NCDWQ prepared the most recent
Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin -wide Water Quality Plan in 2008 in an effort to create long -term water
quality management strategies for local and state officials. The plan recommends that all agencies
and groups interested in development and water quality in the area work together to plan growth in
such a way that water quality and quantity are protected.
As mentioned previously in this report, the FLUSA is within the Cold Water Creek water supply
watershed (WS -IV) and the Dutch Buffalo Creek water supply watershed (WS -II).
Development in the protected area of WS -IV water supply watersheds has density limits. For
projects without curb and gutter street systems under the low- density option, development is limited
to two dwelling units per acre (or 24% built -upon area) or three dwelling units per acre
11

(or 36% built -upon area). Under the high- density option, 24 -70% built -upon area is allowed if
developers control runoff from the first inch of rainfall.
Development in the critical area of WS -IV water supply watersheds is limited to two dwelling units
per acre (or 24% built -upon area) under the low- density option. Under the high- density option,
24 -50% built -upon area is permitted.
Development in the protected area of WS -II water supply watersheds is limited to one dwelling unit
per acre (or 12% built -upon area) under the low- density option. Under the high- density option,
12 -30% built -upon area is permitted.
The 10/70 provision is allowed in the protected area of WS -II, WS -III, and WS -IV water supply
watersheds. This provision allows local governments to use 10% of the non - critical area of each
watershed within its jurisdiction for new development or expansion up to 70% built -upon area
(without storm water control), provided that the low- density option is used in the remainder of the
watershed.
Local Development Regulations
Rowan County's zoning ordinance includes development regulations based on the state and federal
requirements discussed previously. Similar environmental regulations are included in the ordinances
for China Grove, Landis and Kannapolis.
According to the most recent Rowan County zoning map (August 27, 2013), the FLUSA is primarily
zoned as rural agricultural. Exceptions to this are: commercial zones along I -85 (from south of
Daugherty Road to Pine Ridge Road and from Moose Road south to the County line) and US 29;
industrial zones south of Old Beatty Ford Road between Ebenezer Road and China Grove Road; and
an area zoned for a mobile home park south of the Old Beatty Ford Road/ Lentz Road intersection
adjacent to Bostian Elementary School.
XIL Available Land
To determine the potential market for future development, land within the FLUSA was identified as
"developed," "undeveloped/constrained," or "undeveloped/unconstrained." Available land was
categorized using tax data, GIS data, and aerial photography. Small parcels with a structure,
subdivided lots that have been platted but not built on, industrial sites, and road right of way were
considered developed. Next, constraints on development were overlaid on the map, including water
bodies, streams identified by NCDWQ, and National Wetland Inventory (NWI) wetlands. Finally,
the undeveloped land was identified as either undeveloped/constrained (if it was covered by one or
more of these overlays) or undeveloped/unconstrained.
According to Rowan County tax record data, there are approximately 6,250 acres of land in the
FLUSA (not including road right of ways). Of this, approximately 3,340 acres (53 %) are currently
developed (see Figure 4). Of the 2,910 acres of undeveloped area, approximately 2,160 acres
(35% of the total) are considered constrained — protected by streams, wetlands, ponds, and WS -IV
Critical/ WS -II development restrictions. The remaining 750 acres (12% of the total) of land are
12

classified as undeveloped/ unconstrained, which includes active farmland, forested areas, open
space, and large parcels with single structures. Undeveloped/unconstrained areas generally represent
land within the FLUSA that could be developed in the future.
XIII. Market for Development
Current Development Pressures
Based on information obtained from local officials and local land use plans, there is very little
development pressure in the FLUSA. In the past 10 years development has been mostly scattered
single - family homes. The various subdivisions are primarily well - established neighborhoods that
have been there for 20 or more years. Development in the newest residential subdivision along
Lentz Road, Castlebrooke Farms, has been relatively stagnant since it was first subdivided until
recently. According to historical aerial photography, two houses were built in 2008 and just four
more were built between then and the Spring of 2013. Recent field observations revealed four to
five more houses are under construction. If built out, there will be fewer than 50 homes in the
development.
Development Market Assumptions
There are two likely scenarios for future development in the FLUSA that depend upon whether an
I -85/ Old Beatty Ford Road interchange is built. If an interchange is not constructed, the current
development trends are expected to continue through the horizon year. Future development will
mostly include scattered homes on larger lots (an acre or more). However, if an
I -85 interchange at Old Beatty Ford Road is constructed, land uses surrounding the interchange area
are likely to change. There will be interest from developers to develop the area into a regional node
as described previously in Section VII, Transportation Impact Causing Activities. Local officials
have indicated they would support and help facilitate the development of the interchange area by
making zoning changes and relaxing certain development restrictions.
Without municipal or county provided water and sewer services, new development under either
scenario will be hindered. Soil types not suitable for septic systems or wells and the presence of two
water supply watersheds are factors that are likely to prevent dense residential and/ or large
commercial developments.
XIV. Indirect Screening Matrix Methodology and Matrix
The categories listed on the Indirect Screening Matrix (see Table 1) have been shown to influence
land development decisions in numerous areas statewide and nationally.2 The measures used to rate
the impacts from a high concern for indirect effects potential to less concern for indirect effects
potential are supported by documentation sections. Each characteristic is assessed individually and
the results of the table are looked at comprehensively to determine the indirect effects potential of
2 Separate matrices for each alternative were considered. However, the only category that would change would be
"Scope of Project." The scope for Alternative 1 would have the lowest ranking, and Alternative 2 would be moderate as
is shown in Table 1. Changing the ranking from moderate to low does not affect the result of "Indirect Scenario
Assessment Not Warranted." Therefore, only one table representing both alternatives is shown.
13

the proposed project. The scope of the project, change in accessibility, public policy, and notable
environmental features categories are given extra weight to determine if future growth in the area is
related to the project modifications.
Table 1— Indirect Land Use Effects Screening Tool
. '1'o be conservative, the ranking Tor "Scope of Project" shown is for Alternative Z. Alternative 1 would have the lowest ranking. 'l here is no ditterence in the result, and an
Indirect Scenario Assessment is not warranted for either alternative.
XV. Screening Matrix Results
The indirect land use effects screening tool indicates the proposed project is not likely to cause
notable indirect effects. Therefore, further analysis in the form of a Land Use Scenario Assessment
is not necessary.
• Scope of Project — the scope of Alternative 1 is very limited while the scope of Alternative 2
is more of a concern since it is a new location alternative. Changing it to a lower rating for
Alternative 1 would not affect the result of the screening tool. Therefore, the rating for this
category shown in Table 1 is moderate and reflects that of Alternative 2.
• Change in Accessibility — as discussed in Section VII. Transportation Impact Causing
Activities, the travel time savings will be less than one minute and will apply to very few
users (those approaching Alternative 2 on Lentz Road from the north who do not take a
different route such as Daugherty Road). Travel times should not change if Alternative 1 is
the preferred. For the majority of motorists, travel times will increase for Alternative 2.
Therefore, the rating for this category is low.
• Forecasted Population Growth — according to the North Carolina Office of State Budget and
Management, the forecasted population growth is expected to decrease slightly at less than
0.1 % per year through 2030. Therefore, the rating for this category is low.
• Forecasted Employment Growth — the forecasted employment growth in the FLUSA is
expected to be comparable to that predicted for the Centralina WDB. As described in Section
VIX, Job Trends and Projections, the FLUSA is expected to experience an annual job
14
Forecasted
Forecasted
Water/
Notable
Rating
Scope of
Change in
Population
Employment
Available
Sewer
Market for
Public
Environmental
Result
Project
Accessibility
Growth
Growth
Land
Availability
Development
Policy
Features
Major
> 10 Minute
>3%
Substantial
5,000+
All Services
Development
Less
Targeted or
More Concern
New
Travel Time
Annual
Number of
Acres of
Existing/
Activity
Stringent,
Threatened
Location
Savings
Population
New Jobs
Land
Available
Abundant
No Growth
Resources
Growth
Management
t
X
X
Indirect
Scenario
X
X
X
X
Assessment
Not
Warranted
X
X
X
Very
No Travel
No
Limited
No Service
Development
More
Features
Less Concern
Limited
Time
Population
No New Jobs
Land
Available
Activity
Stringent
Incorporated in
Scope
Savings
Growth or
or Job Losses
Available
Now or In
Lacking
Growth
Local
Decline
the Future
Management
Protection
. '1'o be conservative, the ranking Tor "Scope of Project" shown is for Alternative Z. Alternative 1 would have the lowest ranking. 'l here is no ditterence in the result, and an
Indirect Scenario Assessment is not warranted for either alternative.
XV. Screening Matrix Results
The indirect land use effects screening tool indicates the proposed project is not likely to cause
notable indirect effects. Therefore, further analysis in the form of a Land Use Scenario Assessment
is not necessary.
• Scope of Project — the scope of Alternative 1 is very limited while the scope of Alternative 2
is more of a concern since it is a new location alternative. Changing it to a lower rating for
Alternative 1 would not affect the result of the screening tool. Therefore, the rating for this
category shown in Table 1 is moderate and reflects that of Alternative 2.
• Change in Accessibility — as discussed in Section VII. Transportation Impact Causing
Activities, the travel time savings will be less than one minute and will apply to very few
users (those approaching Alternative 2 on Lentz Road from the north who do not take a
different route such as Daugherty Road). Travel times should not change if Alternative 1 is
the preferred. For the majority of motorists, travel times will increase for Alternative 2.
Therefore, the rating for this category is low.
• Forecasted Population Growth — according to the North Carolina Office of State Budget and
Management, the forecasted population growth is expected to decrease slightly at less than
0.1 % per year through 2030. Therefore, the rating for this category is low.
• Forecasted Employment Growth — the forecasted employment growth in the FLUSA is
expected to be comparable to that predicted for the Centralina WDB. As described in Section
VIX, Job Trends and Projections, the FLUSA is expected to experience an annual job
14

increase of about 2.0% between 2010 and 2020 compared to the ESCNC's prediction of
1.7% annually for the Centralina WDB. Therefore, the rating for this category is moderate.
• Available Land — there are approximately 2,910 acres of undeveloped land in the FLUSA.
However, 2,100 acres of it (72 %) are constrained by streams, wetlands, open water, and
water supply watershed development restrictions. Only 750 acres are considered
undeveloped and unconstrained. For these reasons, the amount of developable land in the
FLUSA was rated low.
• Water/ Sewer Availability — there currently are no water or sewer services in the FLUSA.
This category was not rated the lowest because parts of the FLUSA fall within Salisbury -
Rowan Utilities' long range service areas for water and sewer. There are no specific plans at
this time to extend these services into the FLUSA. For these reasons, this category was rated
as moderate -low.
• Market for Development — this category was rated moderate -low because there has been very
little development in the FLUSA in the past 10 years. Local officials expect a similar trend
in the future but do not think this project will have an influence on future development.
• Public Policy — Jurisdictions in the FLUSA follow state and federal development regulations
to protect water quality. In addition to these regulations, local governments have
implemented policies to limit impacts to water quality by encouraging smart growth through
land use plans and zoning ordinances. For these reasons, this category was rated as
moderate -low.
• Notable Environmental Features — there are notable environmental features in the FLUSA.
These will be protected by best management practices and state and federal regulations.
Therefore, the rating for this category is moderate -low.
XVI. Indirect Effects Summary
No notable indirect effects are expected from the proposed project alone. The major factors
contributing to this result are a lack of travel time savings, a lack of existing water and sewer
infrastructure, stagnant development growth, and a population that is projected to decrease over the
next 20 years.
The proposed project intends to improve the safety of a 3.1 -mile stretch of Old Beatty Ford Road by
either improving the existing alignment or relocating it to a new alignment. Although the new
location alternative will increase exposure to some properties, this project should not cause the
affected properties to become more attractive for non - residential development. Any residential
development will be limited in size due to a lack of water and sewer services, soil unsuitable for
septic systems, and growth management policies such as water supply watershed development
restrictions. This project has been taken into account in local land use plans.
Other transportation projects are planned for this area, including widening I -85 and a potential I -85/
Old Beatty Ford Road interchange. The combination of the subject project and a future interchange
will have an effect on the rate and type of development in the FLUSA, but this project alone should
not result in notable indirect effects.
15

XVII. Cumulative Effects Summary
Past Projects
There have not been any notable past actions. Past actions, such as the construction of I -85 and a
trucking facility and automobile salvage yard in the northwest corner of the FLUSA, have not
resulted in considerable cumulative effects on environmental resources.
Current Projects
There are no notable development actions that are currently underway. The ongoing construction of
homes in Castlebrooke Farms (located along Lentz Road) includes relatively few homes on large lots
and is not likely contributing to cumulative effects on environmental resources.
Future Projects
Projects planned for the future include:
• Widening I -85;
• Revising the I -85/ US 29/ NC 152 interchange area (Exit 68);
• Widening Old Beatty Ford Road to a multi -lane facility from Lower Stone Church Road to
Lentz Road;
• Adding a second railroad track to the North Carolina Railroad corridor;
• A new I -85 interchange at Old Beatty Ford Road.
Since there have not been any notable past or present actions, it is reasonable to assume there has
been very little cumulative effect on environmental resources. Future transportation projects,
especially a new interchange at Old Beatty Ford Road, could spur non - residential development in the
interchange area, which would most likely prompt utility providers to extend water and sewer
services to accommodate the new development. These potential development and infrastructure
projects could have a cumulative effect on environmental resources (see Section XIII, Market for
Development for a more detailed discussion of future development).
Notable Environmental Resources
Notable features include two protected water supply watershed areas [Cold Water Creek (WS -IV)
and Dutch Buffalo Creek (WS -II)], a critical area of the Cold Water Creek Water Supply Watershed,
and Lake Fisher. There are no outstanding resource waters, trout waters, anadromous fish waters,
primary nursery areas, high quality waters, or essential fish habitats.
Impacts on Environmental Resources
Direct environmental impacts from NCDOT projects are addressed by avoidance, minimization,
and/or mitigation. These are consistent with programmatic discussions with the natural resource
agencies occurring during the project development and permitting processes.
16

Based on the findings and conclusions of this report, cumulative effects resulting from the
proposed project and primarily from other actions such as a potential future I -85/ Old Beatty Ford
Road interchange will have the potential to minimally impact water quality in the FLUSA. State,
local, and water supply watershed development regulations are in place to help protect sensitive
environmental resources, which include: NPDES Phase II regulations, local growth management
strategies and stormwater management plans, and development restrictions within the two water
supply watersheds.
17

XVIII. Sources
City of Kannapolis, 2015 Land Use Plan, July 2004
City of Kannapolis, Zoning Map, January 2012
City of Kannapolis, Unified Development Ordinance, adopted November 2000, most recently
amended June 2004
City of Kannapolis web site, www.cityofkannapolis.com
City of Salisbury web site, www.salisburync. og_v
CRMPO, 2035 LRTP Report, April 2009
CRMPO, Comprehensive Transportation Plan, August 2011
CRMPO, Draft 2040 LRTP Project List, date unknown
CRMPO web site, www.crmpoorg
North Carolina Department of Commerce — Division of Employment Security web site,
www.ncescl.com
NC One Map web site, www.nconemap.com
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), Water Supply
Watersheds, available from www.enr.state.nc.us
North Carolina Department of Commerce web site, www.nccommerce.com
North Carolina Department of Transportation, 2012 -2020 State Transportation Improvement
Program, November 2013, available from www.ncdot.org /plannin /dg evelopment /TIP /TIP /Trans/
North Carolina Department of Transportation, Best Management Practices for Protection of Surface
Waters, March 1997
North Carolina Department of Transportation, W -5516 Draft Natural Resources Technical Report,
November 2013
North Carolina Department of Transportation web site, www.ncdot.gov
North Carolina Division of Water Quality, Final 2012 303(d) List of Impaired Waters
North Carolina Division of Water Quality web site, www.ncdenr.org
18

North Carolina Office of State Budget and Management web site, www.osbm.state.nc.us
Rowan County GIS data, available from www.rowancountync.gov
Rowan County, Land Use Plan Areas East of I -85, January 2012
Rowan County, Unified Development Ordinance, adopted September 1991, most recently amended
March 2013
Rowan County website, www.rowancounlync.gov
Rowan County, Zoning Map, August 2013
Town of China Grove, Unified Development Ordinance, adopted August 2006, most recently
amended October 2010
Town of China Grove, Zoning Map, September 2010
Town of China Grove web site, www.chinagrovenc.gov
Town of Landis web site, www.townoflandis.com
US Census Bureau, 2000 and 2010 Census
19

FIGURES

r* �
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
1 gf" DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
\?araenK DIVISION 9
29
Karma
dis
�a
:Y
�v
a
Lane
0
V
V;I
Daugherty Road
Alternative 2
Project Corridor
Ivory Lane J
Alternative 1
Project Corridor
�Yaw2
40 d:BeatrJ
goad
rl �
�~b4
i
i
i
i
.�L
o:
•. Rowan County N
ICabarrus•County
,Lake
Fisher Exit 63 0 0.5 1
Miles
TIP Project No. W -5516
Rowan County
Figure 1 - Project Location &
Future Land Use Study Area
Future Land Use Study Area (FLUSA)
Alternative 1 Project Corridor
- Alternative 2 Project Corridor
Municipal Boundary
County Boundary
Water Body
^^— Stream or Creek
Interstate
Major Road
Road
Map Sources:
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Rowan County
US Census Bureau
NC One Map
ICA Engineering
North Carolina Counties
0 Rowan County

' Chini% ove Exit 168 f ti
`- I -3610
\ 152
I -3802B
s
P -5206 •� ,
153 L I v l �dge
.I CJ ��'•� oat/
Landis .•� 'a
a V DaughertyiRo�`a
Alternative 2
1 o
' Project Corridor
min
29
O
Alternative 1
Project Corridor' W -5313
ford
S- OldBeat� J�� �•• q
low
Road i eeCb
Load —�
Miles
TIP Project No. W -5516
Rowan County
Figure 2 - Other Projects
L...: Future Land Use Study Area (FLUSA)
+ Alternative 1 Project Corridor
r✓ Alternative 2 Project Corridor
Municipal Boundary
ED County Boundary
Water Body
��- Stream or Creek
Interstate
Major Road
Road
C TIP Project
TIP Interchange Improvement Project
Map Sources:
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Rowan County
US Census Bureau
NC One Map
ICA Engineering
0 North Carolina Counties
0 Rowan County
r*
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
�
a
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
1 gf,
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
'0
DIVISION 9
aenK
' Chini% ove Exit 168 f ti
`- I -3610
\ 152
I -3802B
s
P -5206 •� ,
153 L I v l �dge
.I CJ ��'•� oat/
Landis .•� 'a
a V DaughertyiRo�`a
Alternative 2
1 o
' Project Corridor
min
29
O
Alternative 1
Project Corridor' W -5313
ford
S- OldBeat� J�� �•• q
low
Road i eeCb
Load —�
Miles
TIP Project No. W -5516
Rowan County
Figure 2 - Other Projects
L...: Future Land Use Study Area (FLUSA)
+ Alternative 1 Project Corridor
r✓ Alternative 2 Project Corridor
Municipal Boundary
ED County Boundary
Water Body
��- Stream or Creek
Interstate
Major Road
Road
C TIP Project
TIP Interchange Improvement Project
Map Sources:
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Rowan County
US Census Bureau
NC One Map
ICA Engineering
0 North Carolina Counties
0 Rowan County

�y
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
bor,enw ° -Y DIVISION 9
ilis
�— Town Branch p
Da
Highest Praise 'Family
s: Worship Center
29
Kannapolis Moose
Family. � Ivor Lane
Y Y
Martin Mar-- t a Aggreg
Kannapolis Quarry
I \ i
Kiiu apolis
e�jdge Ro.
a�
— Pine Ridge
Baptist Church-
t
erty Road i
r-
R`
■
E
Oak Grove-Freewill
Baptist Church
Chastity---'-A,+
Lanes d Road
oY
Castlebrooke s
Farms
Deal Estates
.♦ r 1
Bostian Elementary
School
Road
Fieldcrest Cannon
Stadium
Ft I
Lane Street < Rowan County
t..._.._.._.._.._.�.. _.._.._.._.._.._.._.._.._.._.•�
,Lake
Fisher
63
Cabarrus-County
0 0.5 1
Miles
N
A
TIP Project No. W -5516
Rowan County
Figure 3 - Notable Features
Future Land Use Study Area (FLUSA)
Alternative 1 Project Corridor
- Alternative 2 Project Corridor
Cold Water Creek (WS -IV) Protected
® Cold Water Creek (WS -IV) Critical
Dutch Buffalo Creek (WS -II) Protected
Residential Subdivision
Bostian Elementary School
t Place of Worship
Kannapolis Moose Family Center
Fieldcrest Cannon Stadium
Martin Marrieta Kannapolis Quarry
Map Sources:
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Rowan County
US Census Bureau
NC One Map
ICA Engineering
0 North Carolina Counties
0 Rowan County

`�b�Tar•xh1��
Karma
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
DIVISION 9
29
ais
7�1d
e�
0
a
0
M
�I
a
v
� Iu
c
V;
,'•�•'.. °ad
Ivory Lane
f �FOYd•R °ad
10=80MISM10104 $0
:
i
L
♦
1
e
�—� �Old•SeatriJ �
oG
o
goad
i
i
�.
,Lake
Fisher Exit 63
OF
I)
Rowan Cou
Cabarrus,-CCount
0 0.5
Miles
N
A
TIP Project No. W -5516
Rowan County
Figure 4 - Available Land
Future Land Use Study Area (FLUSA)
F-lAlternative 1 Project Corridor
= Alternative 2 Project Corridor
Developed Land
Undeveloped/ Constrained Land
Undeveloped/ Unconstrained Land
Water Body
Stream or Creek
Interstate
Major Road
Road
Map Sources:
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Rowan County
US Census Bureau
NC One Map
ICA Engineering
North Carolina Counties
0 Rowan County

a�srnrpp
� AM
ti
CuN,
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PAT MCCRORY
GOVERNOR
January 12, 2015
Mr. Jason Mays
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, NC 28801
ANTHONY J. TATA
SECRETARY
Subject: Section 7 Concurrence Request on the Northern -long eared bat for
the proposed relocation of SR 1221 (Old Beatty Ford Road) from SR
1210 /SR 1221 to SR 1337 (Lentz Road Rowan County, North Carolina.
Division 9. Federal Aid Project No. HISP -1221 (18), TIP No. W -5516.
Dear Sir:
The North Carolina Department of Transportation ( NCDOT) proposes the relocation of Old
Beatty Ford Road (SR 1221) from its intersection with SR 1210Bostian Road (SR 1221 to SR
1337 (Lentz Road) Rowan County. The purpose is to improve vehicular safety on Old Beatty
Ford Road and to improve the deficient bridge over 1 -85. The project will construct a two -lane
(26- foot paved) road on new location with a new grade separation over 1 -85. The bridge
carrying existing Old Beatty Ford Road over 1 -85 will be removed with the construction of 1-
3802. A new five -span bridge with concrete girders will be constructed on the new location.
The proposed project will be approximately 3.1 miles long, and is proposed to be let in
September 2015.
The project has been reviewed for effects on the Northern long -eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis;
NLEB). A US Fish and Wildlife Service proposal for listing NLEB as an Endangered species
was published in the Federal Register in October 2013. The listing may become effective as
soon as April 2015. Furthermore, this species is included in USFWS °s current list of protected
species for Rowan County. NCDOT is working closely with the USFWS to understand how this
proposed listing may impact NCDOT projects.
Per the USFWS Northern Long -eared Bat Interim Conference and Planning Guidance (2014),
NCDOT assessed the project footprint for potential NLEB habitat. NCDOT Division 9
conducted a plan review of man -made structures (i.e. old building, barns, etc.) with field
verification on December 9, 2014 to determine if there were suitable structures that qualified as
habitat that would be removed during construction of the project. It was determined that there
were none. Additionally, the project was reviewed for bridges and culverts that were to be
removed. Original project plans called for the removal of an existing bridge over 1 -85 and a
three - barrel culvert over Cold Water Creek. The bridge and the culvert will no longer be
removed as part of W -5516, but will instead be removed as park of the I -85 Widening project (1-
3802). Therefore, these structures will not be surveyed as part of the W-5516 project. There are
DIvisioN OF HIGHWAYS DiVisiON DINE DIVISION OFFICE
376 SiLAS CREEK PARKWAY, WINSTON- SALEM, NC 27127
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]

no other structures that are proposed to be removed with W -5516 that qualify as suitable habitat
for NLEB. The proximity of subsurface mines within 0.5 miles and within 3 miles was examined
using the Mineral Resources Data System hosted by the USES. One subsurface mine was found
on the USGS database within 0.5 miles of the project study area; however, upon field verification
on November 14, 2014, the mine was not located. The area is now in residential housing. In
addition, there are no subsurface mines between 0.5 miles and 3 miles of the project vicinity.
Potential summer roosting and foraging habitat in the form of forested areas interspersed with
fields, and water sources does exist within the project area. In order to avoid potential impacts to
roosting bats, NCDOT has committed to winter tree clearing (between October 15 and April 15
of any year).
The closest known occurrence of NLEB is in Wilkes County (NI-IP 2001 mist net record), more
than 50 miles northwest of the project site. The next closest known occurrence is in Watauga
County (USFWS 2006 mine survey record), more than 60 miles northwest of the project site.
Based on the results of structure surveys conducted in 2014, proximity to known occurrences of
NLEB, potential foraging and roosting habitat within the study area, and using currently
available guidance from USFWS, if the NLEB becomes listed as an protected species under the
Endangered Species Act, the proposed project will have a biological conclusion of May Affect -
Not Likely to Adversely Affect for NLEB. Prior to tieing afforded protection under the
Endangered Species Act, we conclude that the proposed project is not likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of the NLEB.
NCDOT believes that the requirements of Section 7 (a)(2) of the ESA have been satisfied and
hereby request your concurrence. Thank you for your assistance with this project. If you have
any questions or need additional information, please contact Amy Euliss at (336) 747 -7802 or at
[e-mail].
Sine rely,
E{i t s
Division Environmental Officer, NCDOT Division 9
Cc: Mr. John Thomas, USACE (e -copy)
Neil Medlin, NCDOT Biological Surveys Group (e -copy)
Brett Abernathy, NCDOT Division 9 Program Manager (e -copy)
Michael Wood, The Catena Group (e -copy)
Mark Reep, ICA Engineering (e -copy)

Federal Aid #HSIP- 1221(18) TIP # W -5516 County: Rowan
CONCURRENCE FORM FOR ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS
Project Descriplion: Relocate Old Beatty Ford Road (SR 122 1) from Bostian Road (SR 12 10) to
Lentz Road (SR 1337)
On May 13, 2014, representatives of the
North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (HPO)
Other
Reviewed the subject project and agreed on the effects findings listed within the table an the
reverse of this signature page.
Signed:
5
'Zo�
Date
FHWA, for the Division Administrator, or other Federal Agency Date
Representative, HPO
Date

�.i
i
'oG
v;
i
s
00
N
.N.
C,
GI7
.L
`C
m
0
O
Q
N
E
O E
Z �
42
Rf
U
'C
@1
U
G
O
U
R.
V'l
En
U En
O
rn
C
a�
�o
�s
a
O
�
d
ems..
C]
O
C]
Q—
Q
Q
7
p Q
C
L-L
L
u
CZ1
LU
�
_ J
y
u7
'C3
w
Q
�-
0 r--,
Q.
Q�
c�a U
L IS
d
L
n
J s
�
b
� ay+
W y u
V7 -
rr ;;
� V
m
0
O
Q
N
E
O E
Z �
42
Rf
U
'C
@1
U
G
O
U
R.
V'l
En
U En
O
rn
C
a�
�o
�s

§ l:G
;f /}
;*
\ /
22 }/
22£;§ §2q / 2 \}

mw UVN
.,
(4)
/
\
w
2
/
%
/ \f �
e
7BQ
®�§
/] \E.
\ \ \ / \;A — §�
� 2\,
] ®� .
ƒ §«
ƒ a
r
oz
) \ 0.0
3
-( \ -
2 !
�f
Ei`u / '50
\}\
\ \2
/}
\

Federal Aid #HSIP- 1221(18) TIP ## W -5516 County: Rowan
CONCURRENCE FORM FOR PROPERTIES NOT ELIGIBLE FOR
THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES
Projeci Description: Relocate Old Beatty Ford Road (SR 1221) from Bostian Rd (SR 1210) to Lentz Road (SR 1337)
On JJaanuary 7, 2014, representatives of the
North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (NC -HPO)
❑ Federal Agency FHWA
[] Other
Reviewed the subject project at historic architectural resources photograph review session/consultation and
All parties present agreed
1 There are no properties over fitly years old within the project's Area of Potential Effects (APE).
1 There are no properties less than fifty years old which are considered to meet Criteria Consideration G within the
project's APE.
There are properties over fifty years old within the project's APE, but Qasel on the Vol; !�' tdorm tiot�� vai le
and the photographs ofeach property, the properties identified as H'Z5 Z8 re c8ns}crerred t o CeTtg bl�f r'
the National Register and no further evaluation of them is necessary. tographs of these properties are attached.
R/ There are no National Register- listed or Study Listed properties within the project's APE.
❑ All properties greater than 50 years of age located in the APE have been considered at this consultation, and based
upon the above concurrence, all compliance for historic architecture with Section lob of the National Historic
Preservation Act and GS 121 -12(a) has been completed for this project.
More information is requested on properties i �-P� P ,mil 2 �' _ � � i � � 1 � �� �q
Signed:
lcleJt,—� I---T-201
Representative D T Date
1 'I
Representative, NC -HPO Date
Representative, Federal Agency Dale
If a survey report is prepared, a final copy of this Form and Ole attached list will be included.

�w STAtr u
R�
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M. Bartos, Administrator
Governor Pat McCrory
Secretary Susan Motu
November 5, 2013
MEMORANDUM
TO: J. Brett Abernathy, PE, Project Manager
Division of Highway, Division 9
NC Department of Transportation
��
FROM: Ramona Bartos Uso. V,
Office of Archives and History
Deputy Secretary Kevin Cherry
SUBJECT: Relocate Old Beatty Ford Road from its Intersection with Bostian Road to Lentz Road,
W -5516, Rowan County, ER 13 -2317
Thank you for your letter of September 25, 2013, concerning the above referenced information. We apologize
for the delay in our response.
After reviewing the information provided, and based on the physical location, we have determined that there is
a high probability that prehistoric and historic archaeological features associated with past residents may exist
within the project area. We therefore recommend that if any earth moving activities are scheduled to take
place, that a comprehensive archaeological survey be conducted by an experienced archaeologist to identify and
evaluate the significance of any archaeological remains that may be damaged or destroyed by the proposed
project. Please note that our office now requests consultation with the Office of State Archaeology to discuss appropriate field
methodology prior to the archaeological field investigation.
If an archaeological field investigation is conducted, two copies of the resulting archaeological survey report, as
well as one copy of the appropriate site forms should be forwarded to us for review and comment as soon as
they are available and well in advance of any earth moving activities.
We have conducted a review of our maps and files and located the following structures of historic or
architectural importance within the general project area:
• Samuel Deal House (RW 0317);
• Yost Post Office (RW 0773);
• Ketner-Funderburke House (RW 1402);
• Correll- Albright House (RW 1365); and,
• Moses Ketner House and Farm (RW 1411).
We recommend that a qualified architectural historian identify and evaluate the National Register eligibility —
individually and as part of a potential historic district(s) —of the above properties and any other structures over
fifty (50) years of age within the project's area of potential effect (APE) and report the findings to us. The last
comprehensive architectural survey of Rowan County was completed in 1977.
Location: 109 East Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699 -4617 Telephone /Fax: (919) 807 - 6570/807 -6599

An architectural survey for improvements to Old Beatty Ford Road (W- 5313), between Lentz Road and Lower
Stone Church Road, was completed in 2012. Any properties that were evaluated during W -5313 that were
determined not eligible for listing do not need to be reevaluated as part of this project. Please note, the survey
for W -5313 determined that the Bostian School (RW 1772), at the intersection of Old Beatty Ford Road and
Morrow Road, was eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR
Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill- Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919- 807 -6579 or renee.gledhill-
earley ,ncdcr.gov. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the above referenced
tracking number.
cc: Matt Wilkerson, NCDOT
Mary Pope Furr, NCDOT
State Clearinghouse

�w STAtr u
R�
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M. Bartos, Administrator
Governor Pat McCrory
Secretary Susan Kluttz
May 13, 2014
MEMORANDUM
TO: Matt Wilkerson
Office of Human Environment
NCDOT Division of Highways�(��w
FROM: Ramona M. Barton F-�r-'4'U4x w40&
Office of Archives and History
Deputy Secretary Kevin Cherry
SUBJECT: Archaeological Survey and Evaluation, Proposed Relocation of Old Beatty Ford Road (SR
1221) from its Intersection with Bostian Road (SR1210/1221) to Lentz Road (SR1337),
W -5516, Rowan County, ER 13 -2317
Thank you for your letter of April 28, 2014, transmitting the above referenced document.
The report authors state that 11 archaeological sites, (31 RW250-31 RW260), were identified and determined not
eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. We concur with these assessments. Please note
that for purposes of discussion our office classifies isolated finds as archaeological sites.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR
Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill- Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919- 807 -6579 or renee.gledhill-
earle ncdcr.gov. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the above referenced
tracking number.
Location: 109 East Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699 -4617 Telephone /Fax: [phone] -6599

tilr li i 11Mr , tIt'I
(Version 1.2; Released September 2011)
North Carolina Department of Transportation ( l
Highway Stormwater Program /
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
FOR LINEAR ROADWAY PROJECTS
Project /TIP No.: W -5516
County(ies):
Rowan Page 1 of 4
General Project Information
Project No.:
W -5516
Project Type: New Location Date: 10/24/2014
NCDOT Contact:
Brett Abernathy, PE
Contractor / Designer:
Istacey Bailey, PE
Address:
NCDOT Division 9
375 Silas Creek Parkway
Winston Salem, 27127
Address:
ICA Engineering, Inc.
5121 Kingdom WaySuite 100
Raleigh, NC 27607
Phone:
336-747-7800
Phone:
919-900-1602
Email:
[e-mail]
Email:
sbaile icaen .com
City/Town:
Kannapolis
County ies :
Rowan
River Basin(s):
Yadkin -Pee Dee
CAMA County?
1 No
Primary Receiving Water:
Cold Water Creek, Town Branch
NCDWQ Stream Index No.:
13-17-9-4(0.5), 12- 84 -1 -2
NCDWQ Surface Water Classification for Primary Receiving Water
Primary:
Water Su I IV WS -IV
Water Su I IV WS -IV
Supplemental:
Other Stream Classification:
None
303(d) Impairments:
None
Buffer Rules in Effect
N/A
Project Description
Project Length (lin. Miles or feet):
2.39 Miles
Surrounding Land Use: Low density residential and agricultural.
Proposed Project
Existing Site
Project Built -Upon Area ac.
10.60
ac.
2.60 ac.
Typical Cross Section Description:
Two 11' wide lanes with 2' paved shoulders. Total shoulder width of 6'.
Average Daily Traffic (veh /hr /day):
Design /Future:
5100
Existing: 2200
General Project Narrative:
The North Carolina Department of Transportation Division 9 Offices proposes to relocate Old Betty Ford Road (SR 1221) from its intersection with Bostian Road (SR
1210/1221) to Lentz Road (SR 1337) in Rowan County. The project will construct a two -lane road on new location with a new grade seperation over I -85 near Kannapolis,
Landis, and China Grove. The bridge carrying existing Old Betty Ford Road over 1 -85, which is deficient, will be removed as part of this project. The proposed project will have
a straighter alignment that reduces horizontal and vertical curves to improve saftey.
References

l- ligi'tway North Carolina Department of Transportation
7+i1�+1
-., .. Highway Stormwater Program
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN` "'°
(Version 1.2; Released September 2011) FOR LINEAR ROADWAY PROJECTS
Project/TIP No.: W -5516 County (ies): Rowan Page 2 of 4
Project Environmental Summary
Surface Water Impacts
Sheet
No.
Station
From / To
Feature
Impacted
Water/Wetland/
Buffer Type
Receiving Surface
Water Name
NRTR Map
ID
NCDWQ Stream
Index
NCDWQ Surface
Water Classification
303(d)
Impairments
Type of
Impact
Existing
SCM
Proposed
SCM
4
22 +58 -L- RT
Stream
Intermittent
UT to Town Branch
SC
12- 84 -1 -2
WS -Iv
None
Culvert
N/A
Swale
24 +35 -L- LT
5
30 +92 -L- LT
Wetland
Bottomland
I Hardwood
Town Branch
WE
12- 84 -1 -2
WS -Iv
None
Fill
N/A
31 +70 -L- LT
5
31 +66 -L- LT
Stream
Perennial
Town Branch
SA
12- 84 -1 -2
WS -Iv
None
Culvert
N/A
Swale
32 +16 -L- RT
5
30 +97 -L- RT
Wetland
Bottomland
Hardwood
Town Branch
WB
12- 84 -1 -2
WS -Iv
None
Excavation
N/A
Swale
31 +19 -L- RT
5
37 +06 -L- RT
Stream
Perennial
UT to Town Branch
SB
12- 84 -1 -2
WS -Iv
None
Culvert
N/A
37 +50 -L- LT
7
58 +66 -L- RT
Stream
Perennial
Cold Water Creek
SG
13- 17- 9- 4 -(0.5)
WS -Iv
None
Stabilization
N/A
PFSH
58 +86 -L- RT
9/10
89 +70 -L- LT
Wetland
Headwater Wetland
WF
13- 17- 9- 4 -(0.5)
WS -Iv
None
Clearing
N/A
90 +66 -L- LT
10
99 +08 -L- RT
Stream
Intermittent
UT to Cold Water
Creek
Si
13- 17- 9- 4 -(0.5)
WS -Iv
None
Culvert
N/A
99 +33 -L- LT
11
107+80-L- LT
Stream
Perennial
UT to Cold Water
Creek
SE
13- 17- 9- 4 -(0.5)
WS -Iv
None
Culvert
N/A
108 +17 -L- RT
11
108 +30 -L- RT
Stream
Intermittent
UT to Cold Water
Creek
SF
13- 17- 9- 4 -(0.5)
WS -Iv
None
Culvert
N/A
109 +21 -L- LT
List all stream and surface water impact locations regardless of jurisdiction or size.
Equalizer Pipes to be noted as a minimization of impacts.
All proposed SCMs listed must also be listed under Swales, Preformed Sour Holes and other Energy Dissipators, or Other Stormwater Control Measures.
Description of Minimization of Impacts or Mitigation
Concentration of flow in gutter sections with storm drainage systems was minimized on this project. The majority of the project has open shoulders where the runoff can be treated through the
shoulders, fill slopes, and roadside cut ditches. In the areas of shoulder berm gutter a grass swale or preformed scour hole was used for treatment and velocity control of the runoff.
References

Elio, rwav, North Carolina Department of Transportation
Stornlwktr
Highway Stormwater Program
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
(Version 1.2; Released September 2011) FOR LINEAR ROADWAY PROJECTS
Project/TIP No.: W -5516 Count ies : Rowan Page 3 of 4
Swales
Sheet
No.
Station
(From / To)
Stream
Crossing
Station
Base Width
(ft)
Front Slope
(H:V)
Back Slope
(H:V)
Drainage
Area
(ac)
Recommended
Treatment Length
(ft)
Actual
Length
(ft)
Longitudinal
Slope
%)
Q2
cfs
V2
(fps)
Q10
(cfs )
V10
((fps)
Rock
Checks
Used
4
25 +00 -L- LT
32 +00 -L-
0.0
4
3
0.17
17
50
2.00%
0.7
0.9
0.9
1.0
No
25 +50 -L- LT
5
31 +00 -L- RT
32 +00 -L-
2.0
3
3
4.00
400
1.00%
8.6
1.6
11.2
1.7
No
31 +80 -L- RT
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Yes 0 No Have minimum design criteria, as presented in the NCDOT Best Management Practices Toolbox, Version 1 (March 2008), been met and verified? If No,
provide further explanantion of why design criteria was not met.
Additional Comments
The terrain did not allow for a longer treatment swale from Sta. 31 +00 -L- to Sta. 31 +80 -L- LT. Concentration of flow in curb and storm drainage systems was minimized on this project. In the areas
where there are shoulder berm gutter a grass swale or preformed scour hole was used. Through out the rest of the project treatment of the runoff is through the open shoulders, fill slopes and roadside
cut ditches.

WETLAND PERMIT IMPACT SUMMARY
WETLAND IMPACTS SURFACE WATER IMPACTS
Site
No.
Permanent
Fill In
Wetlands
(ac)
Temp.
Fill In
Wetlands
(ac)
Excavation
in
Wetlands
(ac)
Mechanized
Clearing
in Wetlands
(ac)
Hand
Clearing
in
Wetlands
(ac)
Permanent
SW
impacts
(ac)
Temp.
SW
impacts
(ac)
Existing
Channel
Impacts
Permanent
(ft)
Existing
Channel
Impacts
Temp.
(ft)
Natural
Stream
Design
(ft)
Station
Structure
(From/To)
Size /Type
1
-L- 22 +58 TO 24 +35
30" RCP -III
0.01
< 0.01
158
61
BANK STABILIZATION
< 0.01
11
2
-L- 31 +00 TO 32 +16
2 @ 11' x 8' RCBC
0.01
< 0.01
0.02
0.03
< 0.01
140
31
BANK STABILIZATION
0.02
88
3
-L- 37 +06 TO 37 +50
48" RCP -IV
0.01
< 0.01
182
19
BANK STABILIZATION
< 0.01
14
4
-L- 58 +66 TO 58 +86
LATERAL T BASE DITCH
< 0.01
18
5
-L- 89 +70 TO 90 +66
LATERAL V DITCH
0.02
6
-L- 99 +26 TO 99 +30
36" RCP -III
0.02
< 0.01
223
23
BANK STABILIZATION
< 0.01
12
7A
-L- 107 +80 TO 108 +17
1 @ 8'x 7' RCBC,
< 0.01
< 0.01
79
32
BANK STABILIZATION
< 0.01
44
7B
-L- 108 +30 TO 109 +21
FLOODPLAIN PIPE 72" RCP -III
0.01
< 0.01
80
23
BANK STABILIZATION
< 0.01
38
L j
TOTALS':
0.01
0.01
0.04
0.17
0.06
1087
189
0
'Rounded totals are sum of actual impacts
NOTES:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
W -5516, ROWAN COUNTY
OLD BEATTY FORD ROAD FROM WEST OF
BOSTIAN ROAD INTERSECTION TO LENTZ ROAD
9/29/2014
ATN Revised 3/12/13 SHEET OF

v
Z
c'
z
E;
46
�a
u
rr
N
U
See Sheet 9 -A For Index of Sheets
See Sheet I -B For Conventlonal Symbols
TO_ 0 =29
D
r�
N Z
N 0
y
CO I.- �y
O
00 �
F4
/ SITE 1
SITE 2
BEGIN TIP PROJE(
POT STA 15+50.00
W -5516
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
ROWAN.COUNTY
LOCATION. OLD BEATTY FORD ROAD FROM WEST
OF BOSTIAN ROAD INTERSECTION TO
LENTZ ROAD
TYPE OF WORK: GRADING, PAVING, DRAINAGE, TRAFFIC
CONTROL, SIGNING PAVEMENT MARKINGS
AND STRUCTURES
WETLAND AND SURFACE WATER IMPACTS PERMIT
N
BEGIN BRIDGE
L- STA. 57 +10.0
N N,zM
}'—SW
CC V�
y O
C7
SITE 3
SITE 4
SITE 5 —\ SITE 6
7 8
-L-
RELOCATtD OLD BEATTY V0 D RD.
-L- STA. 63 +30.00
NCDOT CONTACT: BRETT ABERNATHY, PE
DIVISION 9 PROJECT MANAGER
m
3 V a
0
c
d
0
5
n
Y
u
L
Oa
Y V
GRAPHIC SCALES
50 25 0 o i 0
PLANS
50 25 0 50 100
PROFILE (HORIZONTAL)
10 5 0 10 20
PROFILE (VERTICAL) Wj
DESIGN
DATA
PROJECT LENGTH
ADT =
PROJECT ENGINEER
HENRY BARE
LETTING DATE:
SEPTEMBER 16, 2015
ADT =
W -5516
DHV =
%
LENGTH ROADWAY TIP PROJECT W -5516 = 2.27 MILE
D =
%
44105.1.FD
T =
%
LENGTH STRUCTURE TIP PROJECT W -5516 = 0.12 MILE
V =
50 MPH
* TTST =
DUAL
TOTAL LENGTH TIP PROJECT W -5516 = 2.39 MILE
FUNC CLASS =
COLLECTOR
REGIONAL
TIER
SITE 7
11
END TIP PRO
POC STA 141 +
f N
Z � L
N W w
O �
J _
W -5516
CLEARING ON THIS PROJECT SHALL BE PERFORMED
TO THE LIMITS ESTABLISHED BY METHOD
Prepared for the
North Carolina Department
of Transportatlon l�
In the offloe of: Engineering
2012 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS
DAVID C. WALLER PE
RIGHT OF WAY DATE:
SEPTEMBER 15, 2014
PROJECT ENGINEER
HENRY BARE
LETTING DATE:
SEPTEMBER 16, 2015
PROJECT DESIGN ENGINEER
W -5516
a <
STATE
STATE PROJECT REFERENCE NO.
MEE
MEETS
N.
W -5516
STATE PROI.NO,
P. A PR.. NO.
ESCRIPTION
44105.1.FD
HSIP - 122118
PE
N. C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
ROWAN COUNTY
PROJECT: W-5516
OLD ]BEATTY FORD ROAD
FROM WEST OF ]BOSTIAN
ROAD INTERSECTION
TO LENTZ ROAD
SHEET OF
NPERMIT
DRAWING
�z
SHEET _1_ OF
j
iGN
�a
INCOMPLETE PLANS
D NOT USE FOR R/W ACQUISFTION
PRELIMINARY PLANS
DO NOT USE FOR CONSTRUCTION
HYDRAULICS ENGINEER
P.E.
SIGNATURE:
ROADWAY DESIGN
ENGINEER
P.E.

Z
�w
- U
I WETLAND AND SURFACE WATER IMPACTS PERMIT
O
CN
Ln
cle
Ln
°I ^
Z I I'a-A�s'caN�
1^ 1 I
yl I6
0'I
mW O. A CAROL A. LPE A I IF
EI
I LIP I I
RICKY a.& CAROL A. u E
FA" DEAL In JOYCE D. DEAL
I I�
O
52? I
cp
9 - - - --
-�� zzasr
TO US — ------ °
_
_ Ir I
29 ETAI E01 -tea I F
TO LAND.-Ts -- I — _ - N
GRADE TO
-- -� EIPp RETAIN \\ DRAI
_ - - - - -- _
OEIP
12" CMP Al
o -
o
I I _ ° II
FAIL DEAL LPE � � _ � I I 4 PIP
JAI D. MILI.PB HTR
DA# M** Q
DP , 0
EiP
100 0
50 100
SCALE: III= 100' HORIZ. TOTAL PROJECT LENGTH: 2.39 MILES
PROPOSED 30" RCP -III
I
/0
cs WAY4E F. 9AMM M)o Jt
X
--- - 4
--------------------------- E-- 4`?
C
M
I
2
ow p
BANK STABILIZATION
INCOMI]PL E
lE PLANS
DO NOT USE FOR
! W ACQUISITION
]PR E]LIM[IIN
RY ]P]LANS
DO NOT USE FO
CONSTRUCTION
EN BG
ST 24 +90 -L- T
r._ m
c
I 0.5' �
to
GI
0
-- o
-. - - - -- Ln
---- - - - - -- - -- - - - - -- �� m
_
aNC /�� E BEGINNING OF
\0 - 0 DRAIN JURISIDICTIONAL STREAM E BURY INVERT 0.5'
O
F % rs
- - - - -1 __ _ --
\ \\ D -- __ - - SEE ENLARGED AREA
\_--- - ......................... --------------------- - - - - -- ---------------
ON SHEET 4A
DI � F - - - -- -- ..
DI
ETA / q
I
65T
KAWAPOLAS LODGE NO. rrn
; RE T IN PLAN VIEW
a c SITE 1
N\
LEGEND
% \ \ \\ N ®
IMPACTS OSE
IN SURFACE WATER
ESTH*ALT \o 4
DENOTES PERMANENT
IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
--

Z
tj
z
Z
sw
WETLAND AND SURFACE WATER IMPACTS PERMIT
co0
0
N
VI
co
Q
Z
0 ANNIE R. MORGAN
/0
BANK STABILIZATION
\E
BEGIN SBG
� STA. 22 +25 -L-
50 0
F
25 50
SCALE: I "= 100' HORIZ.
BK GAR
BEGINNING OF
JURISDICTIONAL STREAM F E
/ BURY INVERT 0.5'
ENLARGED AREA
PLAN VIEW
SITE 1
EN •SBG
ST 24 +90 -L-
m
E
w C
i
B U RY I T 0.5'
2G1
MEMO
INC®M PL E
E P1LANS
DO NOT USE FOR
! W ACQUISITION
PRE]LIM[IIN
RY PLANS
DO NOT USE FO
CONSTRUCTION
LEGEND
®DENOTES
TEMPORARY
IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
®DENOTES
PERMANENT
IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER

v
z
Z
v�
�w
�v
1
Wy WETLAND AND SURFACE WATER IMPACTS PERMIT
p -L
i
' r 1 / 151111'al X >
N. C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
r
CV �I
r , r
i 1
,
/0
DIVISION OF )E][][IC]HWA�9
1
1
ROWAN COUNTY
L
,
1
,
-�� #A* SU m LAI Jt - ; RPROJECT: W-5516
OLD BEATTY FORD ROAD
i `--- - - - - -_ Z _ i -' - _ - ` FRONT WEST OF BOSTIAN
i X115 oNC %' ROAD INTERSECTION
,
i _ - -- TO ]L]ENTZ ROAD
1
,
SHEET OF
- - -- `__ BIM, R 4 CAROL♦ LPE a I� i
PERMIT DRAWING
l I SHEET OF
"GL I
i - ;— ` `♦ II r N -DTI i
i` —
I Itlw L&
LPE � ,-
v - � � ��
v JOYCE 0. DEAI.
_I -- 158128 ` _ `` << i I �/' ♦`• `\` ,`� ' `� ` \ \' 1
�``
�.` `` ♦v U.YV 1$&(D i / �!� `♦ '� v '� r I i EN B
oy ` `, ; r r ', ;I �7 5 4%90x' L -'•
',p AMY •♦ _ � ` ) , I I ` V ' 1 �♦ _ L
fit+ !/��{q�
�
- --' -- I'� `' Kam__ -- 7�{1 `♦ '. E _ `'per ` , v�. '` a ,_ -
-r v - _ _ -_ - - _''r-_---t��---- - - -_��
Sol/
L _ 1
BAI�,ICYABI,L�ZfATIt�Nr is 1
TO-— -
` 0�4 _ - NI
To---- — — - - -vcif'
•r —� •- --__ -_ = — - , GRADE
ANDi$� -E ea 775• _RETAIN 1 - \ DRAIN
' exfsrinc w '`` _ TAI _ ' -- - -�- - -- _ / I C� �•r� i Cif
'0 I G
-- --
- ii- , ,- - ___ -1Jp` �� - __I _ •f � � ���`.SfC• -` I \III i i ,' I I I 1 ii ��!''� �,' /, �_ --
i r
_
� �
1
I
Q
70a� N �� BEGINNIIY�'' O
W lMv i
%� - `♦ _ o :RAIN _ - JURISIDICTIO NI4L'TRE
" -- - - -- -- - --
♦ ♦ ��_
S� `♦ ` 1 ♦♦ .i - - -_ ---- -r �___ _ - _ _______ -- _ _
o----- - - - - -- =------- - - - - -- - - ; - - - - -- - - ©1�- — ---- _d�____--- _-- - - - - --
- - - -- - - -- - - - _
` - -- - - -- ------ - - - - -- �i " -------------- - --- - - - - -- -- - - --
Q _ -------- - - - - -- -:off - - - -- -- --
' - -- -- -- o <t -- - - - - --- -- - -- -
_.�6 L - -- - -- _ - -------------------------- ----- - - - -- _ -_ - - - - - -- -
- -- - - -- - - --
- - -
-- - - - -
i 1 ``♦ ETA / %\ ; `\`
-
-__-
,
I j 1 \ , \ 4, 851 _____— i - - --
.
i
♦ `�. '. _ o�r i -- KA IS LODGE 4m !m i - - - -- - - - - - --
� , i I ' , ' ^ i 955•- - -,�� `♦ \-- ``�'• ---�' w \ \\ \ `' \ -- -- -'' // ,',
c
PLAN VIfW,, "'=
• �� A , 'A r -oar LEGEND
- -- - ��;,A , _ = " ; ; ® DENOTES TEMPORARY
100 �i" �`` IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
- 6Q M DENOTES PERMANENT
50 ��� 6p - _ vIv �;` /� ® IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
TOTAL PROJECT LENGTH. 2.39 MILES
SCALE: III= 100' HORIZ. - -
PROPOSED 30" RCP -III - ----- - - - - -' -
INC ®NIP L E
E PLANS
DO NOT USE
ACQUISITION
PR E LINIIN
RY PLANS
DO NOT USE FO
CONSTRUCTION

Z
tj
z
z
13
sw
-U
WETLAND AND SURFACE WATER IMPACTS PERMIT
0
0
N
VI
co
co
Q
Z
-
wra
S 2,
I
I , -- - -------
60 wL-q
wpm wpm
�\ ANNIE R. M6�6AN
DO NOT USE FOR
1
PRE]LIM[IIN
RY PLANS
,
CONSTRUCTION
O
BEGINNING OF
I It
-_ �����
/Q
- -BURY INVERT- -0.5' %- -
F.
I
, BANK,, S` ,,-
,t
,A$0ZATI0N
p
I
BE dIN SBGy�
I ;
-
wra
S 2,
I
I , -- - -------
60 wL-q
wpm wpm
E P1LANS
DO NOT USE FOR
! W ACQUISITION
PRE]LIM[IIN
RY PLANS
DO NOT USE FO
CONSTRUCTION
IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
BEGINNING OF
-_ �����
- -BURY INVERT- -0.5' %- -
F.
-
wra
S 2,
I
I , -- - -------
60 wL-q
wpm wpm
50 0
25 50
SCALE: I "= 100' HORIZ.
9
----- - - - - -- -- - - - - --
------------ - - - - -- - - - - -- _
-
- - - -- - -
ENLARGED AREA
PLAN VIEW
SITE 1
INC®M PL E
E P1LANS
DO NOT USE FOR
! W ACQUISITION
PRE]LIM[IIN
RY PLANS
DO NOT USE FO
CONSTRUCTION
IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
BEGINNING OF
JURISDICTIONAL STRgAM
- -BURY INVERT- -0.5' %- -
50 0
25 50
SCALE: I "= 100' HORIZ.
9
----- - - - - -- -- - - - - --
------------ - - - - -- - - - - -- _
-
- - - -- - -
ENLARGED AREA
PLAN VIEW
SITE 1
INC®M PL E
E P1LANS
DO NOT USE FOR
! W ACQUISITION
PRE]LIM[IIN
RY PLANS
DO NOT USE FO
CONSTRUCTION
LEGEND
®DENOTES
TEMPORARY
IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
®DENOTES
PERMANENT
IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER

N
O
w
z
i
Z
O
it
N
M
Q
0
0
a
z
v
N
N
O
zH
zw
z=
s=
�v
WETLAND AND SURFACE WATER IMPACTS PERMIT
IO ^
0
N
�N
\H
M
0
Z
2 @ 11' x 8' RCBC 5121 Kingdom Way,
2 @ 11' x 8' RCBC EXCAVATION BURIED 1' ' Suite 100
BURIED 1' Raleigh,NC27607
NG EXCAVATION Engineering NO License No: F-0258
1.5' THICK
1.5' THICK ti (Typ )
(TYP.) ?
CLASS 'I' RIP RAP
CLASS 'I' RIP RAP w/GEOTE) TILE
- GEOTEXTILE
1' SILL 2' SILL 1' SILL 2' SILL
® EXCAVATION -55 CY ® EXCAVATION -35 CY
OUTLET CHANNEL INLET CHANNEL
(LOOKING DOWNSTREAM) (LOOKING DOWNSTREAM)
(NOT TO SCALE) (NOT TO SCALE(
100 0
50 100
SCALE: III= 100' HORIZe
SEE ENLARGED AREA
ON SHEET 5B
W
O m
PROJECT REFERENCE NO.
SHEET NO.
—5516
5
RW SHEET NO.
RY PLANS
SEE
ENLARGED AREA O
HYDRAULICS
ENGINEER
ON SHEET 5A LMm mm or ow
ENGINEER
/ l L 1
\_1 /Li1,
V SILLS SPACED @
LEFT A. 22' CENTERS IN
LEFT BARREL OF CULVERT
/S Y BANK STABILIZATION
.L�
^'� R'
AND 2' SILLS SPACED @
m
APPROX, 22' CENTERS IN
RIGHT BARREL OF
CULVERT
40 LF OF INLET
.� %Q� CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT
EST P RAP
EST. 85 SY GEOTE)MLE
� �
o
m
O
BEGIN SBG
Z
STA. 29 +50 -L-
..�
LL
/
Lu
FS-II
Ln
2GI
2
Lu
W E
(j 2
E
E
2GI 5
—�
—�
- - - -- —__ =
2 @ 11' 8' RCBC
BURIED 1'
SKEW = —j
99 = =_ --
--
0
2GI\�
O _ f— _ - - -
Q
2GI
IF
'- - - -- p
--
� -
,,_ -- - -- ---- -_�_ -- -
R
BANK
e E
ro m STABILIZATION 3
PSRZ lz' i .
`c TDE l0
j, F m LAlpis OF OW
Q
Q Z
3: 40 LF OF OUTL
\ CHANNEL MI LO JE ENT
I� EST. 50 TONS CL. '1' RIP RAP
AN* L
EST. 75 SY GEOTEXTILE
LIJ
Z
J
V
eP
r
PLAN VIEW \s
s
SITE 2 \
TOTAL PROJECT LENGTH: 2.39 MILES �\
PROPOSED CULVERT: 11' x 8' RCBC
KAWAPOLJS LODGE 4m R22
100 0
50 100
SCALE: III= 100' HORIZe
SEE ENLARGED AREA
ON SHEET 5B
W
O m
PROJECT REFERENCE NO.
SHEET NO.
—5516
5
RW SHEET NO.
RY PLANS
ROADWAY DESIGN
CONSTRUCTION
HYDRAULICS
ENGINEER
ENGINEER
INCOI®'I]P]LE
E 1PLANS
DO NOT USE FOR
/W ACQUISITION
]PR E]LIMIIN
RY PLANS
DO NOT USE FO
CONSTRUCTION
N. C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
IDIVISION OF H[IG]HWAYS
ROWAN COUNTY
PROJECT: W -5516
OLD BEAT TY FORD ROAD
FROM WEST OF EOSTIAN
ROAD INTERSECTION
TO 1LENTZ ROAD
SHEET OF
PERMIT DRAWING
SHEET _ OF _ ;19GLISfl
H �o
\ Z
p
� � O
M
BANK
STABILIZATION -'
EQ
END SBG
STA. 37 +22
BURY INVERT Z
CLAS J RIP RAP
BA 5 ONLY
E 26 TONS
49 SY GT
'
E�P 4
PAN VIEW
SITE 3
TOTAL PROJEC /LENGTH: 2.39 MILES
PROPOSED 4/7 RCP -IV
CC
LEGEND
DENOTES FILL IN
WETLAND
* * * * DENOTES MECHANIZED
* * * *r ** CLEARING
DENOTES EXCAVATION
IN WETLAND
✓p\�S
\\ ® DENOTES TEMPORARY
\ \\ IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
I ® DENOTES PERMANENT
IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER

Z
V
uC
Q
d
a
N
d
V
Z
z
Z
vL5
�w
aV
IN SBG
K. 29 +50 -L-
FS -11
WETLAND AND SURFACE WATER IMPACTS PERMIT
V SILLS SPACED @-'
APPROX. 22' CENTERS IN
LEFT BARREL OF CULVERT
AND 2' SILLS SPACED @
APPROX. 22' CENTERS IN
RIGHT BARREL OF
CULVERT
F
50 0
25 50
SCALE: I "= 100' HORIZ.
�A--
i
✓S -A
Ull
v
�
*
at
J
1�
r
c
2
F,
h
E
BANK STABILIZATION
40 LF OF INLET
CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT
EST. 55 TONS CL. '1' RIP RAP
EST. 85 SY GEOTEXTILE
2 @ 11' x 8' RCBC
BURIED 1'
SKEW = 90°
BANK STABILIZATION
F
In
0
O
N
C/)
coH
co
Z
PROJECT REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO.
s1zTx;D�aQnway, —5516 5A
'sD;ce i oo NC 27607 RNJ SHEET NO,
Engineering NC License N,: F -0258 ROADWAY DESIGN HYDRAULICS
ENGINEER ENGINEER
E—
PTDE \ ml - m
C3)
LANDIS CHURCH OF GOD
\ 40 LF OF OUTLET
CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT
I EST. 50 TONS CL. '1' RIP RAP
���� ��EST. 75 SY GEOTEXTILE75 SY GEOTEXTILE
ENLARGED
PLAN VIEW
SITE 2
INCOM PLE
E PLANS
DO NOT USE FOR
/W ACQUISITION
PRELIMIIN
R Y" PLANS
DO NOT USE FO
CONSTRUCTION
N. C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
ROWAN COUNTY
]PROJECT: W -5516
OLID BEATTY FORD ROAD
FROM WEST OF ROSTIAN
ROAD INTERSECTION
TO ]LENTZ ROAD
SHEET OF
PERMIT DRAWING
SHEET _ OF _ I(;I IC
2 @ 11' x 8' RCBC
BURIED 1'
EXCAVATION
1.5' THICK -
(TYP.)
CLASS 'I' RIP RAP
w/GEOTEXTILE
1' SILL -- \-2' SILL
EXCAVATION-35 CY
INLET CHANNEL
(LOOKING DOWNSTREAM)
(NOT TO SCALE)
2 @ 11' x 8' RCBC EXCAVATION
BURIED 1'
1-5' THICK
(TYP.) -? N
CLASS 'I' RIP RAP l
W/GEOTEXTILE
V SILL 2' SILL
EXCAVATION = 55 CY
OUTLET CHANNEL
(LOOKING DOWNSTREAM)
(NOT TO SCALE)
LEGEND
DENOTES FILL IN
WETLAND
• * * *
DENOTES MECHANIZED
CLEARING
®
DENOTES EXCAVATION
IN WETLAND
®DENOTES
TEMPORARY
IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
®DENOTES
PERMANENT
IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER

z
0
_N
M
U
Q
Z
O
0
0
M
Q
0
w
a
Z
f
N
N
O
v
Z
Z
�w
�U
WETLAND AND SURFACE WATER IMPACTS PERMIT
E
50 0
25 50
SCALE: III= 100' HORIZ.
E
BANK STABILIZATION
END SBG I 1�
STA.37 +22 -L-
BURY INVERT
CLAS , RIP RAP
BAN S ONLY
E 26 TONS
O
O
N
y
J co
\H
M
a
Z
ELI
w TD
Uj
0 4
HW ~ i
G
4=
I� 1
EIE
,r
\ \
FF�
G�
ENLARGED
PLAN VIEW
SITE 3
F4
aRy -S BARBQUE 'NC.
R
Fw
I PROJECT REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO.
sJZJ K;IIgdDm way, —55/6 5B
sDu� ion
Raleigh, NC 27607 RAN SHEET NO.
Engineering NCL -.- Nu F02SS ROADWAY DESIGN HYDRAULICS
.7 .7 ENGINEER ENGINEER
INCOMP1LE
E PLANS
DO NOT USE FOR
! W ACQUISITION
]PR EI,IMIN
RY PLANS
DO NOT USE FO
CONSTRUCTION
N. C. DEPT. OF TRANS]PO1RTATION
IIDIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
ROWAN COUNTY
]PROJECT: W -5516
OLdD BEATTY FORD ROAD
FROM WEST OF ROSTIAN
ROAD INTERSECTION
TO ]LENTZ ROAD
SHEET OF
PERMIT DRAWING
SHEET _ OF
LEGEND
®DENOTES
TEMPORARY
IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
®
DENOTES PERMANENT
IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER

N
O
w
u
i
Z
0
0
N
M
Q
0
0
a
w
v
i
N
N
O
zH
zw
z
° � o
°wo
WETLAND AND SURFACE WATER IMPACTS PERMIT 2 @ „'x 6'RCBG ICAr I6gh,N °m Way,
2 @ 11'', 8' RCBC EXCAVATION BURIED 1' Suite IOf)
BURIED 1' Raleigh, NC 27607
NG EXCAVATION Engineering NC Li—II, Nu: F02.55
1.5'T HICK
1.5' THICK ^; (TYR )
O TYR.) ?
Q CLASS TRIP RAP `V
N CLASS 'I' RIP RAP WGEOTEXTILE
H .EOTEXTILE
H 1' SILL 2' SILL 1' SILL 2' SILL
® EXCAVATION -55 CY ® EXCAVATION -35 CY
co OUTLET CHANNEL INLET CHANNEL
Q (LOOKING DOWNSTREAM) (LOOKING DOWNSTREAM)
Z(NOT TO SCALE) (NOT TO SCALE(
PROJECT REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO.
—5516
5
RW SHEET NO.
ROADWAY DESIGN
ENGINEER
HYDRAULICS
ENGINEER
N. C. DEPT. OF TRANS]POII$TATION
IIDIIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
to ROWAN COUNTY
�• . -may ( l J.' i i� 1 I ` 1'` �` �v �' �' � '� 1 1 1 I 1 ' 1 . � , , it ', Av � � - -" %� ,% r' � /�' � i % PlEB ®JEC'JC: W-55II6
�,— o SEE ENLARGED AREA
OLD PEA II Il V FORD ROAD
'O o IW,I,
'� v v `,v, `,1 ` M 11,1,1 ',01 , �;" 1v ` _ ' J ri ' r / r
ON SHEET A. , 1 , , , ', , 1 `� , v ` ' , ' , r , , / ; FROM wE5°II° OF B®S°II°IAN
v/ I 18OAID INTERSECTION
$-- ��
1 v `
/ "� , i� _� - -_ 1 IAPPROR. 22' C NTERS`I IN ` / ` v ` `� 1 ` ` �'�` v ♦ � v ` ` ` �`` ' IO LENIIZ ROAD
/, �� �•O ♦ ,v / , /I r/r
BAtyJK;'
SHEET ®F
BARSILLSOSPA EDE@ �S\. �
A,1'PPROX X22' CENTERS IN. �, H ` \ (�{ ' / i i ' PERMIT DRAWING
___ �\ 'IryGHT BARREL O� .. �` _ `I i 1 �0 LF'Od \INLEF � %" `. � 'I jll I'I Ii'�� `5 \` _ -S E NLHRG � �Ai 'J `. (� 1
- -_ ` 1 \ 1 `WLVERTI .( �� ITQ 1 ` 1 ' o H NEl kNLET, �M tJ[`111 1, I `\ ``, � /
A� SHEET OF
-
£`S - - --
\ � " ` SY GEppTE ILE 1 I
,
,
- - - _-- - -
�O "
---
' � -
` \ ' `. E , ` \\ - 'S " o 11-- �------------ ----• -9 L - -- _------ \ ` - -- - - - -- ------------
-- -- - �
__ - -_- r r
' __ _ _ ___ _ ___ __� \ `� ,' - - \`\ `\"`1 `�1� /' —' _.. I `�` \ \` 1\ 1 '1 \ � �\ O `E
----- t O£ � EGIN SBG
- '
_
Z 0 _- �,'_ -'- --- - - - - -- _
-_ � �. 1 � l i i r \ ��`� AA �s1 • -���1� , � fl�h� ����I
, � 1
_
- v VV1 .� n
O
w -- -------- \ �`� Li I
sa
_ . 11`1`11 ,� ;'� f \ `
W
- _
I ,
W ``__ --- _' v �'y.' v1 v,v11
> k �
to - - ` /
J
E /r
l i �\ BURJD 1x8 R�
SKEW`,- 00° v�' �` 1 1;1 ,1 \`� \`� \�1i ��!r `I \I �i
O ` +
I '
0 % ' 00
Vo
� 1 '
,. 7 Ua. -` � \` � '� � �; 11 F \ _I TI____ �.. `��• ���1\1` \1 X111 `� \`\�� 11\ -�i '\� / � 1\`,1`1 I `
+
�-- '� - =� :,�- I' ' ;�I,I �;?1; _,BAN
N E- 111 –Q– o BANK" �;
T 1 Ty
_ - SIAB141Z f1,90N'"
TABILIZATION: -
F—�1 1` `1111
�V 1I0,�(`T�'\ i j��``v11 � 111 TOE „ --------
- -- -- 1
%14RM4
W "ByRY%NVE ' ` `
CHMENT " - CLA5 1 W RAp .EST1' RIP RAP ``1 _ BA 3' ONEST; 75 GEOTEXTILE ` _ _ E 2'6 TO
Z 'iJ'
1. 111 \ 1__ \ � I
/I4 14
VIEW S -- - - - - -- .1 I '\ I V '�y�j ,
Si
`�� 2 — S ITS i
^ 1� `\\ \� \\ ``69\ _ - -- i
TOT4L PRQJECT NGTH: 239 MILES `TaTTCL- PRtSJEC ; L' NGT�iI'2i3�1 MILE'
1
\ \`
1 1 `
1
� i
PRO�SED \CULVERT: 11' x 8'`RCBC -PROPOSED d RAP -1V f 1 '
01 \ '/ ' �. �/ / i1 �\ K j�PO�,IS LIDM *,R22
`\
1\
`, 01 1 1 ', \ 1 \ `1 \ I I 1 I 1 ; ;' 1 1 I 'i 1 0 I �i ' � + '1 I , 1 ^ ````` ✓S S �_ ' I ' ' l i ' i ' i �i I �i 1
\`�� %
1
I / II 11
1 \ -
`1` \'1
111 11'11111 ,\ \ 1 \1 1 li + 11 'I IIIr/ � 1 III ,11 111 1�
\ r / \ 1 1
1I 1 \ 1
1 \ `I ' \ 1 ' 1 11
1 LEGEND
1' 111'1 `'' � 11 `�` \' � \ � `` ; 111
1,1
1 \
1 11 I 1
1 _
II i \
I
\ 1 111
1 - \
1 - DENOTES FILL IN
``: \ `\I 11` O S
`````
' 1 1 1 1
\ - WETLAND
-- -- ' `1
-- - 1\1 11
1
1
1
1
1 `
1 1 ,
1 '
\ 1 1 1
1 '
I '
1 ,
------ _- _-- - - -_ -- `.
_----------- - -__ , \ I \ _ \`
�,
1 `
li S 1 \1
___ —_— -------- -` \. \` 1 1 ; s `1 ` 1�1` \ 1 �`, 1 \ 1 \ • • DENOTES MECHANIZED
11 s
11 i 1 '1 i +' \1 `Jo �` `1 ; 1, \ �\` 1; �p.\111��11 \ * • r * CLEARING
i - `- _-- --------- - - - --- _ 1 `�
_ ________ _ __ 1, 1!•' I 1 "` ,` V 1` A l 1 A\ 1
100 0 ', 1 1 r `, ', 1', i �i i - _ - ----------' SLL -- -� v `I i '1 11 1 1 '�v'1, DENOTES EXCAVATION
--------------------------- -- ----------- - -- - --- 1 a 1 1�\1`�1`�` ® IN WETLAND
'0 -- - -- - -___ 1 A 1 `1 A \1\0
1 1
2 —--------------- - - - - -- 6�Z- - \ \\
1, !.-------------------------- - - - - -- - - `.
```\ `1 \`1``\II\ `\` \ .`v
1 I I I i i `
\ ` ® DENOTES TEMPORARY
50 100 -----------•SZ'`,_'- \ \11 `1 \\ 1 i IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
SCALE: III= 100' HORIZe I i i'` .y1� '8- - - \ \`` \\r \`` \1 \\\ DENOTES PERMANENT
1 I I / 'I'v 11\ IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
INCOI®'I]P]LE
E PLANS
DO NOT USE FOR
/ W ACQUISITION
]PR E]LIMIIN
RY PLANS
DO NOT USE FO
CONSTRUCTION
N. C. DEPT. OF TRANS]POII$TATION
IIDIIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
to ROWAN COUNTY
�• . -may ( l J.' i i� 1 I ` 1'` �` �v �' �' � '� 1 1 1 I 1 ' 1 . � , , it ', Av � � - -" %� ,% r' � /�' � i % PlEB ®JEC'JC: W-55II6
�,— o SEE ENLARGED AREA
OLD PEA II Il V FORD ROAD
'O o IW,I,
'� v v `,v, `,1 ` M 11,1,1 ',01 , �;" 1v ` _ ' J ri ' r / r
ON SHEET A. , 1 , , , ', , 1 `� , v ` ' , ' , r , , / ; FROM wE5°II° OF B®S°II°IAN
v/ I 18OAID INTERSECTION
$-- ��
1 v `
/ "� , i� _� - -_ 1 IAPPROR. 22' C NTERS`I IN ` / ` v ` `� 1 ` ` �'�` v ♦ � v ` ` ` �`` ' IO LENIIZ ROAD
/, �� �•O ♦ ,v / , /I r/r
BAtyJK;'
SHEET ®F
BARSILLSOSPA EDE@ �S\. �
A,1'PPROX X22' CENTERS IN. �, H ` \ (�{ ' / i i ' PERMIT DRAWING
___ �\ 'IryGHT BARREL O� .. �` _ `I i 1 �0 LF'Od \INLEF � %" `. � 'I jll I'I Ii'�� `5 \` _ -S E NLHRG � �Ai 'J `. (� 1
- -_ ` 1 \ 1 `WLVERTI .( �� ITQ 1 ` 1 ' o H NEl kNLET, �M tJ[`111 1, I `\ ``, � /
A� SHEET OF
-
£`S - - --
\ � " ` SY GEppTE ILE 1 I
,
,
- - - _-- - -
�O "
---
' � -
` \ ' `. E , ` \\ - 'S " o 11-- �------------ ----• -9 L - -- _------ \ ` - -- - - - -- ------------
-- -- - �
__ - -_- r r
' __ _ _ ___ _ ___ __� \ `� ,' - - \`\ `\"`1 `�1� /' —' _.. I `�` \ \` 1\ 1 '1 \ � �\ O `E
----- t O£ � EGIN SBG
- '
_
Z 0 _- �,'_ -'- --- - - - - -- _
-_ � �. 1 � l i i r \ ��`� AA �s1 • -���1� , � fl�h� ����I
, � 1
_
- v VV1 .� n
O
w -- -------- \ �`� Li I
sa
_ . 11`1`11 ,� ;'� f \ `
W
- _
I ,
W ``__ --- _' v �'y.' v1 v,v11
> k �
to - - ` /
J
E /r
l i �\ BURJD 1x8 R�
SKEW`,- 00° v�' �` 1 1;1 ,1 \`� \`� \�1i ��!r `I \I �i
O ` +
I '
0 % ' 00
Vo
� 1 '
,. 7 Ua. -` � \` � '� � �; 11 F \ _I TI____ �.. `��• ���1\1` \1 X111 `� \`\�� 11\ -�i '\� / � 1\`,1`1 I `
+
�-- '� - =� :,�- I' ' ;�I,I �;?1; _,BAN
N E- 111 –Q– o BANK" �;
T 1 Ty
_ - SIAB141Z f1,90N'"
TABILIZATION: -
F—�1 1` `1111
�V 1I0,�(`T�'\ i j��``v11 � 111 TOE „ --------
- -- -- 1
%14RM4
W "ByRY%NVE ' ` `
CHMENT " - CLA5 1 W RAp .EST1' RIP RAP ``1 _ BA 3' ONEST; 75 GEOTEXTILE ` _ _ E 2'6 TO
Z 'iJ'
1. 111 \ 1__ \ � I
/I4 14
VIEW S -- - - - - -- .1 I '\ I V '�y�j ,
Si
`�� 2 — S ITS i
^ 1� `\\ \� \\ ``69\ _ - -- i
TOT4L PRQJECT NGTH: 239 MILES `TaTTCL- PRtSJEC ; L' NGT�iI'2i3�1 MILE'
1
\ \`
1 1 `
1
� i
PRO�SED \CULVERT: 11' x 8'`RCBC -PROPOSED d RAP -1V f 1 '
01 \ '/ ' �. �/ / i1 �\ K j�PO�,IS LIDM *,R22
`\
1\
`, 01 1 1 ', \ 1 \ `1 \ I I 1 I 1 ; ;' 1 1 I 'i 1 0 I �i ' � + '1 I , 1 ^ ````` ✓S S �_ ' I ' ' l i ' i ' i �i I �i 1
\`�� %
1
I / II 11
1 \ -
`1` \'1
111 11'11111 ,\ \ 1 \1 1 li + 11 'I IIIr/ � 1 III ,11 111 1�
\ r / \ 1 1
1I 1 \ 1
1 \ `I ' \ 1 ' 1 11
1 LEGEND
1' 111'1 `'' � 11 `�` \' � \ � `` ; 111
1,1
1 \
1 11 I 1
1 _
II i \
I
\ 1 111
1 - \
1 - DENOTES FILL IN
``: \ `\I 11` O S
`````
' 1 1 1 1
\ - WETLAND
-- -- ' `1
-- - 1\1 11
1
1
1
1
1 `
1 1 ,
1 '
\ 1 1 1
1 '
I '
1 ,
------ _- _-- - - -_ -- `.
_----------- - -__ , \ I \ _ \`
�,
1 `
li S 1 \1
___ —_— -------- -` \. \` 1 1 ; s `1 ` 1�1` \ 1 �`, 1 \ 1 \ • • DENOTES MECHANIZED
11 s
11 i 1 '1 i +' \1 `Jo �` `1 ; 1, \ �\` 1; �p.\111��11 \ * • r * CLEARING
i - `- _-- --------- - - - --- _ 1 `�
_ ________ _ __ 1, 1!•' I 1 "` ,` V 1` A l 1 A\ 1
100 0 ', 1 1 r `, ', 1', i �i i - _ - ----------' SLL -- -� v `I i '1 11 1 1 '�v'1, DENOTES EXCAVATION
--------------------------- -- ----------- - -- - --- 1 a 1 1�\1`�1`�` ® IN WETLAND
'0 -- - -- - -___ 1 A 1 `1 A \1\0
1 1
2 —--------------- - - - - -- 6�Z- - \ \\
1, !.-------------------------- - - - - -- - - `.
```\ `1 \`1``\II\ `\` \ .`v
1 I I I i i `
\ ` ® DENOTES TEMPORARY
50 100 -----------•SZ'`,_'- \ \11 `1 \\ 1 i IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
SCALE: III= 100' HORIZe I i i'` .y1� '8- - - \ \`` \\r \`` \1 \\\ DENOTES PERMANENT
1 I I / 'I'v 11\ IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER

z
d
v
NI
O
0
Z
v�
O�w
aV
WETLAND AND SURFACE WATER IMPACTS PERMIT
ANDS ' 2 ILLS PA(G €D`, (a 41 \
° APPR -CENT fv I`N
RIGHT- BARREL --QF I
� ��y, ' � --------- - - - - -- -oil „ - - -,;
- �— - ---- S`�;
-- - --
<
- -- - -- ;
`
�' -- ----------- -- - -• S --- ,,\
- � `��
��♦�.` VrA
In
0
O
N
C/)
coH
co
Z
' NCO27 07
Engineering NC Li —, No: F-0258
a,`,`,,r,, ,
0.
n�G i
Y Li T -5 0 . `♦ �0`\,;' \'
\,
i
E PLANS
DO NOT USE FOR
/W ACQUISITION
PRELIMIIN
R Y" PLANS
DO NOT USE FO
CONSTRUCTION
UN
®
DENOTES EXCAVATION
IN WETLAND
®DENOTES
TEMPORARY
I r
IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
®DENOTES
PERMANENT
IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
L'l
�
♦ M
_ __
�', ♦` F^�� �p�
it i
a,`,`,,r,, ,
0.
n�G i
Y Li T -5 0 . `♦ �0`\,;' \'
\,
i
3 gi , p' 00 ` v , ♦ y v� ' �`'v `, i '� li V
0
\
r,
2
Iry y <
/ OS ,
1 1 '
BANK I 1 O
�.
STAB L - J � I
\'\ ' �\ \, `�\ \�,\ \ ,i /�'1p //I/ , � ; \' RRR \ ` ♦.` \S0i - - - -_- -- ----
to
`, \\ , , °� `< \ \ i i ' i � l � � ' 7l” 'i \ i 'i i ♦ ♦` `�``J ' i � I i v i i1
' ° I �( I' ' - LA NM,
;` ;'' ;\ ;1'',` ;'I ii ; M ; i�; 1lr i ; ;�!;' \ ------ - - - - --
40\ IF OF, OUTLET ) f
\ \ 1
- CNANN`,EL', IMPROVEMENT \'
0 DONS CL. '1' RIP RAP
\
II
GE
5 S�( OTEXTILE \,
\ ` ,
50 0
25 50
SCALE: I "= 100' HORIZ.
ENLARGED
PLAN VIEW
SITE 2
SHEET NO.
R1W SHEET NO,
ROADWAY DESIGN HYDRAULICS
ENGINEER ENGINEER
INCOM PLE
E PLANS
DO NOT USE FOR
/W ACQUISITION
PRELIMIIN
R Y" PLANS
DO NOT USE FO
CONSTRUCTION
UN
®
DENOTES EXCAVATION
IN WETLAND
®DENOTES
TEMPORARY
I r
IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
®DENOTES
PERMANENT
IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
I�AIr Tl i
3 gi , p' 00 ` v , ♦ y v� ' �`'v `, i '� li V
0
\
r,
2
Iry y <
/ OS ,
1 1 '
BANK I 1 O
�.
STAB L - J � I
\'\ ' �\ \, `�\ \�,\ \ ,i /�'1p //I/ , � ; \' RRR \ ` ♦.` \S0i - - - -_- -- ----
to
`, \\ , , °� `< \ \ i i ' i � l � � ' 7l” 'i \ i 'i i ♦ ♦` `�``J ' i � I i v i i1
' ° I �( I' ' - LA NM,
;` ;'' ;\ ;1'',` ;'I ii ; M ; i�; 1lr i ; ;�!;' \ ------ - - - - --
40\ IF OF, OUTLET ) f
\ \ 1
- CNANN`,EL', IMPROVEMENT \'
0 DONS CL. '1' RIP RAP
\
II
GE
5 S�( OTEXTILE \,
\ ` ,
50 0
25 50
SCALE: I "= 100' HORIZ.
ENLARGED
PLAN VIEW
SITE 2
SHEET NO.
R1W SHEET NO,
ROADWAY DESIGN HYDRAULICS
ENGINEER ENGINEER
INCOM PLE
E PLANS
DO NOT USE FOR
/W ACQUISITION
PRELIMIIN
R Y" PLANS
DO NOT USE FO
CONSTRUCTION
N. C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
IDIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
ROWAN COUNTY
]PROJECT: W -5516
OLD BEATTY ]FORD ROAD
FROM WEST OF BOSTIAN
ROAD INTERSECTION
TO ]LENTZ ROAD
SHEET OF
PERMIT DRAWING
SHEET _ OF
2 @ 11'x 8' RCBC
BURIED V
EXCAVATION
i
1.5' THICK
(TYP.)
CLASS 'I' RIP RAP-
w/GEOTEXTILE
2 CW I U x E
BURIED 1'
Nc
1.5' THICK
(TYP.)
CLASS 'I' RIP RAP
W/GEOTEXTILE
1' SILL ---' �-2' SILL
EXCAVATION-35 CY
INLET CHANNEL
(LOOKING DOWNSTREAM)
(NOT TO SCALE)
EXCAVATION = 55 CY
OUTLET CHANNEL
(LOOKING DOWNSTREAM)
(NOT TO SCALE)
EXCAVATION
LEGEND
DENOTES FILL IN
WETLAND
• * * *
DENOTES MECHANIZED
CLEARING
®
DENOTES EXCAVATION
IN WETLAND
®DENOTES
TEMPORARY
IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
®DENOTES
PERMANENT
IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER

Z
O
w
rr
J
U
i
O
+
O
O
N
M
Q
0
0
a
w
v
i
N
N
0
v
Z
Z
�w
aU
WETLAND AND SURFACE WATER IMPACTS PERMIT
h
O
O
N
I`y
\H
M
co
Q
Z
1 k )eight NC 27607
Engineering NCL -.- Nu: F °l. "S
I 1 I � (� I `,'� I , 1 I ', � , ', � I I' 11 'I 1 I � 'i 'I ; i I -- I \♦ \ `♦ � `\ ♦ � ,
ii [1�7__' 'I cl a'' II ,, ; ', ', i '�I I 'I ; ',I II ; 'I�'II ' 1 ; i 1 � i ♦ 1 \ \ \ �`, ', I
i � it I'I I ; ', III it III II ; Ili � ', � II 'I 'I 'I it �' I'i I i i ' i i � f I �I � � ` \•��` \�\ `` - -' � ' -
i I i' 'I � �' 'I i II ' i ', ,1 I' i { i I li i ; � ' i � ' � � `� '�r ```♦ -- _'` `.S
111 ' 1, 1' 11, 11' 1 ♦
1 I
\ O�
♦
11 1 1 1 d\
„I
\
I, ; �'I li i I' ', � 'i II 'ii I � , I 'I 'i i I i 1 'I ', � ' -_ ` � \ ` ,` :\• ``Sr ``� ```O `•� `•� •� ````•
- i i ii it I � it i ; li , I I � li ', ; �� \, � \\ i / ' i I' 1� � `♦\ �` `\``, �`�\; `� �` 2� `
' 1 I to � � ♦�� ♦ � \ \
i , j / ' 1 I I I i 1 � li I 'i I' J 'i � ' ' 1 'i ' I ' I 1 �� �� ', i 1 `II `\♦ sd `, ♦` ` ` ♦` '� ` \\ \\ ` ♦` �
\ \
�� �S `♦ Y� �1J,V.� ♦\ � \ �, `` �♦ `
� ., ; ` `I 11, ; 1 it � I ' ' I ; I' � � ` ; ` ♦\\ \ \ \ `` S`♦`I
I \
W \
I,' I
1\
I
I ,
11'
1
1'
\ \
I,I ,
�,,J __ "� ♦ ` \
o n' _ i ♦��
- i1` i � `� 1 , �, 1 � 1 1 A : ' I 1 _ �� � � � i ` ♦ `. A `, \ v 111 `
1 , I I ILA ; I 1 ' , ; ,t ` fy��I' ' / � \\\ -.' ; I ♦1`` \ \, \ , 0�
1
\
/ Mr
---------------
` 1
,
`\ l N 1 ' / l; i � i i i , ' �'/ r I � 1 \` ��% /, � - Icy i ' / i I. -- - `�•L , / , I
I
-750
4
w
/ylx'J1
i
\
1 �
li ill
--- C
7X0 i `v 110
Jt 1 i ,i 1 1 � � � �; ,' I' � ' /i � I I �1 - -' ,In ", �\\' "' "" - ' "" , -' ,, ,. % I,i I �I �•\f�'���' �r� � _�._���� 1 \\\
I
740 -- -- --. .,7,
I '
' 1 �
I,I
I BANK $TABILIZATIQN -- - - - ---
' ' '� ♦ - °1
`E'ND SBG I'4� _- �,' -Z�\ ♦ \`
-'LLJ- - -- - - -
c 4HIS f�IP aAP' / �' ,' /v �' _' /y�� �
' 4 ; ; ' ; - - -� - - -- - - - -- - �
ON ; , - - - -- --
50 0
25 50
SCALE: III= 100' HORIZ.
ENLARGED
PLAN VIEW
SITE 3
PROJECT REFERENCE NO.
SHEET NO.
-55/6
5B
RAN SHEET NO.
RY PLANS
ROADWAY DESIGN
CONSTRUCTION
HYDRAULICS
ENGINEER
ENGINEER
INCOI®' PLE
E PILANS
DO NOT USE FOR
! W ACQUISITION
PRELIMIN
RY PLANS
DO NOT USE FO
CONSTRUCTION
N. C. IDEF°IC.OF °d'iBANS][�01�8°Il°ATION
IIDIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
ROWAN COUNTY
PROJECT: W -5516
OLD BEA'Il TY FORD ROAD
FROM WEST OF BOSTIAN
ROAD INTERSECTION
TO ]LENTZ ROAD
SHEET OF
PERMIT DRAWING
SHEET _ OF
LEGEND
®DENOTES
TEMPORARY
IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
®
DENOTES PERMANENT
IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER

WETLAND AND SURFACE WATER IMPACTS PERMIT
i
H
W
W
N
W
W
N
O
O
O
O
Q
E-
N
d
I
W
z
J
V
Q
I
DECK DRAINS RI
In 6' DIAMETER SCUPPERS I
FROM STA. 57 +20 TO ST,
FROM STA. 59 +61 TO STI
FROM STA_ 60 +67 TO ST,
100 0
50 100
SCALE: I "= 100' HORIZ.
HIGH BRDGE,L
PLAN
SIT[
TOTAL PROJECT LENGTH:
PROPOSED BRIDGE: FIVE.
3 @ 117', 1 @ 118'; 72"
NO.
HYDRAULICS
ENGINEER
]E �II ANS
W ACQUISITION
RY PLANS
CONSTRUCTION
$ANSPOIBTATION
H[IG]HWAYS
�OUNTY
C: W -5516
]FORD ROAD
OF ]BOSTIAN
;]EBSECTION
Z ROAD
G
GLI
z
W
W
N
W
W
V)
O
O
O
O
%O
H
N
I
f
■i
BE
r
5
n
O
0
N
N
tY
In
00
00
Q
Z
S PERMANENT
IN SURFACE WATER

a
0
2
WETLAND AND SURFACE WATER IMPACTS PERMIT
n
0
0
N
N
\N
Go
Q
Z
'CAW 5121 Kingdom Way
Suite 100
Raleigh, NC 27607
Engineering NC License Na F-0258
TIDE
I
m
BNC ®IeJ1�II E
lE �1L ANN
DO NOT USE FOR
ra C
l� E$E LIIM[IIN
RY PLANS
DO NOT VSE FO
CONSTRUCTION
W PSH
c9
.
O I
—" LO m I
I
3
Y
I
I
_ 2G1 15" 271
J'
Y
2G1
I
j
I m
I
o
END SBG
—_
STA. 57+21 —L— LT & RT
I
i
45
--- -- - - - -_ ____
CLASS I RIP RAP
@ EMBANKMENT m
SEE DETAIL K
;
nl
W
C
E
Y
m
N
50 0
25 50
SCALE: IR= 100' HORIZ.
ENLARGED
PLAN VIEW
SITE 4
PROJECT REFERENCE NO. I SHEET NO.
PW SHEET NO.
ROADWAY DESIGN HYDRAULICS
ENGINEER ENGINEER
N. C. DEPT.OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVIISIION OF HIGHWAYS
ROWAN COUNTY
PROJECT: W -5516
O1LD 1BEATTY FORD ROAD
FROM WEST OF ]BOSTIIAN
ROAD INTERSECTION
TO ]LENTZ ROAD
SHEET OF
PERMIT DRAWING
SHEET _ OF _ (;I IC
LEGEND
S, DENOTES PERMANENT
IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
BNC ®IeJ1�II E
lE �1L ANN
DO NOT USE FOR
d W ACQUISITION
l� E$E LIIM[IIN
RY PLANS
DO NOT VSE FO
CONSTRUCTION
N. C. DEPT.OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVIISIION OF HIGHWAYS
ROWAN COUNTY
PROJECT: W -5516
O1LD 1BEATTY FORD ROAD
FROM WEST OF ]BOSTIIAN
ROAD INTERSECTION
TO ]LENTZ ROAD
SHEET OF
PERMIT DRAWING
SHEET _ OF _ (;I IC
LEGEND
S, DENOTES PERMANENT
IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER

v
PROJECT REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO.
' ' 5121 Kin dom Way -556 7
a II 'li l e Y
Suite 100
WETLAND AND SURFACE WATER IMPACTS PERMIT 4�' ;N;! �lelgh,NC276o7 RES SHEET NO.
CD EX' Engineering NC License Ne Fozse ROADWAY DESIGN HYDRAULICS
�' ��' �" �', ENGINEER ENGINEER
ACV i i i' � I' eLe �R•PI
N ,Ili „° ,' z II' I iI
i
r'
1, I
DD ” ✓l� I I I OC
L*A sue TAI
Z ��ao �iI' I iI ii II gill
069 ----------------- - '--- - -- --- -- - - -- � ♦` `I `r � ` � b„ `- �•��:� - -., 1,;; 1 � � i� I II/�� - .
___ -- -- - - N. C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
\ I' ``_ ;I II "III DIVISION OF H[IG]HWAYS
- - - --- 6y \ \ \ �' r ' " -_ - ---o= - --c - -_ ___ =_�4 I I Ii i,''�I
_ _ Ili;1, ROWAN COUNTY
- - - -- _ ♦ 1 _����= -
DECKI DRAINS REQUIRED , \ , 1 "--___ i1'I I I I I ill 'illl Ll
-- -------- _ `\ \ \ \ 6" DIAMETER SCUPPERS ON 72'CENTERS _ I 1 1 - -- ---��_ - _ Ii I;;,i, ,I,i„
___-- _569 -_ - \ 1 1 ��'� 1 FROM STA.57 +20 TO STA. 58 +16 RT. LT. ; ', j' 'iQ� -`' I,I PROJECT: W'S6IGn
FROM STA. 59 +b1 TO STA. 60 +57 RT. & LT. 1 "'i ✓ V: -- - - -- - -- 'I'i' III I I 1
\ \ -� - 111111
` \\ i B9-
1 \
_ 1 _
_ __ � IIII ]LID ]BEATTY FORD ®AID
_ � FR M TA. + 7 T TA. RT. LT. i - - I' ® IS R
` � I
- - - -- -__ �\,�I i;illi I II I I III' ii;i
- - - - -- - -------- FROM WEST OF ]BOSTIAN
-- - -- '- ` 1 1 \ ' ' \', \ \,'1 IIII Ili , / ✓ -"_- ; __ ,.. nryi, iqp
- - -- - -- --------
ROAD INTERSECTION
- - - --
- -- TO LENT2 ROAD
l'j--------------- _ SI \ •D r 1 ',1, 'i IPA!,
-- Q. \ S •O I 1, l- I'1 I',I ,' / - ,`Ill 11I'w iI I!Iliillli'14i I SHEET 'OF
__ ___ -
, 'I ";IIII' II;Iljl'� PERMIT DRAWING
-- ♦ ♦ ` 1 1 , I , , 1♦ i''i'1' I'nii' 11, 'i'I'
♦ A 1 I 1 '1 1 i'''''I li 1 II''ll linil;'gi ;I li I
♦ 1 ' 1', ',;, li, li,,', I�, iii I
- - -- ♦�0. . ♦ A 1 , 1 I'll li' 1' I,Ihnlj'�Il II; il''i''I SHEET OF
- - -_ \ `\\ \ \ 1 , 1 'Pi'�,1 „',;I'�, „1,',1' li 'ii'11,I,li, I iI 'illll I;j
I'
I
. STA 44 +Q0 (EL 1Y =A69 70)
1
1 '
1 - _ IV
IIII
1 � Z
3 +�
I
�w
, I i 111
y0`, I 1'111
t
1\
I
I \,�
T
_ J
/
CLASS IJtIP RAP
SE EMBANKMENT
„
--SEE QETAIL K -.
s
I
/
_ 1 �
INC ®IiIIl�]L]E ]E PLANS
DO NOT USE FOR /w ACQUISITION
1�Ig1E]LINIIN I8Y PLANS
DO NOT USE PO CONSTRUCTION
-;i,,luli,l 111 I Id Ihl..
,UIJWI j' I I ,I I,Ip uluullui
li�i,ll ” ' I ,liilil IIII iii
1 I Ilp
I
„�`` '1 I I,I,Iry
I
I
'I I Illp
,,.`�
Z
,�,` ♦♦ iliiii, 1 N 1 I II,p'Ili 1 111'1 I
I
ummu�l�
lillllii;;iw1 -T...
,\ �♦ Ililil'I "'Iii N N lill'li I,1', iiiliiiiliiii w
\� r liiiilllllllliiii j o , 1 -1 II ;iilili I; "i "Ili iilli ii illii,l W O
1
IIII
V
N
l,il)� I I iI N,ili Ili, lulu IIII
`�♦ � ��''' , v /i pp liwll -�' � I bd'n� ' ",�',un�I�uu�V N
V`�' •A` iLU i � I 1 1 °I FI 11 A N
w
,1, �♦ '\ ,11;1,11,,, II I ' 1'li'I "II i'lll, 'I "ill liilli ill,` L0
,\ \�`� � ♦1,`' '1` I I III I ; � 1,�1,II;li'i'I, IIj i,11111i1ii1i1, ✓ W
1Ei
,`,♦ , `,1 ,' iii'i'nn 1 1 I I � I nI IIIry11 "III' li'I'iliFnlluiil, N
•``V`; ;;'; ;I'� 1'IJ'ilu � ICI' i� i � 1 li'i;ii'I;Ilili 111 ql'i li l,;;'ullll lliViiil' � C
OD
i I iy
I
pp.. 'il ' I1IyI�
O Q
I ,1 I II I i 1 1( o f , li ,i 1 III i I i ill:
1
1
1 1
'\ r
1 I I
1 I
-
, A 1 1
I I II
I 1
1 1
d
Im I
\V'61�`�` \�`;�� �`���` ♦\' j 1 II �n 1 1� I I I I II �'il I II
`' `��;� \� \�` ,`♦``✓` `._ , I ,110, i m ' ,III ; I i i ;'; i 1 ; ii;' ' i '':
`; �\``,.20.\.�♦� �\��`'�` ', i Io' III. i �i ' i i � i '�i 1 i 1 1'1 ii
\`,` —, �I,i ''''i Iti I I'll l;lil I;i'illl; °ulA'IOiI
���`
\`°s��`�� ,``♦,`,,�o;�jlll li;i; i 1 0l i � �'I IIIIi,�I�, il'llll ' ' n ' nn,
� ♦ � ` - 'i' 1 ' i' I i� , ' II ry '11' I lls 1 1 ,'q l'pin'iilgry
` ♦ �`� � „�..1 _ _- i. i,l it 1 Iii',
, 1 � ,♦�. - - % /'n i I 1 1 , VVIppI 11 Ih ;11Ili "1; 4,;1'q n,y "',,,nhii,
`\ ``\� `♦% III I ' ' 'iI IIII, ,111i1,ll IINliil,iii'lii „'I'I
1 it I 1
` \ ^`\ ".\ ,II I I'i III 1 I , 1 I I Ills I;li1,111; 11 Iliiiili li l,; �;�
- -_ \ �l;i 1 W' I �O {IIII Ilil,l,ii,l iilii irr,u,/
♦ ` i 1 ' ' T I I f'i'll ,. 1 i li'i i,„ri•,rril
l
1 I I ' ' I I I ' ' N 'i 0 , 1 }} � 1 � .1i � A ; , 1 �', ` 1➢ �I `I `; ,, 1 III I I F ' 11', �I, II
T 1 1 1 1 1 I \ I'i V 1 * 1 11141 I1h,�
;o
1 ♦ I II I I I I 'I
1 -
1 1 \
♦ \ 1
1 ♦ � 1 1.11,
1
11 1 ♦ ` - _- 1 I
LI i I I Q
1 I
1 - I
1 111 1 il'1
I
_
\'1
1
1 \\ 1 1
` 1
I II' 1
1'
�I
i
1 1 1
I '11 1
_
I
I I
3 1 1
EI 1 1 I �` Ir / I I I ❑li
1 1 1
1
I
I
I
/ 1 1 i �O _ �'S ♦ ..5''`
0� .\ .D
,.D� \ rD \� ♦,��,,LO. ,•O)
� o - Q}[ �n ,i� 1 I I' m III ♦ 1a
/ _ ♦ \` `
1`J , II i s
h " /'
\ 1 \ R I
.P
1 ♦
1 �I
I
I'
_ 1p I
` 1; 'IN IIII Ilillilll;
3 it , i ♦♦ `♦ ♦ �'� ,' ' ` \\� ��`♦ `, �'' \ \` ' �'$'i 1, A 1 1 ;�� ; 4u
1 `� ``S `, '✓ 7VP i, i ' i II f,P� i RETA N iii'I 1
E
PLAN VIEW
z �I 100 0 SITE 4
5 , 1
L
T1,
II
II I
i 50 100 TOTAL PROJECT LENGTH: 2.39 MILES
o PROPOSED BRIDGE: FIVE SPAN: 1 @ 83',
r SCALE: I "= 100' HORIZe 3 @ 117', 1 @ 118'; 72" CONCRETE GIRDERS I„ O I
”, �i, / /' � �1 A, 1, I 1 i 1 I ll � ...
O Z
�O
N
/ I
LU
Z
V
H
LEGEND
®DENOTES PERMANENT
IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
'o
- '
D \`
1
1
♦s 1
1
1
_ _
.�
V'
� B
W ;
1 i �
BEGIN SBG'
\ 1 ♦
T
W
LU0.
O /
/ /
/
O--1 -
-- - \` `
O -
-- v
v 1 2
1
' 1 ,
Ll
_ 1
1 \
j t_ 1
1 �
1 /
1
I ♦
\ ♦\ I
_ i ; /
I ♦
♦
♦ 1 \
Z `
1 ♦
DETAIL O % \ ♦ ,�� `
MEDIAN V DITCH ;
; \\ ` ♦ ♦
V N
No o >
♦`� ♦
>dd -
-
DITCH GRADE = 0.3% I
a 1 \
FROM STA. 39 +73 ELEV. = 668.39) TO ;
I a
1
1 '
1 - _ IV
IIII
1 � Z
3 +�
I
�w
, I i 111
y0`, I 1'111
t
1\
I
I \,�
T
_ J
/
CLASS IJtIP RAP
SE EMBANKMENT
„
--SEE QETAIL K -.
s
I
/
_ 1 �
INC ®IiIIl�]L]E ]E PLANS
DO NOT USE FOR /w ACQUISITION
1�Ig1E]LINIIN I8Y PLANS
DO NOT USE PO CONSTRUCTION
-;i,,luli,l 111 I Id Ihl..
,UIJWI j' I I ,I I,Ip uluullui
li�i,ll ” ' I ,liilil IIII iii
1 I Ilp
I
„�`` '1 I I,I,Iry
I
I
'I I Illp
,,.`�
Z
,�,` ♦♦ iliiii, 1 N 1 I II,p'Ili 1 111'1 I
I
ummu�l�
lillllii;;iw1 -T...
,\ �♦ Ililil'I "'Iii N N lill'li I,1', iiiliiiiliiii w
\� r liiiilllllllliiii j o , 1 -1 II ;iilili I; "i "Ili iilli ii illii,l W O
1
IIII
V
N
l,il)� I I iI N,ili Ili, lulu IIII
`�♦ � ��''' , v /i pp liwll -�' � I bd'n� ' ",�',un�I�uu�V N
V`�' •A` iLU i � I 1 1 °I FI 11 A N
w
,1, �♦ '\ ,11;1,11,,, II I ' 1'li'I "II i'lll, 'I "ill liilli ill,` L0
,\ \�`� � ♦1,`' '1` I I III I ; � 1,�1,II;li'i'I, IIj i,11111i1ii1i1, ✓ W
1Ei
,`,♦ , `,1 ,' iii'i'nn 1 1 I I � I nI IIIry11 "III' li'I'iliFnlluiil, N
•``V`; ;;'; ;I'� 1'IJ'ilu � ICI' i� i � 1 li'i;ii'I;Ilili 111 ql'i li l,;;'ullll lliViiil' � C
OD
i I iy
I
pp.. 'il ' I1IyI�
O Q
I ,1 I II I i 1 1( o f , li ,i 1 III i I i ill:
1
1
1 1
'\ r
1 I I
1 I
-
, A 1 1
I I II
I 1
1 1
d
Im I
\V'61�`�` \�`;�� �`���` ♦\' j 1 II �n 1 1� I I I I II �'il I II
`' `��;� \� \�` ,`♦``✓` `._ , I ,110, i m ' ,III ; I i i ;'; i 1 ; ii;' ' i '':
`; �\``,.20.\.�♦� �\��`'�` ', i Io' III. i �i ' i i � i '�i 1 i 1 1'1 ii
\`,` —, �I,i ''''i Iti I I'll l;lil I;i'illl; °ulA'IOiI
���`
\`°s��`�� ,``♦,`,,�o;�jlll li;i; i 1 0l i � �'I IIIIi,�I�, il'llll ' ' n ' nn,
� ♦ � ` - 'i' 1 ' i' I i� , ' II ry '11' I lls 1 1 ,'q l'pin'iilgry
` ♦ �`� � „�..1 _ _- i. i,l it 1 Iii',
, 1 � ,♦�. - - % /'n i I 1 1 , VVIppI 11 Ih ;11Ili "1; 4,;1'q n,y "',,,nhii,
`\ ``\� `♦% III I ' ' 'iI IIII, ,111i1,ll IINliil,iii'lii „'I'I
1 it I 1
` \ ^`\ ".\ ,II I I'i III 1 I , 1 I I Ills I;li1,111; 11 Iliiiili li l,; �;�
- -_ \ �l;i 1 W' I �O {IIII Ilil,l,ii,l iilii irr,u,/
♦ ` i 1 ' ' T I I f'i'll ,. 1 i li'i i,„ri•,rril
l
1 I I ' ' I I I ' ' N 'i 0 , 1 }} � 1 � .1i � A ; , 1 �', ` 1➢ �I `I `; ,, 1 III I I F ' 11', �I, II
T 1 1 1 1 1 I \ I'i V 1 * 1 11141 I1h,�
;o
1 ♦ I II I I I I 'I
1 -
1 1 \
♦ \ 1
1 ♦ � 1 1.11,
1
11 1 ♦ ` - _- 1 I
LI i I I Q
1 I
1 - I
1 111 1 il'1
I
_
\'1
1
1 \\ 1 1
` 1
I II' 1
1'
�I
i
1 1 1
I '11 1
_
I
I I
3 1 1
EI 1 1 I �` Ir / I I I ❑li
1 1 1
1
I
I
I
/ 1 1 i �O _ �'S ♦ ..5''`
0� .\ .D
,.D� \ rD \� ♦,��,,LO. ,•O)
� o - Q}[ �n ,i� 1 I I' m III ♦ 1a
/ _ ♦ \` `
1`J , II i s
h " /'
\ 1 \ R I
.P
1 ♦
1 �I
I
I'
_ 1p I
` 1; 'IN IIII Ilillilll;
3 it , i ♦♦ `♦ ♦ �'� ,' ' ` \\� ��`♦ `, �'' \ \` ' �'$'i 1, A 1 1 ;�� ; 4u
1 `� ``S `, '✓ 7VP i, i ' i II f,P� i RETA N iii'I 1
E
PLAN VIEW
z �I 100 0 SITE 4
5 , 1
L
T1,
II
II I
i 50 100 TOTAL PROJECT LENGTH: 2.39 MILES
o PROPOSED BRIDGE: FIVE SPAN: 1 @ 83',
r SCALE: I "= 100' HORIZe 3 @ 117', 1 @ 118'; 72" CONCRETE GIRDERS I„ O I
”, �i, / /' � �1 A, 1, I 1 i 1 I ll � ...
O Z
�O
N
/ I
LU
Z
V
H
LEGEND
®DENOTES PERMANENT
IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
INC ®IiIIl�]L]E ]E PLANS
DO NOT USE FOR /w ACQUISITION
1�Ig1E]LINIIN I8Y PLANS
DO NOT USE PO CONSTRUCTION
-;i,,luli,l 111 I Id Ihl..
,UIJWI j' I I ,I I,Ip uluullui
li�i,ll ” ' I ,liilil IIII iii
1 I Ilp
I
„�`` '1 I I,I,Iry
I
I
'I I Illp
,,.`�
Z
,�,` ♦♦ iliiii, 1 N 1 I II,p'Ili 1 111'1 I
I
ummu�l�
lillllii;;iw1 -T...
,\ �♦ Ililil'I "'Iii N N lill'li I,1', iiiliiiiliiii w
\� r liiiilllllllliiii j o , 1 -1 II ;iilili I; "i "Ili iilli ii illii,l W O
1
IIII
V
N
l,il)� I I iI N,ili Ili, lulu IIII
`�♦ � ��''' , v /i pp liwll -�' � I bd'n� ' ",�',un�I�uu�V N
V`�' •A` iLU i � I 1 1 °I FI 11 A N
w
,1, �♦ '\ ,11;1,11,,, II I ' 1'li'I "II i'lll, 'I "ill liilli ill,` L0
,\ \�`� � ♦1,`' '1` I I III I ; � 1,�1,II;li'i'I, IIj i,11111i1ii1i1, ✓ W
1Ei
,`,♦ , `,1 ,' iii'i'nn 1 1 I I � I nI IIIry11 "III' li'I'iliFnlluiil, N
•``V`; ;;'; ;I'� 1'IJ'ilu � ICI' i� i � 1 li'i;ii'I;Ilili 111 ql'i li l,;;'ullll lliViiil' � C
OD
i I iy
I
pp.. 'il ' I1IyI�
O Q
I ,1 I II I i 1 1( o f , li ,i 1 III i I i ill:
1
1
1 1
'\ r
1 I I
1 I
-
, A 1 1
I I II
I 1
1 1
d
Im I
\V'61�`�` \�`;�� �`���` ♦\' j 1 II �n 1 1� I I I I II �'il I II
`' `��;� \� \�` ,`♦``✓` `._ , I ,110, i m ' ,III ; I i i ;'; i 1 ; ii;' ' i '':
`; �\``,.20.\.�♦� �\��`'�` ', i Io' III. i �i ' i i � i '�i 1 i 1 1'1 ii
\`,` —, �I,i ''''i Iti I I'll l;lil I;i'illl; °ulA'IOiI
���`
\`°s��`�� ,``♦,`,,�o;�jlll li;i; i 1 0l i � �'I IIIIi,�I�, il'llll ' ' n ' nn,
� ♦ � ` - 'i' 1 ' i' I i� , ' II ry '11' I lls 1 1 ,'q l'pin'iilgry
` ♦ �`� � „�..1 _ _- i. i,l it 1 Iii',
, 1 � ,♦�. - - % /'n i I 1 1 , VVIppI 11 Ih ;11Ili "1; 4,;1'q n,y "',,,nhii,
`\ ``\� `♦% III I ' ' 'iI IIII, ,111i1,ll IINliil,iii'lii „'I'I
1 it I 1
` \ ^`\ ".\ ,II I I'i III 1 I , 1 I I Ills I;li1,111; 11 Iliiiili li l,; �;�
- -_ \ �l;i 1 W' I �O {IIII Ilil,l,ii,l iilii irr,u,/
♦ ` i 1 ' ' T I I f'i'll ,. 1 i li'i i,„ri•,rril
l
1 I I ' ' I I I ' ' N 'i 0 , 1 }} � 1 � .1i � A ; , 1 �', ` 1➢ �I `I `; ,, 1 III I I F ' 11', �I, II
T 1 1 1 1 1 I \ I'i V 1 * 1 11141 I1h,�
;o
1 ♦ I II I I I I 'I
1 -
1 1 \
♦ \ 1
1 ♦ � 1 1.11,
1
11 1 ♦ ` - _- 1 I
LI i I I Q
1 I
1 - I
1 111 1 il'1
I
_
\'1
1
1 \\ 1 1
` 1
I II' 1
1'
�I
i
1 1 1
I '11 1
_
I
I I
3 1 1
EI 1 1 I �` Ir / I I I ❑li
1 1 1
1
I
I
I
/ 1 1 i �O _ �'S ♦ ..5''`
0� .\ .D
,.D� \ rD \� ♦,��,,LO. ,•O)
� o - Q}[ �n ,i� 1 I I' m III ♦ 1a
/ _ ♦ \` `
1`J , II i s
h " /'
\ 1 \ R I
.P
1 ♦
1 �I
I
I'
_ 1p I
` 1; 'IN IIII Ilillilll;
3 it , i ♦♦ `♦ ♦ �'� ,' ' ` \\� ��`♦ `, �'' \ \` ' �'$'i 1, A 1 1 ;�� ; 4u
1 `� ``S `, '✓ 7VP i, i ' i II f,P� i RETA N iii'I 1
E
PLAN VIEW
z �I 100 0 SITE 4
5 , 1
L
T1,
II
II I
i 50 100 TOTAL PROJECT LENGTH: 2.39 MILES
o PROPOSED BRIDGE: FIVE SPAN: 1 @ 83',
r SCALE: I "= 100' HORIZe 3 @ 117', 1 @ 118'; 72" CONCRETE GIRDERS I„ O I
”, �i, / /' � �1 A, 1, I 1 i 1 I ll � ...
O Z
�O
N
/ I
LU
Z
V
H
LEGEND
®DENOTES PERMANENT
IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
-;i,,luli,l 111 I Id Ihl..
,UIJWI j' I I ,I I,Ip uluullui
li�i,ll ” ' I ,liilil IIII iii
1 I Ilp
I
„�`` '1 I I,I,Iry
I
I
'I I Illp
,,.`�
Z
,�,` ♦♦ iliiii, 1 N 1 I II,p'Ili 1 111'1 I
I
ummu�l�
lillllii;;iw1 -T...
,\ �♦ Ililil'I "'Iii N N lill'li I,1', iiiliiiiliiii w
\� r liiiilllllllliiii j o , 1 -1 II ;iilili I; "i "Ili iilli ii illii,l W O
1
IIII
V
N
l,il)� I I iI N,ili Ili, lulu IIII
`�♦ � ��''' , v /i pp liwll -�' � I bd'n� ' ",�',un�I�uu�V N
V`�' •A` iLU i � I 1 1 °I FI 11 A N
w
,1, �♦ '\ ,11;1,11,,, II I ' 1'li'I "II i'lll, 'I "ill liilli ill,` L0
,\ \�`� � ♦1,`' '1` I I III I ; � 1,�1,II;li'i'I, IIj i,11111i1ii1i1, ✓ W
1Ei
,`,♦ , `,1 ,' iii'i'nn 1 1 I I � I nI IIIry11 "III' li'I'iliFnlluiil, N
•``V`; ;;'; ;I'� 1'IJ'ilu � ICI' i� i � 1 li'i;ii'I;Ilili 111 ql'i li l,;;'ullll lliViiil' � C
OD
i I iy
I
pp.. 'il ' I1IyI�
O Q
I ,1 I II I i 1 1( o f , li ,i 1 III i I i ill:
1
1
1 1
'\ r
1 I I
1 I
-
, A 1 1
I I II
I 1
1 1
d
Im I
\V'61�`�` \�`;�� �`���` ♦\' j 1 II �n 1 1� I I I I II �'il I II
`' `��;� \� \�` ,`♦``✓` `._ , I ,110, i m ' ,III ; I i i ;'; i 1 ; ii;' ' i '':
`; �\``,.20.\.�♦� �\��`'�` ', i Io' III. i �i ' i i � i '�i 1 i 1 1'1 ii
\`,` —, �I,i ''''i Iti I I'll l;lil I;i'illl; °ulA'IOiI
���`
\`°s��`�� ,``♦,`,,�o;�jlll li;i; i 1 0l i � �'I IIIIi,�I�, il'llll ' ' n ' nn,
� ♦ � ` - 'i' 1 ' i' I i� , ' II ry '11' I lls 1 1 ,'q l'pin'iilgry
` ♦ �`� � „�..1 _ _- i. i,l it 1 Iii',
, 1 � ,♦�. - - % /'n i I 1 1 , VVIppI 11 Ih ;11Ili "1; 4,;1'q n,y "',,,nhii,
`\ ``\� `♦% III I ' ' 'iI IIII, ,111i1,ll IINliil,iii'lii „'I'I
1 it I 1
` \ ^`\ ".\ ,II I I'i III 1 I , 1 I I Ills I;li1,111; 11 Iliiiili li l,; �;�
- -_ \ �l;i 1 W' I �O {IIII Ilil,l,ii,l iilii irr,u,/
♦ ` i 1 ' ' T I I f'i'll ,. 1 i li'i i,„ri•,rril
l
1 I I ' ' I I I ' ' N 'i 0 , 1 }} � 1 � .1i � A ; , 1 �', ` 1➢ �I `I `; ,, 1 III I I F ' 11', �I, II
T 1 1 1 1 1 I \ I'i V 1 * 1 11141 I1h,�
;o
1 ♦ I II I I I I 'I
1 -
1 1 \
♦ \ 1
1 ♦ � 1 1.11,
1
11 1 ♦ ` - _- 1 I
LI i I I Q
1 I
1 - I
1 111 1 il'1
I
_
\'1
1
1 \\ 1 1
` 1
I II' 1
1'
�I
i
1 1 1
I '11 1
_
I
I I
3 1 1
EI 1 1 I �` Ir / I I I ❑li
1 1 1
1
I
I
I
/ 1 1 i �O _ �'S ♦ ..5''`
0� .\ .D
,.D� \ rD \� ♦,��,,LO. ,•O)
� o - Q}[ �n ,i� 1 I I' m III ♦ 1a
/ _ ♦ \` `
1`J , II i s
h " /'
\ 1 \ R I
.P
1 ♦
1 �I
I
I'
_ 1p I
` 1; 'IN IIII Ilillilll;
3 it , i ♦♦ `♦ ♦ �'� ,' ' ` \\� ��`♦ `, �'' \ \` ' �'$'i 1, A 1 1 ;�� ; 4u
1 `� ``S `, '✓ 7VP i, i ' i II f,P� i RETA N iii'I 1
E
PLAN VIEW
z �I 100 0 SITE 4
5 , 1
L
T1,
II
II I
i 50 100 TOTAL PROJECT LENGTH: 2.39 MILES
o PROPOSED BRIDGE: FIVE SPAN: 1 @ 83',
r SCALE: I "= 100' HORIZe 3 @ 117', 1 @ 118'; 72" CONCRETE GIRDERS I„ O I
”, �i, / /' � �1 A, 1, I 1 i 1 I ll � ...
O Z
�O
N
/ I
LU
Z
V
H
LEGEND
®DENOTES PERMANENT
IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
I ,1 I II I i 1 1( o f , li ,i 1 III i I i ill:
1
1
1 1
'\ r
1 I I
1 I
-
, A 1 1
I I II
I 1
1 1
d
Im I
\V'61�`�` \�`;�� �`���` ♦\' j 1 II �n 1 1� I I I I II �'il I II
`' `��;� \� \�` ,`♦``✓` `._ , I ,110, i m ' ,III ; I i i ;'; i 1 ; ii;' ' i '':
`; �\``,.20.\.�♦� �\��`'�` ', i Io' III. i �i ' i i � i '�i 1 i 1 1'1 ii
\`,` —, �I,i ''''i Iti I I'll l;lil I;i'illl; °ulA'IOiI
���`
\`°s��`�� ,``♦,`,,�o;�jlll li;i; i 1 0l i � �'I IIIIi,�I�, il'llll ' ' n ' nn,
� ♦ � ` - 'i' 1 ' i' I i� , ' II ry '11' I lls 1 1 ,'q l'pin'iilgry
` ♦ �`� � „�..1 _ _- i. i,l it 1 Iii',
, 1 � ,♦�. - - % /'n i I 1 1 , VVIppI 11 Ih ;11Ili "1; 4,;1'q n,y "',,,nhii,
`\ ``\� `♦% III I ' ' 'iI IIII, ,111i1,ll IINliil,iii'lii „'I'I
1 it I 1
` \ ^`\ ".\ ,II I I'i III 1 I , 1 I I Ills I;li1,111; 11 Iliiiili li l,; �;�
- -_ \ �l;i 1 W' I �O {IIII Ilil,l,ii,l iilii irr,u,/
♦ ` i 1 ' ' T I I f'i'll ,. 1 i li'i i,„ri•,rril
l
1 I I ' ' I I I ' ' N 'i 0 , 1 }} � 1 � .1i � A ; , 1 �', ` 1➢ �I `I `; ,, 1 III I I F ' 11', �I, II
T 1 1 1 1 1 I \ I'i V 1 * 1 11141 I1h,�
;o
1 ♦ I II I I I I 'I
1 -
1 1 \
♦ \ 1
1 ♦ � 1 1.11,
1
11 1 ♦ ` - _- 1 I
LI i I I Q
1 I
1 - I
1 111 1 il'1
I
_
\'1
1
1 \\ 1 1
` 1
I II' 1
1'
�I
i
1 1 1
I '11 1
_
I
I I
3 1 1
EI 1 1 I �` Ir / I I I ❑li
1 1 1
1
I
I
I
/ 1 1 i �O _ �'S ♦ ..5''`
0� .\ .D
,.D� \ rD \� ♦,��,,LO. ,•O)
� o - Q}[ �n ,i� 1 I I' m III ♦ 1a
/ _ ♦ \` `
1`J , II i s
h " /'
\ 1 \ R I
.P
1 ♦
1 �I
I
I'
_ 1p I
` 1; 'IN IIII Ilillilll;
3 it , i ♦♦ `♦ ♦ �'� ,' ' ` \\� ��`♦ `, �'' \ \` ' �'$'i 1, A 1 1 ;�� ; 4u
1 `� ``S `, '✓ 7VP i, i ' i II f,P� i RETA N iii'I 1
E
PLAN VIEW
z �I 100 0 SITE 4
5 , 1
L
T1,
II
II I
i 50 100 TOTAL PROJECT LENGTH: 2.39 MILES
o PROPOSED BRIDGE: FIVE SPAN: 1 @ 83',
r SCALE: I "= 100' HORIZe 3 @ 117', 1 @ 118'; 72" CONCRETE GIRDERS I„ O I
”, �i, / /' � �1 A, 1, I 1 i 1 I ll � ...
O Z
�O
N
/ I
LU
Z
V
H
LEGEND
®DENOTES PERMANENT
IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
1 I I ' ' I I I ' ' N 'i 0 , 1 }} � 1 � .1i � A ; , 1 �', ` 1➢ �I `I `; ,, 1 III I I F ' 11', �I, II
T 1 1 1 1 1 I \ I'i V 1 * 1 11141 I1h,�
;o
1 ♦ I II I I I I 'I
1 -
1 1 \
♦ \ 1
1 ♦ � 1 1.11,
1
11 1 ♦ ` - _- 1 I
LI i I I Q
1 I
1 - I
1 111 1 il'1
I
_
\'1
1
1 \\ 1 1
` 1
I II' 1
1'
�I
i
1 1 1
I '11 1
_
I
I I
3 1 1
EI 1 1 I �` Ir / I I I ❑li
1 1 1
1
I
I
I
/ 1 1 i �O _ �'S ♦ ..5''`
0� .\ .D
,.D� \ rD \� ♦,��,,LO. ,•O)
� o - Q}[ �n ,i� 1 I I' m III ♦ 1a
/ _ ♦ \` `
1`J , II i s
h " /'
\ 1 \ R I
.P
1 ♦
1 �I
I
I'
_ 1p I
` 1; 'IN IIII Ilillilll;
3 it , i ♦♦ `♦ ♦ �'� ,' ' ` \\� ��`♦ `, �'' \ \` ' �'$'i 1, A 1 1 ;�� ; 4u
1 `� ``S `, '✓ 7VP i, i ' i II f,P� i RETA N iii'I 1
E
PLAN VIEW
z �I 100 0 SITE 4
5 , 1
L
T1,
II
II I
i 50 100 TOTAL PROJECT LENGTH: 2.39 MILES
o PROPOSED BRIDGE: FIVE SPAN: 1 @ 83',
r SCALE: I "= 100' HORIZe 3 @ 117', 1 @ 118'; 72" CONCRETE GIRDERS I„ O I
”, �i, / /' � �1 A, 1, I 1 i 1 I ll � ...
O Z
�O
N
/ I
LU
Z
V
H
LEGEND
®DENOTES PERMANENT
IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
LEGEND
®DENOTES PERMANENT
IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER

v
Z
Z
�LD
�w
-u
WETLAND AND SURFACE WATER IMPACTS PERMIT
0
0
N
co
co
Q
Z
069
lE 1PII ANS
DO NOT USE FOR
--
]PR E]LIMIIN
DO NOT USE FO
CONSTRUCTION
\
�
711
`,'„
n'-11�
,'11'11 II 11i'nlrlr' / '11g11h'1 11�
�J
Pso1
♦\ ` \ \ 1 � x1 ,' j111',1:1'lll l 1 1 '1 .0 � ', 1 1 1, 1111 1
,
!6!0(�11111111
,7111in11
111;11111
1 (),1 1 x11111 1 „',1 ,II,I,
\ �TII I 1 66W ��'1111'li'11111 ,lii , `, `,\` ; Ir „I,yli1u1l1,uy
\ \ \ ` -r, -Ul 1 �� ,\` 11 11(��
;I
1111111 r1
\\
\ ��, 1111'11 x'I�x:l,.x i'�p11i 1'ImKlu
_
\ \ \ ` ` 1� x , 1 1 ` \ 11' x11 1 1,, 1 \ `� \� I I,
-� C'x', `, `, \ - 1'11111111'1111r�Ili1�J
\\ �� \ x�1�T
I 1
1
u,lunl
1
111 1111
\ I ;�1 1 _ ,{K' , 1'1'','11', 1',1,x1'1 11',x
\ \,
♦ \ a ^� \ 1 1 1 , �. 1 �- ___ `x �`,', \,II 1 ' 1 x``, i�i1111iililillii "IIji11, l� 1
- \ ♦ `� j�T \ ` 1 1 �'1 1 1'�`'x`' ` \' ` \ \,O" x11111 , I
`\ \\\\ xa' �11111i1i1111111111'11; II
111 1iNi111
11111W 1111
;1111.111111
\ 0 11111111,11
I'\ � '\
n 1 x
b
1111 1'i 1111
1111111,11111
1111111,1,
I
�� ♦ \ \ ` 1 1 x \ ' \ -- ,r ` \'`,,,xx \ '11n111 111
'� i ' '1� , 'x111111,
1 1 I
111111111111
,
1 , I '' \, i \„`, \1 x`\ xx ,\ , 111111111 ,1
,, 1 1111111
1 1 `` \ 1 \ "' \ \,,,\ ,` \`,,`, \` \; �` ',111111111111 , 1
1` ', ' 1 ' ' % - __�'_ ` �r , \�, ;\,1\ , \, . ` ```\ i 111111; i1111111''jii
, 1 ``\ `\ �\` \ `�
,`, \, x'xlx`,\, \'`�`�,\
Oi
1 1 1
; 1 1
I
111111111
1 it 11
1 11 I
1ii111i'i lit
111111111
C �\ r 11111;111111 111'1 1
1 rI ;.� \x \ \`` '\ 1111111
`�� M I 1 IIO \ \\ ``�`` \�� ',1
1 1 1 \ 1 'x``\. 1 �.y, \`I
1 11 ..} 'x 1\ \ 'I : ",� Ixx`,x \x', x`,1 ,♦ , \`�;'
1
I u
p11'1111
p111;1
'� ,, \, III W111111I��11111
\ I l I _- II ', 1 1 ; 1 \ ') r r` ���\�• �` \�. I �'1'IxlI x \ `` \;,;,`� \`, x'x 11�I,; 11 1
1 I i' t ♦ ��� ` "�``x``� ,` 1i 111 1'i
'
1 I I
1
r 1'i 11111ii11I
'
r, - 1111 V x A 1i11,1u
ea -- 1 I
1 1
Iun1111h
1tl 1uu1
y V V' V: 1A 111j1'1111n1, ;P
r `,A�x`1�''1`V` xA'11'1 111i;11niy;11
, 1
,
,I11w
, 11111
\` \,
O ♦ j I 1 1 � 1 � i "ouc. `, ', \, 11 I
1
11111111111
1 \��„• 1 ,,,1
Ir
/ 1
"
11111 1111111
'111
1
;
11 11111
;Til
11goi1
'111,111'
1';j i'1, ''l 1'111 N1111 '1111'1'1.111
1 1 1
11 111111
'1i11a1n,
x 1P 1 1 1 111 1
1
1
'
,\(/ 1111 Ijl�i 1 1 ,11 11
1
,
11 luq
i� 1�Y
2,G)
,��, I x'1;11';',i',x',1�1 Ir',1 „1 11ij1'�i���lii; �
'111'11'11 P1 1 111 iiljii'1; 11111,11 r}
,M ',x111'`11 , 1'I t', x1','111 ', n1,11;1, 111;, 1`9
1 1
1 I
;
i 1
I
;
11 ;ilui�iinl�
O 11wtl,ii111
N In11111
1
1
-- ----- ; l ' l `\• ' i ' ; \ b 1 ,IF' i1, 11111x 1x x`x\ ,Ix , 1u,111,; 1 1
/ 1 \\;',` x 'I'i''1 I
1 ' i
1
1
, 1
I
11 ulbnr
11 N111111
, \, xxlxx�
/'11111 11 1
r ` iiil''inl
'
' I \x; \`,
u I
I 1
11 °iinlln
'u'I�i�'i111
�'x � ; 1 I \� ♦ x\`
1 I a1 11 i \\ \\..11ii1ii�111iiii i
,\`\``�.
1 I
i
1
- - -- 11 1 i � ` \\ i 1 ,\° � i , x1 •° i `\ ��
� ry��•Yy1 '� _, `` �� `\d ``.`���``: �``,` r'iijlulilii'IO`1
I
I
1' 111111 11�i1i�11111
_ _ - ."
♦
O ♦ \�h�, 1 \ ,.,, x` ♦`x`, - 1111,111 °1
\ •``\`. �`\` \ ,,11 1 -- - ,'Ifni'
a \ \ \ ``5 ` 65
I
I
1 ` \ ♦ \ 1 1.
` \ pl�l' / 1� , \ \p \\ T``_,'1'111;i'111
; \ \11011
1 1
1
111 y;01II 111111;
11111
Cd \1 fp 11, I
_ �T_ \ , IN;' f 'i1i �X` \, iii' 1111
♦`.`: ��. \ I ` , _, /1, 2 J` „`I,t,`�`1♦ O i 11'11 l
. ��``�` \ \r 1 I
` \ \,.
STA.'$7� ``�� T' '`, �' �,. 1 "
1
1 1
V
10
11 1 11
i, l;u
II 11 lul
;evil
X21 -' -'' ,,r,r' a :, \,`;, __rl;h
, ` ` �. 1. ,
_Lr�_��� `� `\ ` ♦`
`````. \'
\`` �J':``�.;,•.
1 _
``
`
mss,,, �\
11'
1•_'1�` \ ` \ \` _ �•x 'U \` 1 11 ;
1 1 `t�;- �_�;�� \ \ \. `\ �t1�1dkNT
1
I
; 1
,
h 1 ♦ ` . .� 1 ' `V 111
�' I;
vp
,'11 ,
1 p II i,l
_ _ �
j ' 1 � ; � I � 1 '1 ; � 11 ' �
� ,
1
� i1��1'11'i�l'n
V ,(•� JJ
,_ __
�1
W
``
``� `\ `` ♦
1 II 1 1 1 j _ `` ``` ```
` `\ \j. lii`� I 1 1 1
O
1
\\ \` . \\ 1
1 1 11 I I °S6
1 11111111111111
9
00 -' •�g9_, U,1,f 1 11'1 1
1 ,
rot YY��
l 1 0 \ ` , \ ` nl ii ' 11 I
1
I
11111111111
6D `` ` (• '11
\`,'\ 1 \ I
ijl 11 \ -' -_ �`\ \\ � \`` 1 , o;inli
; ,
I .p
111111111'11;
1 ♦\ -_ `\\ \ `� x1 1 1 ` ', `, `\ \`\ N 114111r '1 1 1 1
1
1
11101
50 0
25 50
SCALE: III= 100' HORIZ.
ENLARGED
PLAN VIEW
SITE 4
INC®I®'I]PL E
lE 1PII ANS
DO NOT USE FOR
/ W ACQUISITION
]PR E]LIMIIN
RY PLANS
DO NOT USE FO
CONSTRUCTION
LEGEND
DENOTES PERMANENT
IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER

z
]z z
w
Z
oZ
�w
PROJECT REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO.
'C Raleigh, NC 27607 RW SHEET NO.
s1zJ Kingdom 10 way,
Suite 100
0
WETLANDAND SURFACE WATER IMPACTS PERMIT Engineering NC License Nn: F-0258 ROADWAY DESIGN HYDRAULICS
O ENGINEER ENGINEER
CN
N
N
K
N
00
Q
a
iz
N. C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF H[IG]HWAYS
HIGH oLb 9 \m ♦ ROWAN COUNTY NONE. LLC \� \\ PROJECT: W -5516
\ \
OLD BEAT TY FORD ROAD
\ \\ FROM WEST OF BOSTIAN
\\ ROAD INTERSECTION
�\ TO 1LENTZ ROAD
te�
SHEET OF
\ PERMIT DRAWING
SHEET _ OF _ GLI
TDE �' "� \\
1/
CLASS B RIP RAP
EST 3 TONS
EST 10 SY GT Or j i \
°
O E��E E E -�F i i/ JOE \ �+
N I R __F W
LU
Lu
W /� W ����� F �� N LU
W -
N
O
_
- - -- -- °
° W - - - - -- - -- +
/
R ' _� R 'C'/ /ESE E -E
R
�F _ E
I / �
°s �E E E�
W SEE tLARGED AREA Z J O SHEET 9A =
_ V
V
Q
I
I
m
9
P
O
LI
a O
9
E
NO BRDQE� L W
T O
9
HM LwoaE.Luc
N
3
PLAN VIEW
SITE 5
E
100 0
LEGEND
f
50 100 * * * * DENOTES MECHANIZED
SCALE: I "= 100' HORIZ. * * * * * ** CLEARING
INC ®IdIIy]LE
E PLANS
DO NOT USE POR
! W ACQUISITION
Il�I8ICI,IM[IN
I8�' Il�]LANS
DO NOT USE FO
CONSTRUCTION

Z
z
w
z
oz
�w
�Y
0
0
N
N
K
N
00
0
a
z
50 0
25 50
SCALE: I "= 100' HORIZ.
WETLAND AND SURFACE WATER IMPACTS PERMIT
ENLARGED
PLAN VIEW
SITE 5
INCOM PL E
L9
DO NOT USE FOR
/ W ACQUISITION
]PR E]LIMIIN
RY PLANS
HIGH BRIDGE, LLC
/ fill
;
I
�
;
it
�.
< � TDE�T�F
R
-ODE TDE
ToF R
W
W
<
,
'
F
�
R
W
ENLARGED
PLAN VIEW
SITE 5
INCOM PL E
E PLANS
DO NOT USE FOR
/ W ACQUISITION
]PR E]LIMIIN
RY PLANS
DO NOT USE FO
CONSTRUCTION
LEGEND
* * * * DENOTES MECHANIZED
CLEARING

Z
w
z
oZ
�w
�L)
WETLAND AND SURFACE WATER IMPACTS PERMIT Raleigh, NC 27607 R4N SHEET NO.
Engineering NC Liiease Nun Ea2sa ROADWAY DESIGN
O G .7 .7 ENGINEER
O
N
N
K
N
00
Q
a
z
N. C. DEPT. OF °dTRAN
,- -- ' _ ' _ \ s DIVISION OF H P
♦ I I .r
`_- - - -__- __ _ _ ' , I I I III 1 I / i i i i / � ` / r 1 r , I ' ' / ' � �`
/ � -_, _, � __ _ - -�S9 \ \\ �. to
]E8 ®WAN C ®U�
' : ro (I <I , r / - -- �!!. - \ , PROJECT: W
�`_ 'ir Iii "' ii ,'i '� - - ♦♦\ \, �'' ', �`, ``', \` l �i'' --- o. ,SS \ \\`� \ ` \•,
i II 1, i,rV,i ,'� - \ \, `\O,', ,1;,,\'\♦`�` iir r/r iii i
I
FROM WEST OF
` � r r I `
i'
\ / (1 1 ry I 1 r r � r .or �'; �; / , `, \', ',\-, , , �`, \� `� ` r / 1 ' i l / - - -- - -- - -- ��S! � ` `�`� `� ` ` ` ♦ `` `. \ ROAD 1<N°Il°E]E8S]E
r
.. -- -- _ % / ' ' / r ! 1 r r 111; ' / , � ' o , ♦ � ♦ r / ; / , / _ _ \ ` \ � ` ♦ , '�� \ °I°O 1LEN°lf°Z IF
`.---55L- i l ; i r i l {' ', V, •♦ `, ` \\ \ `, \ `, `, \`, ; ✓',, i / r l .08 ----- - - - - - -- - . \ ` \` �`\ �` ```` `` \.`ik,, �e ` SHEET OF
„
` \" ` - ```: ; ' r arll II 1 III' ,, i ' ``♦``\` ,\♦ \�\, ,\ \`, �`\`� ,'i'' ' i ' , /i----------------- \ --- ` `` \` �\` \` ♦`\` - \�
- - -. - -
PERMIT DRAWING
`� S9 - -- ,
- -- - -'; % ,;�`' %% ;';' `.a' �`, ; ♦\ � ',` ♦, �; ♦`:`;`,�``,\ \� ;� SHEET _ OF
8
I
,
2n ,
B,RIP RAP- mi ', .`♦` \`♦`�`�„♦,\`,\�♦`_!
77 ST,3`TOAis / +�l,��r,,,♦i /!„` Iun .;lr rr/, u'. - ♦ ♦ \ �_cn... r /., I ` i
♦` r`. q,\ \ ♦�, 111 1 ♦ ,\♦`` \�� \ \� ������`_ 'il! r'ii / - -- l I I rfl /i, ",l "4' _ _ _ _ `J O
`ST q9 -SY GI` ` ♦\.H, \A\"" ` ,\ - /, ,/, rl / -- - ' -- - -- _ i', �1 rl r/, 1, �, _ _F.I \% \ `;.
- - -- ", I, /'r,/ rrI' I, `1 `�`�`, \`♦``, ,`. rIi , ' ' - 1 11 , r/ r� ,1 - ^_ 6�
\ - --
i
\` �... qL_ "' `.` ,,'„i'," ,I iniii 'n1 /r -_- :' ♦`` ,\ \`, , /ri ,r1�', /, iii --- - -_ - -_ I 111 iir l' 'i/ ',1 -��i _ /i
\ \ ,�,
\ , \♦,`,`�```�a5 /nl�i'r ` ♦`.,\`` `p`�:.,' I, 'O \ lI Iln''„ _ ./
\`,`„� \`, ",` , \,x`,1,11,, "jiii'll,', 1, Ir „/r r'r ,/, `` ♦\, `�` ♦, `, 6� / iji11 I/N i'ii,ii �[� _ "� `�.�! _ \_ _
O ` `, , . ---. ` , , /,rr;/,r, i;' „ /r,' ♦� `� ♦..,r„ 1 r,�r; ,I '/' _ h; Ir ,n, ', /' G'�� /,. �1�E- :'IE
i 0
`
Im
I '
\ ;, , , `, r, 06`,` \ �♦ ♦, �� ` \' rivi i � ^' i i i i ' „ l _ _
H y \, `,\, � E.- i', ',l1 r ri,,, /,. f /il; l / %'; ,r� 74 " �` ``SA` '�� ' rE�� ,�': ,'i�' /'i: _ ::X - - -- W
mot__ ` \ \,`, �� �♦ `�,`, \,` l'r'E ��� -' W
♦ _
IWy ��v�``-- `, +i�tn'C �. , ,` ', �/, i /,, ,♦,`� I' Im u— -� - i�'�� _ -_ y ;�/ \ A^
N ` ` `�_ `�. .`♦„`,\ / / /r�'r/ r /ui /ii, rl r _ _ ♦`� ` `;.\\ 1 1 "T� / F:�' •59 �'' -,� - - _'SG/i.,�... \\ <. i
r
`mss ± �� - L��' --
;,< ,b`!l ( ♦� �. �r ,�,, ;'�; /r ' /11 - •0 - /. �'. �` \� i N Lu
r'
W `-`- `.. �♦' -_ � �� \`.`♦�,, Sy yrr/`,rrr/,i:, /r'rr O.
,
` w '� I
+
r C
a - - --
- -- . - -', •;;;;;;i ��' _ °a vii
i
- '
,
,
° - -
W � v \ � _ "_- ---- -- SEE LARG f1, AREA` Z
Lu
- --------------------- - _ - - - - - -- , O SHE.f 9A .
I
I V
1
I
'
,
,
•S6L
v ------ - - - --- -
1
,
o° -- ------------------------------ `��a
,
,
♦
-
1
-- \ yb -008.___ --
I _
I
r
j♦
- _
1
-- _ -
785- - - - --• `
EIP
HO Mom LL.6
,
,
,
,
, ,ry`I
♦` `\ `\ \ , , J , , , \ 0 \
P VIEW
SITE 5
INC ®I®'IE]LE
E 1PILANS
DO NOT USE POR
! W ACQUISITION
Il�I8ICI,IA9[IN
I8�' Il�]LANS
DO NOT USE FO
CONSTRVCTiON
100 0
50 100
SCALE: 111= 100' HORIZ.
LEGEND
* * * * DENOTES MECHANIZED
* * * ** *s CLEARING

Nvdz Lz w � W �
0 9 Lv0 �f O 3 �a 30 0 0
I 1 l I I
N N 0 Q
I i I �♦ � I II II`\ i ,I , II I
I I I
III ,� i
eI I � I , \`/ •
I , �� ; I I � I ♦ �� � 1 jI / I
,
I
I
_
� - - - - ! I
I
I I
1 �I
�
-_
* * * ** • * . ** . Il I�DNTO SD IC O N3_ OI®NLT O IIT iUN ISIUE Il� TSE ]FN L O
R FE _ O
/
E
AaAN
S
N 8Y PLANS
CONSTRUTON
00 Z N. C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
\ ROWAN COUNTY
P ROJECT: W -5516
OLD BEATTY FORD ROAD
FROM WEST OF BOSTIAN
ROAD INTERSECTION
TO LENTZ ROAD
OF IEE
PERMIT DRAWING
SHEET OF G
j 75 0 _760 ____ ___ ____
TDE
E L ENLARGED
PLAN VIEW
SITE 5
E 50 0 LEGEND
DENOTES MECHANIZED
CLEARING 25 50
SCALE: I"= 100' HORIZe
�-6
PROJECT REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO.
5121 Kingdom Way, -55/6 9
WETLAND AND SURFACE WATER IMPACTS P
PERMIT
suit o 100
Raleigh, NC 27607 RW SHEET NO.
Engineering N
I, s
O
ENGINEER ENGINEER
O

a
\\
E PLANS
DO NOT USE FOR
/ W ACQUISITION
Il�I8ICI,IM[IN
BEGINNING OF
DO NOT USE FO
CONSTRUCTION
PROJECT REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO.
\\
STREAM
E —E
' �
512] Way, — JCJC�6 /0
WETLAND
AND SURFACE WATER IMPACTS
PERMIT
Suite I00
cite 10m
Raleigh,NC27607 PW SHEET NO.
E
Ems— E --
CLASS I RIP RAP
Eng�neer�ng
G .7 .7
NCLii. - Nu: F0258 ROADWAY DESIGN HYDRAULICS
ENGINEER ENGINEER
EST 15 TONS W
EST 29 SY GT �
O
T.
1
J
fV
N
c�
Q
Z
N. C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
9
ROWAN COUNTY
No BRDOE.LLC
PROJECT: W -5516
OLD BEA'Il TY FORD ROAD
FROM WEST OF BOSTIAN
ROAD INTERSECTION
TO ]LENTZ ROAD
SHEET OF
PERMIT DRAWING
\\
SHEET _ OF
�DE�ro
F�TDE
O
O
E Z
Z
R
OF
R E E
E E— ------ E
E
-------------
E _- _•_ - - - -- h
- - - - --
LU
_ -- - - - - --
_ - - --- - -
— — — — c --
- --
W
W
—'
`—
LLJ
W
W
- -�
�� Pq
W
N
N
O
O
O
_ -F
•
-
- --
-- — - --
--
R
O
+
R ,c -
o
O___�
- - - - -
- -------
Q`
R
--- -- ------
- - - - -- =E
E
E�-
-- - - --
---
Q
E E E
N
f^\
N
J
`
J
I
/f
F` �E
V
I
Z
SEE ENLARGED AREA
W
Z
ON SHEET 9A
J
I
SEE ENLARGED AREA
ON SHEET 10A
0
^I
/
E
O
��
a
v'
FIOB BRDOE. LLC
s
N
3
PLAN VIEW
a
SITE 6
LEGEND
E
0
DENOTES TEMPORARY
� w
I00
0
®
IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
z�
DENOTES PERMANENT
Z.
F. T
W
5O
100 TOTAL PROJECT
LENGTH: 2.39 MILES
®
IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
z=
PROPOSED
36" RCP -III
Z�
SCALE: I "=
100' HORIZ.
* + : .
*� *s'.
DENOTES MECHANIZED
•
CLEARING
¢_
V�
\\
E PLANS
DO NOT USE FOR
/ W ACQUISITION
Il�I8ICI,IM[IN
BEGINNING OF
DO NOT USE FO
CONSTRUCTION
JURISDICTIONAL
\\
STREAM
E —E
E
Ems— E --
CLASS I RIP RAP
BANK STABILIZATION
EST 15 TONS W
EST 29 SY GT �
T.
1
J
INC ®IdIU]LE
E PLANS
DO NOT USE FOR
/ W ACQUISITION
Il�I8ICI,IM[IN
I8�' PLANS
DO NOT USE FO
CONSTRUCTION

O
O
N
N
V)
o0
Q
Z
WETLAND AND SURFACE WATER IMPACTS PERMIT
,5121 Kingdorn Way,
k l6ght 1 NC276O7
Engineering NCL" .-M.' F02'8
REFERENCE NO. I SHEET NO.
RAN SHEET NO.
ROADWAY DESIGN HYDRAULICS
ENGINEER ENGINEER
INCOMP]LE
BEGINNING OF
O
/ W ACQUISITION
JURISDICTIONAL
RY PLANS
DO NOT USE FO
STREAM
E E
E
E E
E.---------------------------------
C -
----------------------------- --- -- - - --
R
< vpl
t
-- - - - - -- - --
t
w
~
BANK STABILIZATION
CLASS I RIP RAP
EST 15 TONS w
EST 29 SY GT
W
0
YI
r
REFERENCE NO. I SHEET NO.
RAN SHEET NO.
ROADWAY DESIGN HYDRAULICS
ENGINEER ENGINEER
N. C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
IIDIIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
ROWAN COUNTY
]PROJECT: W -5516
OLD BEA'II TY FORD ROAD
FROM WEST OF BOSTIAN
ROAD INTERSECTION
TO ]LENTZ ROAD
SHEET OF
PERMIT DRAWING
SHEET _ OF
ENLARGED
PLAN VIEW
SITE 6
LEGEND
50 O
®DENOTES TEMPORARY
IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
25 50 ® DENOTES PERMANENT
SCALE: III= 100' HORIZ. IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
a
s
INCOMP]LE
rE PLANS
DO NOT USE FOR
/ W ACQUISITION
]PR E]LIMIIN
RY PLANS
DO NOT USE FO
CONSTRUCTION
N. C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
IIDIIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
ROWAN COUNTY
]PROJECT: W -5516
OLD BEA'II TY FORD ROAD
FROM WEST OF BOSTIAN
ROAD INTERSECTION
TO ]LENTZ ROAD
SHEET OF
PERMIT DRAWING
SHEET _ OF
ENLARGED
PLAN VIEW
SITE 6
LEGEND
50 O
®DENOTES TEMPORARY
IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
25 50 ® DENOTES PERMANENT
SCALE: III= 100' HORIZ. IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
a
s

PROJECT REFERENCE NO.
---------- 5121 Kingd— Way, W-5516
Suite 10
It Raleigh, NC 27607 RW SHEET NO.
WETLAND AND SURFACE WATER IMPACTS PERMIT N,.: F 02,58 ROADWAY DESIGN
Engineering NC L—.
C, ENGINEER
SHEET NO.
HYDRAULICS
ENGINEER
-----------
-------------
-----------
----- -------
--------------- -------- 1, IN OF
'90
-- / , I i � 1, 1, 1 I'l � , i ,/ A NAL
-- ---------- -------- --
ISIYACTIO
1, ---------- 0
Ir, I I I , , ,
EAW,,-- --- - ----
z
0
F
z -E
------- �-7 �7 LU
- c
LU
LU
LU �80
V)
-77
i LU
-----------
--------- --
LU
7
LL
LU ------ OLL k
------ --- -
IgO ---- -------------------------
-- ---------------- --- -------- ------
-------------------------
0
+
+ w 0
�4- ...
E- - ♦ - - - - - - - - - - - -
E; ---
E --------- E
E 0 ......
7ATION
15 Tq4t,
�ANK �T�
---- ------
-------- LU
b
-------------
z ----------- z
-SEE-Ek LARl ARE
-- -- -------
---------------- -j
ON SHEET 9A,,--'
--------------------
. ........
U F-
J1
--------------- ---- 770--,
--- - - - -- _-__--- ---'770
---- -----------
"6
------ ------
0 ------
--------------
'o, -------------
------ Rl AREA' 6.5
---------- -
SEE ENIA
---------- ON 'SHEET It ------
5
0- )A --------
x- -----
v
7"161
PLAN VIEW
SITE 6
LEGEND
DENOTES TEMPORARY
100 0 FFMA IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
DENOTES PERMANENT
TOTAL PROJECT LENGTH: 2.39 MILES IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
50 100 PROPOSED 36" RCP-111 DENOTES MECHANIZED
SCALE: I'l 100' HORIZ. CLEARING
--
rE PLANS
9
790,
ACQUISITION
k/� �cw
R Y PLANSI
. . .
---------
CONSTRUCTIoN
♦Go
80
901,
---- ------------
----------------- 0
9
N. C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
"o ---------
- --------------
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
♦
795 -------- 11, 1A
10,11,
ROWAN COUNTY
1,9
PROJECT: W-5516
0.
m mom
OLD BEATTY FORD ROAD
FROM WEST OF BOSTIAN
------------
ROAD INTERSECTION
TOLENTZ ROAD
A,
SHEET OF
1po
0
PERMIT DRAW ING
jq
------ -------------- o
------------ Ilk
SHEET OF
GPI
-----------
-------------
-----------
----- -------
--------------- -------- 1, IN OF
'90
-- / , I i � 1, 1, 1 I'l � , i ,/ A NAL
-- ---------- -------- --
ISIYACTIO
1, ---------- 0
Ir, I I I , , ,
EAW,,-- --- - ----
z
0
F
z -E
------- �-7 �7 LU
- c
LU
LU
LU �80
V)
-77
i LU
-----------
--------- --
LU
7
LL
LU ------ OLL k
------ --- -
IgO ---- -------------------------
-- ---------------- --- -------- ------
-------------------------
0
+
+ w 0
�4- ...
E- - ♦ - - - - - - - - - - - -
E; ---
E --------- E
E 0 ......
7ATION
15 Tq4t,
�ANK �T�
---- ------
-------- LU
b
-------------
z ----------- z
-SEE-Ek LARl ARE
-- -- -------
---------------- -j
ON SHEET 9A,,--'
--------------------
. ........
U F-
J1
--------------- ---- 770--,
--- - - - -- _-__--- ---'770
---- -----------
"6
------ ------
0 ------
--------------
'o, -------------
------ Rl AREA' 6.5
---------- -
SEE ENIA
---------- ON 'SHEET It ------
5
0- )A --------
x- -----
v
7"161
PLAN VIEW
SITE 6
LEGEND
DENOTES TEMPORARY
100 0 FFMA IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
DENOTES PERMANENT
TOTAL PROJECT LENGTH: 2.39 MILES IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
50 100 PROPOSED 36" RCP-111 DENOTES MECHANIZED
SCALE: I'l 100' HORIZ. CLEARING
DO NOT USE FOR
DO NOT USE FO
-----------
-------------
-----------
----- -------
--------------- -------- 1, IN OF
'90
-- / , I i � 1, 1, 1 I'l � , i ,/ A NAL
-- ---------- -------- --
ISIYACTIO
1, ---------- 0
Ir, I I I , , ,
EAW,,-- --- - ----
z
0
F
z -E
------- �-7 �7 LU
- c
LU
LU
LU �80
V)
-77
i LU
-----------
--------- --
LU
7
LL
LU ------ OLL k
------ --- -
IgO ---- -------------------------
-- ---------------- --- -------- ------
-------------------------
0
+
+ w 0
�4- ...
E- - ♦ - - - - - - - - - - - -
E; ---
E --------- E
E 0 ......
7ATION
15 Tq4t,
�ANK �T�
---- ------
-------- LU
b
-------------
z ----------- z
-SEE-Ek LARl ARE
-- -- -------
---------------- -j
ON SHEET 9A,,--'
--------------------
. ........
U F-
J1
--------------- ---- 770--,
--- - - - -- _-__--- ---'770
---- -----------
"6
------ ------
0 ------
--------------
'o, -------------
------ Rl AREA' 6.5
---------- -
SEE ENIA
---------- ON 'SHEET It ------
5
0- )A --------
x- -----
v
7"161
PLAN VIEW
SITE 6
LEGEND
DENOTES TEMPORARY
100 0 FFMA IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
DENOTES PERMANENT
TOTAL PROJECT LENGTH: 2.39 MILES IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
50 100 PROPOSED 36" RCP-111 DENOTES MECHANIZED
SCALE: I'l 100' HORIZ. CLEARING

C'
O
O
N
V)
V)
ri
Q
z
WETLAND AND SURFACE WATER IMPACTS PERMIT
1 Ralr'zgi, NC 227 07
Engineering NCLcense No: F-0258
NO.
RW SHEET NO.
ROADWAY DESIGN HYDRAULICS
ENGINEER ENGINEER
INCOMP]LE
i
DO NOT USE FOR
/w ACQUISITION
------- - - - - --
co BEOII`+I
i Q
CONSTRUCTION
----------
-'�
STkEAIV1'�
.
- - - --
i
- --
I I 1
\ �%�--- - - - -
-- - - - - -- - --- - - - - --
ND
►I
Lp
-----
0 1
- - -
-----------
- --
-- - - - - --
--
- -- -- - - --
-
I
rT-
,
--
—
r-� - - +_�_�
- - - - --
t \1
-- - - - - -- --
' i/
%
,Ty� -i 1>
`-- - - �
-' - - -- - -- - - - - -- / ; i
1
T'�
�� I
_E
E 1
- - - - _ -
_-
C ' ' I, RIP' PAP
BANK`,ST413111ZATION
-- 1
I _
_
- EST' 15 TO'NiS
-
-
- - -- EST }29 $Y ;CST;
-- -
- --
- --
'
- --
760
_ --
-
NO.
RW SHEET NO.
ROADWAY DESIGN HYDRAULICS
ENGINEER ENGINEER
INCOMP]LE
E PII,ANS
DO NOT USE FOR
/w ACQUISITION
PRE]LIMIN
RY PLANS
DO NOT USE PO
CONSTRUCTION
N. C. IDEPT.OF TRANSPOIRTATION
IIDIVISION OF H[IG]HWAYS
]ROWAN COUNTY
PROJECT: W -5516
OLD BEATTY FORD ROAD
FROM WEST OF BOSTIAN
ROAD INTERSECTION
TO ]LENTZ ROAD
SHEET OF
PERMIT DRAWING
SHEET _ OF
ENLARGED
PLAN VIEW
SITE 6
LEGEND
50 O
®DENOTES TEMPORARY
IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
25 50 ® DENOTES PERMANENT
SCALE: 11'= 100' HORIZe IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
a
E;

-o
Q
m
WETLAND AND SURFACE WATER IMPACTS PERMIT
0
O
N
N DETAIL A DETAIL E
Q. LATERAL 'V' DITCH SPECIAL CUT DITCH PLAN N \,I E \A/
N IN.�,p xaiel IN re. xpiel LA Y YY
N.t.r.l �otrol z.e SITE 7A & Site 7B
Graend :) D 1 "F�. Slope Ground! D F
a d
Q Geoeextile Min. D– 1 Ft.
Q Min. D= 1 Ft. f Lner
i= PSRM M— d= 1 Ft.
Z Max. d= 1 R. YPe o
Type of Liner= Cl— B Rip –R.p b =5 R. FROM STA. 109 +50 TO STA. 110 -h 50 –L– RT
FROM STA, 110 +00 TO STA. 111 +50 -L- LT
FROM STA. 106 +50 TO STA. 108+04 -L- LT
FROM STA. 106 +50 TO STA. 108 +20 -L- RT
FROM STA. 108 +32 TO STA. 109 +50 -L- RT
FROM STA. 109 +00 TO STA. 110 +00 -L- LT
O E ELF
W c
LU
N
LU
LU
Ln l
�E �E
LU
Z
J
2
U
7
HIGH BRIDGE, LLC
15 LF OF INLET
CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT
EST. 10 TONS CL. 'l' RIP RAP
EST. 15 SY GEOTEXTILE
LATERAL V DITCH � SITE 7A
W /CLASS B RIP RAP
SEE DETAIL A
LATERAL V DITCH—/ —TDE
W /CLASS B RIP RAP
SEE DETAIL A
BANK STABILIZATION —/
SEE ENLARGED AREA
ON SHEET 11A
ICAW5 121 Kingdom Way,
R Icgh�NC27 07
Engineering NC License No F-0258
TOTAL PROJECT LENGTH: 2.39 MILES
PROPOSED CULVERT: 8'x 7' RCBC
PROJECT REFERENCE NO. I SHEET NO.
—55/6
I /l
RW SHEET NO.
:OADWAY DESIGN
ENGINEER
HYDRAULICS
ENGINEER
16
LARRY W.& BARBARA B. BASINGER
\ 1 @ 8'. 7' RCBC
FLOODPLAIN PIPE BURIED 1'
\ 72" RCP BURIED V
EIP
EXCAVATION
1.5' THICK
(TYP.) 1' SILL
CLASS 'I' RIP RAP USE SILLS THROUGHOUT LEGEND
/GEOTEXTILE CULVERT LENGTH; BACKFILL
W /NATIVE MATERIAL
® EXCAVATION =70 Cy ® DENOTES TEMPORARY
OUTLET CHANNEL IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
(LOOKING DOWNSTREAM) ® DENOTES PERMANENT
(NOT TO SCALE) IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
rE PLANS
/ W ACQUISITION
kYBT PLIAN$
INCOMPLE
DO NOT USE FOR
PRELo MIN FOR
Ni C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
16
LARRY W.& BARBARA B. BASINGER
\ 1 @ 8'. 7' RCBC
FLOODPLAIN PIPE BURIED 1'
\ 72" RCP BURIED V
EIP
EXCAVATION
1.5' THICK
(TYP.) 1' SILL
CLASS 'I' RIP RAP USE SILLS THROUGHOUT LEGEND
/GEOTEXTILE CULVERT LENGTH; BACKFILL
W /NATIVE MATERIAL
® EXCAVATION =70 Cy ® DENOTES TEMPORARY
OUTLET CHANNEL IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
(LOOKING DOWNSTREAM) ® DENOTES PERMANENT
(NOT TO SCALE) IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
Ni C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HWHWAY$
FLOODPLAIN PIPE
ROWAN COUNTY
72" RCP BURIED F
1 C 8' x 7' RCBC
\G
BURIED
PPCOJEOM W-$$16
�K /*
EXCAVATION
OLD BEATTY FORD ROAD
o_
FROM WEST OF BOSTIAN
ROAD INTEPOECTION
0
TO LENTZ ROAD
HIGH BRIDGE, LLC
$HEFT OF
T s s ED
1.5' THICK
1
ry USE SILLS THROUGHOUT
PERMIT DRAWING
O APPROX. 20'CENTERF1
(TYPO
'I'
CULVERT LENGTH; BACKFILL
SHEET — OF
— GLI
20 OF INLET
CLASS RIP RAP
r /GEOTEXTILE
W /NATIVE MATERIAL
EXCAVATION
CH NEL IMPROVEMENT
ES 10 TONS CL. '1' RIP RAP
_
E5 .15 SY GEOTEXTILE
\
INLET CHANNEL
BANK LATERAL V DITCH
B RIP RAP
(LOOKING DOWNSTREAM)
SEE DETAIL A
J ,STABILIZATION SEE DES
(NOT TO SCALE)
1 SIT 7B
CN
SPECIAL CUT DIT H
O
WiPSRM
o E SEE DETAIL E
E� —E
E
E Z
% c E
E
h-
E
—
� � �
I
LLI
W
_
N 86'37'01'W
N 85 °37'01' W
R
4.34'
390.30'
N
LL
N
i
R
p
E E
E �rE
E E
E ,O
E
10 r
OE
SPECIAL CUT DITCH
W/PSRM
MARK A.& JOY L.ROBERTS Q
SEE DEFAIL E
—
_ N
I
FLOODPLAIN PIPE LATERAL V DITCH
ID STATION 108 +54.0 W /CLASS B RIP RAP
I
J
72" RCP -III BURIED 1' SEE DETAIL A
LENGTH 83.9'
SKEW = 114
s
I
LL
Z
20 LF OF OUTLET
_
CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT
-
14
EST. 15 TONS CL.'1' RIP RAP
U
EST. 25 SY GEOTEXTILE
TERRY 0. BASINGER
F-
EI
E
E �
I
16
LARRY W.& BARBARA B. BASINGER
\ 1 @ 8'. 7' RCBC
FLOODPLAIN PIPE BURIED 1'
\ 72" RCP BURIED V
EIP
EXCAVATION
1.5' THICK
(TYP.) 1' SILL
CLASS 'I' RIP RAP USE SILLS THROUGHOUT LEGEND
/GEOTEXTILE CULVERT LENGTH; BACKFILL
W /NATIVE MATERIAL
® EXCAVATION =70 Cy ® DENOTES TEMPORARY
OUTLET CHANNEL IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
(LOOKING DOWNSTREAM) ® DENOTES PERMANENT
(NOT TO SCALE) IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
O
HIGH BRIDGE, LLC
FLOODPLAIN PIPE
72" RCP BURIED F
1 C 8' x 7' RCBC
\G
BURIED
EXCAVATION
1' SILL
1.5' THICK
1
ry USE SILLS THROUGHOUT
00 O
(TYPO
'I'
CULVERT LENGTH; BACKFILL
CLASS RIP RAP
r /GEOTEXTILE
W /NATIVE MATERIAL
EXCAVATION
® EXCAVATION -50 CY
50 100
INLET CHANNEL
SCALE: 1 "— 100' HORIZ.
(LOOKING DOWNSTREAM)
(NOT TO SCALE)
16
LARRY W.& BARBARA B. BASINGER
\ 1 @ 8'. 7' RCBC
FLOODPLAIN PIPE BURIED 1'
\ 72" RCP BURIED V
EIP
EXCAVATION
1.5' THICK
(TYP.) 1' SILL
CLASS 'I' RIP RAP USE SILLS THROUGHOUT LEGEND
/GEOTEXTILE CULVERT LENGTH; BACKFILL
W /NATIVE MATERIAL
® EXCAVATION =70 Cy ® DENOTES TEMPORARY
OUTLET CHANNEL IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
(LOOKING DOWNSTREAM) ® DENOTES PERMANENT
(NOT TO SCALE) IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER

aN�
www
0
0
N
to
cn
\N
00
ao
Q
Q
Z
WETLAND AND SURFACE WATER IMPACTS PERMIT
FLOODPLAIN PIPE
72" RCP BURIED 1'
\tiG
1.5' TH
(TYP.)
CLASS 'I' RIP
.GEOTEXTILE
INC®MPLE
DO NOT USE FOR
E PLANS
/ W ACQUISITION
T T T
15 LF OF INLET
20 F OF INLET
CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT
CH� NEL IMPROVEMENT
EST. 10 TONS CL. '1' RIP RAP
ESTJ. 10 TONS CL. '1' RIP RAP
EST. 15 SY GEOTEXTILE
ES7. 15 SY GEOTEXTILE
SITE 7A
J x SITE 713
1 @
R
BANK STABILIZATION
BURIED IBC (
SKEW = 81
R
E
E l
IN
c E
BANK STABILIZATION
- - - -_
C-
- - - --
- --
HW
F
I
F
- - -
-
/
-- E
L TOE `��'TDE
T BANK STABILIZATION
A.Z Ab
FLOODPLAIN PIPE
y
ID STATION 108 +54.0
72" RCP -III BURIED V
LENGTH 83.9'
SKEW = 114
m '
I
20 LF OF OUTLET
CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT
EST. 15 TONS CL. '1' RIP RAP
EST. 25 SY GEOTEXTILE
FLOODPLAIN PIPE
72" RCP BURIED 1'
\tiG
1.5' TH
(TYP.)
CLASS 'I' RIP
.GEOTEXTILE
INC®MPLE
DO NOT USE FOR
E PLANS
/ W ACQUISITION
PRELIMIN
DO NOT USE FO
RY PLANS
CONSTRUCTION
1 @ 8'. 7' RCBC
BURIED 1' /?O
EXCAVATION
SILL
USE
USE SILLS THROUGHOUT
CULVERT LENGTH; BACKFILL
W /NATIVE MATERIAL
® EXCAVATION -50 CY
INLET CHANNEL
(LOOKING DOWNSTREAM)
(NOT TO SCALE)
\ 1 C- 8' x T RCBC
FLOODPLAIN PIPE BURIED 1'
\ 72" RCP BURIED 1'
\ EXCAVATION
1.5' THICK
(TYP.) 1' SILL
CLASS 'I' RIP RAP USE SILLS THROUGHOUT
/GEOTEXTILE CULVERT LENGTH; BACKFILL
W /NATIVE MATERIAL
®
EXCAVATION-70 CY
OUTLET CHANNEL
(LOOKING DOWNSTREAM)
(NOT TO SCALE(
50 0 ENLARGED LEGEND
PLAN VIEW ® DENOTES TEMPORARY
25 50 SITE 7A & 713 IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
SCALE: I "= 100' HORIZ° DENOTES PERMANENT
IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER

c
m
-o
a
a
0
w
WETLAND AND SURFACE WATER IMPACTS PERMIT
0
O
N
lop% � 5121 Kingdom Way,
Suite
Raleigh, NC
27607
Engineering NC License No F-0258
N DETAIL A DETAIL E
ce LATERAL 'V' DITCH SPECIAL CUT DITCH PLAN VIEW
N 11No,, fo Smle) (NOf fo Soo.)
Front TOTAL PROJECT LENGTH: 2.39 MILES
N N°Nr °l z, A''�o(a� OIOW SITE 7A & Site 7B PROPOSED CULVERT: 8'x 7' RCBC
OD Groun D 1 "ifl. Slope Groen / D
d d
PROJECT REFERENCE NO. I SHEET NO.
RW SHEET NO.
ROADWAY DESIGN HYDRAULICS
ENGINEER ENGINEER
INCOMPLE
PRELIMIBNQ
EPLAN$
$
0 Geofeafae Min. D= 1 Ft.
Q Min. D= 1 FE Type of Liner= PSRM Mo. d= I Ff.
Z Mox. d= 1 Ff.
Type ofti -- Class B Rip-R p b =5 H. FROM STA. 109 +50 TO STA. 110 +50 -L- PT
FROM STA. 110 +00 TO STA. 111 +50 -L- LT
FROM STA. 106 +50 TO STA. 108 +20 -L- RT /' / / // // / / / / / / / ,' /— - - --
1 \ \ \ \ ` FROM STA. 108 +32 TO STA. 109 +50 -L -RT y5 l / /' /' / /' /' /' /' / / j� j'' ' /'' - -- -- N, �L DEPT, OF TRAN$POR-TATION
FROM STA109 +00 TO STA. 110 +00 -L- LT /1 /' / / / 1� / / J/ I l / / / / - - -__-
I DIVISION OF HIGHWAY$
CO
'_ - -- --------- _ ROWAN IINTY
— — - - -- - - JTW414
PRO
y � � /* OLD BEATTY FO"
ROAD I I lilt / \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ I[1 I 1 I I I I I J / / / / / / / / / �✓ / / / I / I / l l / // // / l / / / / / / / / / / / / / / // ,/ / /',' �g1 - - - - - -�
f J \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ co o I I l / l l // J / l ! l l I l l j FF1GH�RIDGF U—e /' / / I 1 I //f l I I I 1 1 1 / / ' / / !' / /' // /// / / FROM TERSECTION N
�r \ \ \ \I \ \ \ \I / / / / /J /
/ L I" I IIII I 1 —
/+'I TO LENTZ ROAD
' I 1\ \ \\ \\ �n \\ \ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\\ \\ 1 \l 1 1 III I l l I\ 1 1 1 1] l I I l I j/ i / / I / t/ ( I/ I I I 111 1 I N I I I` 9 l l l I\ I\ I\ 1 1 1 1 1 1 j I /' ,/ ,' / /// // /' HEET OF
\ \ \\\ \ \\ \\ \ \ \ \\ \ \ 11 \ 01 II I I I 1 \ \I \ 1 1 I I I I I I I/ /' // I y t�l' l EDI * I 1 I 1 I I I I 1 I I\ l \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 11 11 1 \ 1 I / I !/ / // // // / / / / ,/ )nsl+-BPoD CLC o \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 1 1- 1 \ Q / I l \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ I I I / / / / / / / PERMIT DRAWING
a \ \ \ \ r l I 0,l I / / I / I \ \ l \ 1 1 1 / / / / / / / / / SHEET OF
/ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 1 I \ I o / 0 APPRO %. o' CE rER I I \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 1\ 1 1 1 1 I I I I /
\0 \ 1 I J I I I I I1 FIIOFIIr{LEI77 I / / / I 1 ( / "\ I 2 o 11JIETr \
r 1 \ l \ \ \ \\ \ \ \\ \ \\ \I I \ \ 11 ) I I I I IC ANNElII PRO4AE / —s\ I I / /''I\ l C NEL �R�EA\ENi \ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \\
}11\�JlIL�sF{I10TpstLl'U torp{M1M� \cL \rggIPkAA` \\` —;\ �� \ 1 I\ 1 \ \ 1 1 J 1 J /�1 1
0 1 ) T. % / 7 1 EST-115 : Y GE IL l _ \ J\ E 5 SYJ GE ILE\ —
\ 1 I I Ir I I /I/ I (I I I 1 1 / I q J// 1 "sI \ uIT�R%L
\\ 1 11 I r 1 11 1 1 1 1 I I I I 1 I// / / // ��\ ` �-
- � \ � —' � � \ / I I I / • / l I 1 I I I / / / / / � � tlA`N,IF > / / yu1cL�IsS�B,�cI� J.
I I I I I I 1 1 I p� /�� TA LI T4 1 5 pEYAI / Q 1 1 I 1 \\ I r— / /, / / '. // /
0 \ 90 —_ / 1 \ I I I I 1 /I / �RAI 4nk I� Igl1 � I —, � " --
/ 1 I I I I : I I IIII c sYB RIB / / ' y 'i \ Jo I / / N
Z \ J I JI /1•y J/ /ll I I / / / ! \_� _\ I I I /( ,/ / I \ \\ / l / 1 1 I �/l / 8LI ( I
II
F- /RCec ( — % ' / // ' / ' ' / \
—
L!J \� /I ( :/ §I lj 11 I I J II I 1 1 11 I lj I l/ / /sl�%DBi' / — /'� \\ \g�RsII��MM \/ \\ \ \\ 1 171 / / �>� / /E
/_�/ E PEALE/ `/1I�/ I
\�\' R
� /, � /��/
N \ \ \ _ — / / / / / / l l / 111 I I I 16 I I I I l l l ' \ ' \ 1 I J ' / — i I ( r i' ' 1 / / /� �— L! /-ri 1 -' — F-
\ �' E / / //. 1 1 1 IEIP / // , ` \ \ \ \.. W
LyI \ \ —•..( h l / 'r l III I q I lJ // I / - / / / / / l ( / I ( f N $e °s�'ora \ W
H\ \\ \ j / i ' j 'l J I IIII of / / I 1 I . I _y / / / \ N es °sr•QI. \ _
\ \ \ \_/ // / / 1! Ij 11 I ICI\ 1 111111 ^II 1jo / / ( I / / / /lo ,• /Jlr / // // / / l l / l I \ \ �\ \ \ \ \ \ —\ \
LW
p 1 I 1 I ( I I n I I / / \ I / II I .• / / / / / / / / / / I I \ \ \\ �— N
/J / / I n/ / / III I I l ll ll l l l ll/ � ,_ / I) l/. // / // l /—' � / � f •i / �. /// / / ' l • �,\ \ \ `\ \'\ �\ \��\ \� ` O
co \ '♦
Tel \�� \l — ^` \' `� �\ E �\
T111110-L / E�_�E \� �E _ 1O
l / ER�r /�ilvl P �76E / DE / W�1/ // / III / / 1 \ I sPECI cbT DITCH \ ' / t \ \ 1 \� \` - -- 7 \ \ o
/ I /l III II I I / R� H I I I v $� \ Q
_ MARL( A. & JOY L.. BO tTS
// / / /l / //I 111 /rlJ�j§4 g/ /Rll ) / / f� J I 111111 1111 1 \ 1 I \ \ \EE�DIA 1 \ \\ \\ E /1� 14 \
VT IL ION J l I / 1 I c I I \ 1 1 I I \
0 - -'\ .— / / ' / / I /h1/1• �y I \ /J /1111 11 \ \
I � �_�__'_��' �� / / :// J! o // I•IIII / /// a / 1 J / II / /(( 11 I \\ \1 \\ \ \ � —:\
/ III/ / / kLQ NIPjPg \\ LkTe\eAlaDl H\ \ ��`� \ \\ l 1 ` \ �\ / 190 \\ _ \ \I I\ \\ \ J
/ / /^II`,�II / / I I Wn p\ \WYC 59.B IP P\ \ O \ \ —\ \ � \ \ — __ __ \ \ J \
/// 7Y°AQ�I pL�Rl�d V l sFhAte�� �`\ \— - - - - --
775_ / / /' / / / /// , // /III IIILLI���/ / / / // / // / /Js/C k43�194 ` \ \` \ \\ \ \ \s� \� \�\ \ \ ` \\ \\ \\ �� - - - - -- 1 - - - - -- - \ \` \ 1 \ 1 1 I I
�i /i JItI ! 1 / / / / I 1 I \ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \\ \\ \\ �\ _— �\ �0 \l 1 I 1 1 I 1 W
V - - -- /// // / ,' / / / / /'/ l / /ri' /i� / /J / / / /ll /dI ` I I 1 J \ 1 \\ 1\ Z zi
~ ''__ '' /' /' / J // / /// // // / ) \\ / / caA ELI POE EMf 1I \ \ \ \ `\ \ \\ \� _ _ _ — \\
7�(O , / /// /E$j1T.IISTOs�Ll�'7�RIPIRAd \ \ \ \\ \\ \ \ \ \\ \\ \ 11� 1 I I _
E8T 2 sYIGE 1gX11LE I 1 \ \ \ \ \ _ 1 I U
// / / / / /l // `\ I I 'll l 1 1 I PII I I I °o \ \ \\ \ — \) \�R �� I
>p
/ I ( I l l \ \ \ \\
I I�I I�M�LJI !AREA —_� 1 I I I I \ \ \\ \ `\ \ \ \\ \ \\ `\ \ `\ `\ `\ `\ `\ \�\`\ \mss \• `\ \` '\ EI �T/-- lam— ITS --� —e
II p�I / \ I I I I I \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ s \ \ / / / —I�h
Illllnlllf `1' Ili L /—�—r
5' / , / 1 1 \\ I I I I I I I \ \ \`so \\ `\ \\ \\ // / ,
�76 ' \\ \1 \\ ` \\ \` I I I I /I i I /' // //
' //
II I I I I III IIII
\,v
1 I
I 19
I I I I I I I 111 1 1 1 1 1 1 \\ ' I I IFF� B n�{LLCI / ,/ / ; / / /' // // yvv /' ' / '/
l // / ,/ / /',/ / ,/ / 'i /./ /' LAARY/ *. * BARBARAI B. BA LER
— 760 �/ / / / / / / /
_ 72ORCPAIN PIPE I' 7@ 8'x 7'RCBC //
— — 1 @ 8' x 7' RCBC O/ FLOODPLAIN PIPE BURIED 1'
BURIED 1' 2 72" RCP BURIED 1'
EXCAVATION
EXCAVATION
1' SILL —" —
1.5' THICK 1.5' THICK
USE SILLS THROUGHOUT
100 0 CLASS InP.I CULVERT LENGTH; BACKFILL (NP.) � ti 1' SILL
'I' RIP RAP W /NATIVE MATERIAL CLASS 11' RIP RAP USE SILLS THROUGHOUT LEGEND
4GEOTEXTILE EXCAVATION .1GEOTEXTILE CULVERT LENGTH; BACKFILL
® EXCAVATION =50 CY W /NATIVE MATERIAL
® EXCAVATION =70 CY ® DENOTES TEMPORARY
50 100
INLET CHANNEL OUTLET CHANNEL IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
SCALE: I "- 100' HORIZ. (LOOKING DOWNSTREAM) (LOOKING DOWNSTREAM) ® DENOTES PERMANENT
(NOT TO SCALE) (NOT TO SCALE) IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER

�Z_
Q H r
0
0
N
N
LY
V)
0
Q
Z
WETLAND AND SURFACE WATER IMPACTS PERMIT
1
I I \\ \1 1 1 I I II ( I I l()
1 I \ I
I \ \ 1 I I
1 I \\ \ \ \ 1 I II 1 I I I 115�F IOFI II�LEf i ' / /
I
I I \ / �� I I 20 F O I LEU► \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
\_��,
C ANINEL IMPRO�IEIy' EN i
- -
_ - - ='\ I I r ^ -" \ I NNE MPR�/E ENfi
-- ` 10 TJ S 1 RIP RAPS
El 10 T}�JI�S ,CLJ 1� RIP RAP
�i
\CI-I
- \ •� \ I € \CL.\
\\ l \
1 E$Til$ 9Y(C3 €r3rEXTIL
i EST-) 15 Sr, GEn�If1IL -\ - -� -�_,
\ �l
_ \
/
SIT �A /
\` C p/
r 1 \\\ -��� \\ , IT¢' 7R/ / I I I I J / / I
1
I / I
/'$o X 7' R�BC /
\ Ilil -- - =_ ,'� /BANK S`�AQ111fA]YOI�\
L;kIED /j
/SKE)�1`481
BXN/K S'TABOZAtTION
Hw
I\ \
I I I 101 \L-4- -7
I I I ( `011 I I I I I OI_ / /� ,/
/ = / / / / / ll�l /• / J I /' // /' // /' / /
I I I I ' I I I I I I ,'
/ /
I 1' /I I
\ / /
\II
i��
/ b
I
I l /
TUEI
/` QE / / I I / l / I I I I ` I �( I J I
14tASILI'ATIbI \
,l
��� \
f
I 11
l
l rii'i/
i
ilillllr��
\
(FLQ 1 \ \ \ \ \ \
! 6QODPILAIW I PIP
/
W$T�r,I( I� ',1081+$4\\0 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ , \
I \ \ \ \ \ \
\ \ \
JP R PF-IVI $lk1RIEQ\ ]' \ \ \ \ \ \ \
\ \
\\ '
L N'G,IT� $3F9� \ \\ \ \ `\ \\ `\ 6�• \\ `• �\ \•\ `\ \\
\ \ \
SKGW, r 1 lqq� \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
12a LF OF II
-'__-- ��
7�0 '
tILItiLEi1
i i r / CHANNEL Il/MMPIdO'1/EIMENT 1 \ \ \ \ \ \ \
E T.115 TOWS L.I 1 RIPI RAP1i 1 \ \ \
\ \
ETJ2� SY, GETEX�ILE
I I I I
FLOODPLAIN PIPE
72" RCP BURIED 1'
1.5' TH
(TYP.)
CLASS 'I' RIP
- GEOTEXTILE
INCOMPLE
E PLAN$
DO NOT USE FOR
/ W ACQUISITION
PIiELIMIN
�tY PLANS
DO NOT USE FO
CONSTRUCTION
1 @ 8'x 7' RCBC
BURIED 1' /20
EXCAVATION
/�/ SILL
USE SILLS THROUGHOUT
CULVERT LENGTH; BACKFILL
W /NATIVE MATERIAL
® EXCAVATION -50 CY
INLET CHANNEL
(LOOKING DOWNSTREAM)
(NOT TO SCALE)
\
1 8' B' x 7' RCBC
FLOODPLAIN PIPE BURIED 1'
\ 72" RCP BURIED 1'
\ EXCAVATION ?%
/
1.5' THICK
(nP.) 1' SILL
CLASS 'I' RIP RAP USE SILLS THROUGHOUT
- GEOTEXTILE CULVERT LENGTH; BACKFILL
W /NATIVE MATERIAL
®
EXCAVATION -70 Cy
OUTLET CHANNEL
(LOOKING DOWNSTREAM)
(NOT TO SCALE)
50 0 ENLARGED A� LEGEND
PLAN VIEW ® DENOTES TEMPORARY
25 50 SITE 7A & 7B IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
SCALE: I "= 100' HORIZ. ® IM AO CTS IN SURFACE WATER