20150362 All Versions_I-3802 CE_20150420

I-B5
I-B5 WIDENING AND INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENTS FROM
NORTH OF NC 73 TO US 29-601 CONNECTOR
CABARRUB AND RowAN COUNTIES
FEDERAL AID PROJECT No. FANHIMF-085-2(61 )55
STATE PROJECT No. 36780.1 .2
T.I.P. PROJECT NOS. 1-3802/1-3610/8-5365
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
SUBMITTED BY THE
NORTH CAR13LINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT
For further information contact:
Richard Hancock,P.E.,Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Unit
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh,North Carolina 27699-1548
[phone]
Date of Approval Richard Hancock,P.E.,Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Unit
North Carolina Department of Transportation
'yo
Date of Approval J�P&n R Sullivan III,P.E.,Division numstrator
F'ederal Highway Administration

CABARRUS AND ROWAN COUNTIES
I-B5 WIDENING AND INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENTS FROM NORTH OF
NC 73 TO US 29-601 CONNECTOR
STATE PROJECT NO. 367BO. 1 . 1
T.I.P. PROJECT Nos. 1-3B02/1-361 O/B-5365
PROJECT COMMITMENTS
Roadway Design Unit, Hydraulics Unit, Structure Design Unit, Division 10—
Provisions for Greenway
The proposed new I-85 bridges over Irish Buffalo Creek will be designed with adequate
vertical and horizontal clearance to accommodate the future Irish Buffalo Creek greenway
crossing under I-85. Coordination with the local municipality will be performed during
design of those bridges to ensure they are compatible with the future greenway crossing.
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Unit—NEPA/Section 404 Merger
Process
NEPA/Section 404 Merger Concurrence Points 3 (Least Environmentally Damaging
Practicable Alternative) and 4 (Avoidance and Minimization) will be completed for the
project.
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Unit, Division 10, Roadway
Design
Blake House, Goodman Farm, Caldwell House and Barrier House
Blake House, Goodman Farm, Caldwell House, and Barrier House are National Register-
eligible properties. These properties are located within the project's Area of Potential
Effects. Currently, the proposed project will have No Effect on the Blake House and
Goodman Farm and No Adverse Effect on Caldwell House and Barrier House. If design
plans change near any of the properties,impacts will be re-evaluated and appropriate
coordination with the Department of Cultural Resources will be undertaken.
North Cabarrus Park
North Cabarrus Park, owned and managed by Cabarrus County,is located on the west side
of I-85 near Irish Buffalo Creek. No additional right-of-way or easements are proposed
along I-85 on park property; thus, the project will not impact North Cabarrus Park. If
design plans change and result in impacts to North Cabarrus Park, a Section 4(f) evaluation
will be prepared.
Hydraulics Unit—Floodplain Mapping Program Coordination
The NCDOT Hydraulics Unit will coordinate with the North Carolina Floodplain Mapping
Program (FMP), the delegated state agency for administering FEMA's National Flood
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION PAGE 1 OF 3
DECEMBER 20 1 3

Insurance Program, to determine the status of the project with regard to the applicability of
NCDOT's Memorandum of Agreement with the IMP or approval of a Conditional Letter
of Map Revision (CLOMR) and subsequent final Letter of Map Revision (LOMR).
Divisions 9 and 10 —As-Built Construction Plans
The Divisions shall submit sealed as-built construction plans to the Hydraulics Unit upon
completion of project construction, certifying that the drainage structure(s) and roadway
embankment that are located within the 100-year floodplain were built as shown in the
construction plans,both horizontally and vertically.
Division 10 and Roadside Environmental Unit- Landscaping
NCDOT will provide vegetative screening along the Dale Earnhardt Boulevard southbound
off-ramp,which utilizes Jaycee Road.
Congestion Management Unit— Interchange Modification Report
Due to the proposed improvements at the I-85 interchanges in the study area, an
interchange modification report is being prepared and will be submitted to the Federal
Highway Administration for approval following completion of the final environmental
document.
Design-Build Unit
During Final Design,NCDOT will investigate the feasibility of a roundabout at Vinehaven
Drive and Copperfield Boulevard.
NCDOT will provide a leftover from northbound US 29-601 (Cannon Boulevard) to S.
Ridge Avenue, and will provide access from Ridge Avenue to the Rider Transit Center. The
proposed roundabout on S. Main Street will be removed from the design.
NCDOT will connect S. Ridge Avenue to US 29-601 with right-in/right-out access.
NCDOT will provide full access at the intersection of Old Earnhardt Road and Dale
Earnhardt Boulevard.
NCDOT will coordinate with representatives of F&M Bank to minimize impacts.
NCDOT will modify the proposed service road at the Dale Earnhardt Boulevard
interchange to provide improved access to F&M Bank, the Chamber of Commerce Building,
and Lowe's Home Improvement store.
NCDOT will provide a leftover into the Pilot Truck Stop on Lane Street.
NCDOT will provide right-in/right-out access to Motel 6,Waffle House, and Brantley
property on Lane Street. The proposed service road will be removed.
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION PAGE 2 OF 3
DECEMBER 20 1 3

NCDOT will coordinate, on a case-by-case basis, the location of bus stops, sidewalks, and
pedestrian controls with the City of Concord, City of Kannapolis, and Rider Transit.
NCDOT will coordinate with local officials regarding emergency access in the
NC 152/US 29 interchange area.
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION PAGE 3 OF 3
DECEMBER 20 1 3

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Summary.....................................................................................................................S-1
Description of the Proposed Action......................................................................................S-1
Summary of Purpose and Need..............................................................................................S-1
Alternatives Considered...........................................................................................................S-1
Summary of Environmental Effects ......................................................................................S-2
PermitsRequired.......................................................................................................................S-2
Coordination..............................................................................................................................S-2
ContactInformation.................................................................................................................S-4
1.0 Description of Proposed Action............................................................................ 1-1
1.1 General Description...................................................................................................... 1-1
1.2 Project Schedule............................................................................................................ 1-1
1.3 Cost Estimates............................................................................................................... 1-2
2.0 Purpose and Need for Project...............................................................................2-1
2.1 Purpose of Project.........................................................................................................2-1
2.2 Need for Project............................................................................................................2-1
2.3 Project Setting................................................................................................................2-1
2.4 System Linkage..............................................................................................................2-2
2.4.1 Existing Road Network..................................................................................2-2
2.4.2 Modal Interrelationships.................................................................................2-3
2.5 Roadway Capacity.........................................................................................................2-4
2.5.1 Mainline Analysis.............................................................................................2-5
2.5.2 Merge/Diverge Analysis.................................................................................2-5
2.5.3 Weaving Analysis.............................................................................................2-6
2.5.4 Traffic Operations Summary.........................................................................2-6
2.6 Crash Analysis................................................................................................................2-6
2.7 Transportation Plans.....................................................................................................2-8
2.7.1 State Transportation Improvement Program..............................................2-8
2.7.2 NCDOT Strategic Highway Corridors.........................................................2-8
2.7.3 Other Transportation Plans...........................................................................2-8
2.8 Summary of Purpose and Need..................................................................................2-9
3.0 Alternatives............................................................................................................3-1
3.1 No-Build Alternative....................................................................................................3-1
3.2 Alternate Modes of Transportation............................................................................3-1
3.3 Transportation Management Alternative...................................................................3-1
3.4 New Location Alternative............................................................................................3-2
3.5 Improve Existing Facility Alternative (NCDOT-Preferred Alternative)..............3-2
3.5.1 Reconstruction and Widening of Mainline..................................................3-2
3.5.2 Interchange Alternatives.................................................................................3-3
3.5.3 Right-of-way and Access Control.................................................................3-8
3.5.4 Intersecting Roadways....................................................................................3-9
3.5.5 Railroads and Railroad Crossings................................................................3-10
12-20-13

3.5.6 Structures........................................................................................................3-11
3.5.7 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities and Greenways......................................3-15
3.5.8 Noise Barriers.................................................................................................3-16
3.5.9 Utilities ............................................................................................................3-16
3.5.10 Work Zone,Traffic Control and Construction Phasing..........................3-17
4.0 Environmental Effects of Proposed Action..........................................................4-1
4.1 Biotic Resources............................................................................................................4-1
4.1.1 Terrestrial Communities.................................................................................4-1
4.1.2 Aquatic Communities......................................................................................4-1
4.2 Jurisdictional Topics .....................................................................................................4-1
4.2.1 Clean Water Act Permits..............................................................................4-13
4.2.2 Construction Moratoria................................................................................4-13
4.2.3 NC River Basin Buffer Rules.......................................................................4-13
4.2.4 Rivers and Harbors Section 10 Navigable Waters....................................4-13
4.2.5 Mitigation........................................................................................................4-14
4.2.6 Endangered Species Act...............................................................................4-14
4.2.7 Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act......................................................4-16
4.2.8 Endangered Species Act Candidate Species ..............................................4-16
4.3 Cultural Resources ......................................................................................................4-16
4.3.1 Compliance Guidelines.................................................................................4-16
4.3.2 Historic Architecture.....................................................................................4-16
4.3.3 Archaeology....................................................................................................4-17
4.4 Sections 4(0 and 6(0 Resources................................................................................4-17
4.4.1 Section 4(0 Resources...................................................................................4-17
4.4.2 Section 6(0 Resources...................................................................................4-18
4.5 Farmland.......................................................................................................................4-18
4.6 Social Effects ...............................................................................................................4-18
4.6.1 Neighborhoods/Communities....................................................................4-18
4.6.2 Relocation of Residences and Businesses..................................................4-20
4.6.3 Environmental Justice...................................................................................4-20
4.6.4 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities..................................................................4-21
4.6.5 Recreational Facilities....................................................................................4-22
4.6.6 Other Public Facilities and Services............................................................4-22
4.7 Economic Effects........................................................................................................4-23
4.8 Land Use.......................................................................................................................4-23
4.8.1 Existing Land Use.........................................................................................4-23
4.8.2 Future Land Use............................................................................................4-24
4.8.3 Project Compatibility with Local Plans......................................................4-26
4.8.4 Indirect and Cumulative Effects .................................................................4-26
4.9 Flood Hazard Evaluation...........................................................................................4-27
4.10 Traffic Noise Analysis ................................................................................................4-27
4.10.1 Introduction....................................................................................................4-27
4.10.2 Traffic Noise Impacts and Noise Contours..............................................4-28
4.10.3 No-Build Alternative.....................................................................................4-28
4.10.4 Traffic Noise Abatement Measures............................................................4-28
4.10.5 Noise Barriers.................................................................................................4-29
12-20-13

4.10.6 Summary.........................................................................................................4-31
4.11 Construction Noise.....................................................................................................4-31
4.12 Air Quality Analysis....................................................................................................4-31
4.12.1 Attainment Status..........................................................................................4-32
4.12.2 Carbon Monoxide..........................................................................................4-32
4.12.3 Ozone and Nitrogen Dioxide......................................................................4-32
4.12.4 Particulate Matter and Sulfur.......................................................................4-33
4.12.5 Mobile Source Air Toxics.............................................................................4-33
4.13 Utilities..........................................................................................................................4-42
4.14 Hazardous Materials ...................................................................................................4-42
5.0 Comments and Coordination................................................................................5-1
5.1 Local Officials Meetings............................................................................................... 5-1
5.2 Citizens Informational Workshop.............................................................................. 5-2
5.3 Design Public Meetings................................................................................................ 5-2
5.4 Public Meetings ............................................................................................................. 5-3
5.5 NEPA/Section 404 Merger Process.......................................................................... 5-4
5.6 Other Agency Coordination........................................................................................ 5-5
6.0 Basis for Categorical Exclusion............................................................................6-1
List of Tables
Table S-1. Summary of Direct Project Impacts...........................................................................S-3
Table 1. Intersecting Roads with Interchanges in the Project Area.........................................2-2
Table 2. Freeway Mainline Capacity Analysis..............................................................................2-5
Table 3. Freeway Merge/Diverge Capacity Analysis..................................................................2-6
Table4. Crash Summary.................................................................................................................2-7
Table 5. Crash Rate Comparison...................................................................................................2-8
Table 6. TIP Projects in the Vicinity of I-3802.........................................................................2-10
Table 7. Interchange Ramp Capacity Analysis Summary (2035 Build Level of Service).......3-4
Table 8. Bridges in the Study Area..............................................................................................3-12
Table 9. Terrestrial Community Impacts......................................................................................4-1
Table 10.Jurisdictional Streams in the Study Area.....................................................................4-2
Table 11. Wetlands in the Project Area........................................................................................4-8
Table 12. Federally Protected Species Listed for Cabarrus and Rowan Counties................4-14
Table 13. Predicted Traffic Noise Impacts by Alternative* ....................................................4-29
Table 14. Total Emissions for Each Air Toxic Pollutant (tons/year)....................................4-36
Table 15. USTs,Landfills, and Other Potentially Contaminated Sites ..................................4-43
12-20-13

Appendix A—Figures
Figure 1. Project Vicinity
Figure 2. TIP Projects in Vicinity of 1-3802,1-3610 and B-5365
Figure 3A-3F. Proposed Typical Sections
Figure 4A-4Q. Proposed Improvements
Figure 5. Proposed Improvements —US 29-601 Interchange
Figure 6. Proposed Improvements —Dale Earnhardt Boulevard Interchange
Figure 7. Proposed Improvements —Centergrove Road Detour
Figure 8. Proposed Improvements —NC 152/I-85/US 601 Detour
Appendix B —Agency Correspondence
Appendix C —NCDOT Relocation Report
Appendix D —Public Involvement Materials
Appendix E—NEPA/Section 404 Merger Team Concurrence Forms
12-20-13
IV

SUMMARY
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) and Federal Highway
Administration propose the reconstruction and widening of I-85 to an eight-lane freeway
from NC 73 in Cabarrus County to US 29-601 Connector in Rowan County. The project is
approximately 13.5 miles in length and is shown in Figure S-1.
SUMMARY OF PURPOSE AND NEED
The primary purpose of the proposed project is to improve level of service (LOS) on I-85
and its interchanges in the project area. The project is part of a multi-faceted solution to
address congestion and capacity problems along the I-85 corridor in and near the Charlotte
metropolitan area. Traffic analysis shows that traffic demand along I-85 for most of the
study area either approaches or exceeds the roadway capacity limits. If no improvements are
made the entire length of I-85 in the study area is expected to approach or exceed roadway
capacity limits by 2035. In addition, the proposed project addresses a"bottleneck" created
by the construction of TIP Project No. I-3803 to the south (currently under construction)
and the eight-lane section to the north. The projects increase the number of travel lanes on
I-85 to eight lanes in Mecklenburg County and Rowan County, respectively.
Reconstructing the interchange at US 29-601 Connector and NC 152,which connects the
two US highways to I-85,will allow it to meet current design standards and replace a
structurally deficient bridge. Modifications also would improve overall traffic operations at
the interchange. The improvements would increase the distance between the interchange
and local driveways and intersections, thereby reducing the number of conflict points and
providing additional capacity for drivers in the interchange vicinity.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
In addition to the NCDOT-preferred improvements (Improve Existing Facility), the
following alternatives to the proposed widening of I-85 were considered:
• No-Build Alternative
• Alternate Modes of Transportation
• Transportation Management Alternative
• New Location Alternatives
The No-Build Alternative would not reduce congestion along I-85 and would not provide
lane continuity with the eight-lane cross sections south of US 29-601 in Concord and north
of US 29-601 Connector in China Grove.
The Alternate Modes of Transportation Alternative could help reduce congestion along I-85
by providing options to automobile travel, but they alone will not provide a level of benefit
comparable to the proposed interstate widening and interchange improvements. In addition,
they will not provide the lane continuity between the existing eight-lane segments north and
12-20-13
S-1

south of the proposed projects. This alternative alone will not meet the purpose and need of
the project and therefore it is not recommended for detailed study.
The Transportation Management Alternative could help reduce congestion on I-85 by
reducing the number of single-occupant vehicles on the road and by making spot
improvements along certain roads and at key intersections. However, these strategies alone
will not provide the operational improvements needed to adequately address the project's
purpose and need. In addition, they will not provide the lane continuity between the eight-
lane sections north and south of the proposed project. The Transportation Management
Alternative in lieu of the proposed I-85 improvements is therefore not recommended for
further study.
The New Location Alternative would have substantial environmental impacts and would not
be cost effective. In addition,it may not provide lane continuity with the eight-lane sections
north and south of the proposed project.
For these reasons, the alternatives to the proposed action are not recommended.
SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
The project is expected to result in the displacement of 36 homes, 20 businesses, and one
church. These displacements occur across the five interchanges to be modified by this
project. It will impact approximately 9,230 linear feet of streams and approximately 1.7 acres
of wetlands. Two hundred sixty-six residences, 16 businesses and 26 churches/schools/
institutions will experience traffic noise impacts. No historic properties will be adversely
affected by the proposed project. No archaeological sites were identified within the study
area. Seventeen hazardous material sites were identified in the study area. The impact
severity of potentially contaminated sites on the preferred alternative is low and little to no
impacts to cost or schedule are anticipated.
Two federally protected species are listed for Cabarrus and Rowan Counties: Schweinitz's
sunflower and Carolina heelsplitter. The project is expected to have No Effect on either
species.
A summary of project impacts is presented in Table S-1.
PERMITS REQUIRED
It is expected that the proposed action will require an Individual Permit JP) from the US
Army Corps of Engineers. In addition, a Section 401 Water Quality Certification will be
required from the North Carolina Division of Water Resources.
COORDINATION
Federal, state, and local government agencies were consulted at the beginning of the project
development process. Written comments received from those agencies are included in
Appendix B. Local officials meetings were held on January 8,2008,November 27,2012,
February 26,2013, and November 4,2013.
12-20-13
S-2

A Citizens Informational Workshop was held was held on January 29, 2008. Design Public
Meetings were held on November 27 and November 29, 2012. Additional Public Meetings
were held on February 26,2013 and November 4,2013.
Concurrence was reached through the NEPA/404 Merger Process on Concurrence Point 1
(Purpose and Need and Study Area Defined) and Concurrence Point 2 (Design Options for
Detailed Study) on December 16, 2010. A Concurrent Point 2 Update meeting was held and
concurrence reached on January 16, 2013. A combined Concurrence Point 2A/3/4A
meeting was held on March 13, 2013. Concurrence was reached on CP 2A on December 20,
2013. Merger coordination will continue throughout project studies for Concurrence Point
3 (Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative), Concurrence Point 4A
(Avoidance and Minimization), Concurrence Point 413 (30 percent Hydraulic Review), and
Concurrence Point 4C (Permit Drawing Review). This document will be sent to federal,
state, and local agencies for review and comment,including agencies represented on the
NEPA/404 Merger team.
Table S-1. Summary of Direct Project Impacts
Environmental Feature Anticipated Impact
Residential Relocations 36
Commercial Relocations 20
Other Relocations 1 church
Goodman Farm—No Effect
Historic Properties Blake House—No Effect
Barrier House—No Adverse Effect
Caldwell House—No Adverse Effect
Archaeological Resources 0
Cemeteries acres 0.2 Carolina Memorial Gardens
Section 4 Resources 1 —No Impact
Streams linear feet 9,230
Wetlands acres 1.7
100-year flood lain acres 21.09
Water Supply Watershed Critical Area,WS-N acres 132.19
Impacted Noise Receptors 308 (61 greater than under Existing
Condition
Federally-Protected Species Carolina heelsplitter: No Effect
Schweinitz's sunflower: No Effect
Hazardous Material Sites 17 —low impact
Railroad Crossings 2
Major Utility Crossings 3 -1-85
6—Intersecting Roads
Note:Stream and tretland impacts include 25 foot clearing limits outside slope stake lines.
12-20-13
S-3

CONTACT INFORMATION
Additional information concerning this proposal and document can be obtained by
contacting either of the following individuals:
John F. Sullivan III, P.E., Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
310 New Bern Avenue, Suite 410
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601
[phone]
Richard Hancock, P.E.,Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Unit
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1501
[phone]
12-20-13
S-4

Figure S-1
Project Vicinity
Project Are a� 1-85 Widening and Interchange Improvements From North of NC 73 to
US 29-601 Connector(1-3802/1-3610/8-5365)
514 ',1+ 4P„'Gi if r.°-;y�. "' �� ��n,
Rowan and Cabarrus Counties, North Carolina
t51rr iI � ��I
14pt ¢kU
"1 CUx r� I6,i1if Ira t
A % 4$"11
n Li �f V 11 "1 r= C) )y
North Carolina
+ �
Baru �
aui Salisbur w r"
� y � Department of Transportation
u,�1 4 rr r �Ib ist rnb °� e�rri .r a�,.e p
Protect Vicinity ^�
ry' �. r
� yy kI � nnapo @15 �A n i
d
onrn r �r
a
""0
N P m kkk
M
�5d ' 29
:a
Chinaa Grave
Landis ��atx Rcy
29 �AO� ►.
na@Fgherty Ra 1117
Waygt
�µ
O/d Beatty Fgfyd
a
d
Kannapolis Legend
ga r
sluJyArea
n
e Study Area Se bon B
Z'20 a
� 1_._._ Winacoff School Rd Watery a ar
Go
Bt tam f rraj--- it
,.. ....... edits
\3 Mayor Roads
Roads
Stoearns
h"rterchariges
601 I�i6ac

1 .0 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION
1 . 1 GENERAL DESCRIPTION
The proposed project is included in the North Carolina Department of Transportation
(NCDOT) 2072-2078 State Trans ortation Improvement Program (STIP) and the Draft 2013-2023
STIP as 1-3802,1-3610, and B-5365. NCDOT has combined TIP Project Numbers I-3802,
I-3610, and B-5365 into a single work effort because of the proximity and interrelationship
between the projects.
For I-3802,NCDOT proposes to add four additional travel lanes (two in each direction) to
I-85 from north of NC 73 in Cabarrus County to US 29-601 Connector in Rowan County.
The project is approximately 13.5 miles long. The project involves widening the existing
four-lane freeway to eight lanes,matching TIP project I-3803 at NC 73 to the south, and the
recently widened freeway to the north. The majority of the I-85 widening will occur within
the existing right-of-way. Interchange improvements,including reconstruction of existing
structures to meet current design standards for vertical clearance, are proposed at US 29-601,
SR 2126 (Dale Earnhardt Boulevard) and SR 2180 (Lane Street). In addition, a new bridge
carrying Winecoff School Road over the railroad tracks, S. Ridge Avenue, and S. Main Street
will be constructed. The existing at-grade crossing will be closed and the S. Ridge Avenue
bridge over I-85 will be removed. Winecoff School Road is located near the US 29-601
interchange. The project is divided into two sections for construction phasing—Section A
extends from NC 73 to Lane Street and Section B extends from Lane Street to US 29-601
Connector. Additional structures may need to be improved to meet current design
standards.
For TIP Project Number I-3610,NCDOT proposes to reconstruct the existing cloverleaf
interchange at NC 152 and US 29-601,reconstruct the interchange at NC 152 and I-85, and
improve existing NC 152,which provides access to I-85 between the two interchanges.
For TIP Project Number B-5365,NCDOT proposes to replace Bridge No. 21 and Bridge
No. 34 over the Norfolk Southern Railroad and US 29 in China Grove.
1 .2 PROJECT SCHEDULE
The following schedule is based on the current STIP.
Right-of-way Acquisition I-3802: Section A—Fiscal Year (FY) 2014
Section B —FY 2018
I-3610: included in I-3802 B
B-5365: FY 2017
Construction I-3802: Section A—FY 2014
Section B —FY 2019
I-3610: included in I-3802B
B-5365: FY 2019
12-20-13
1 -1

1 .3 COST ESTIMATES
Construction (I-3802A) $211,000,000
Construction (I-3802B)* $124,000,000
Right-of-way $ 37,780,000
Utilities $ 3,300,000
TOTAL $376,080,000
*NOTE: The construction cost estimate for I-3802B includes costs fore -glas I-3610 and B-5365.
12-20-13
1 -2

2.0 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR PROJECT
2. 1 PURPOSE OF PROJECT
The primary purpose of the proposed project is to improve level of service (LOS) on I-85
and its interchanges in the project area. The project is part of a multi-faceted solution to
address congestion and capacity problems along the I-85 corridor in and near the Charlotte
metropolitan area. Another desirable outcome is to eliminate vertical clearance deficiencies
for structures over I-85 within the project study area in order to meet current highway
design standards.
An additional purpose is to reduce operational deficiencies at the interchange of US 29-601
Connector and NC 152. This interchange connects the two US Highways to I-85. The
improvements would allow the interchange bridge to meet current standards for vertical
clearance. In addition, the project will increase the distance between the interchange and
local driveways and intersections, thereby reducing the number of conflict points for drivers
in the interchange vicinity.
2.2 NEED FOR PROJECT
The primary need for the proposed project is a projected increase in traffic along I-85 to
volumes that will exceed the roadway capacity by 2035, the project's design year. 2008
traffic volumes range from 64,400 vehicles per day (vpd) to 91,000 vpd. 2035 No-Build
traffic volume projections range from 101,400 vpd to 140,000 vpd. As a result,nearly the
entire length of I-85 in the project area would operate at LOS F conditions during one or
both peak hours of the day by 2035. In fact, many segments of I-85 would reach these
conditions prior to 2035, some as early as 2015.
In addition, the interchange at NC 152 and I-85 allows for only two movements: I-85
northbound to NC 152 and NC 152 to I-85 southbound. The other two movements to and
from I-85 north of NC 152 are facilitated through the US 29-601 Connector, causing
confusion for some motorists. The 2035 forecasted traffic indicates approximately 6,000
additional vehicles per day would use the I-85/NC 152 interchange.
The interchange bridge at US 29-601 Connector and NC 152 does not meet current design
standards for vertical clearance. In addition, three of the seven ramps at this interchange
intersect with local roads and/or driveways, creating a number of conflict points for drivers.
2.3 PROJECT SETTING
The project is located in Cabarrus and Rowan Counties in the southern Piedmont region of
North Carolina. It passes through or near the Cities of Concord and Kannapolis, the Town
of China Grove, and the Town of Landis (Figure 1). Land use surrounding the proposed
project is a mixture of agricultural,business and residential uses. Land immediately adjacent
to I-85 is predominantly agricultural or undeveloped. Small retail,gasoline, and other
service-type businesses are common at interchanges. In some portions of the study area,
there is dense development,including"big box" retail,particularly south of Dale Earnhardt
Boulevard in Cabarrus County. Carolinas Medical Center NorthEast (Northeast Medical
Center), Cabarrus County's largest employer is located near the US 29-601 interchange. It is
outside the project study area, but its proximity is expected to generate a large number of
12-20-13
2-1

trips within the study area. North of Dale Earnhardt Boulevard,land adjacent to I-85 is
predominantly undeveloped.
2.4 SYSTEM LINKAGE
2.4. 1 EXISTING ROAD NETWORK
Principal arterials that serve the project area and vicinity include I-85, NC 73 at the southern
end of the project, and US 29-601 at the northern end of the project. These roads are
regionally significant,heavily traveled commuter routes.
I-85 traverses the state from north to south and connects several urban areas in the region
including Charlotte, Concord, and Kannapolis. Within the study area,I-85 is a controlled
access,four-lane freeway with 12-foot travel lanes, a 68-foot grassed median, four-foot
inside paved shoulders, 10-foot outside paved shoulders, and a speed limit of 65 miles per
hour (mph). The existing right-of-way is 292 feet. Just north of the proposed project,I-85
is eight lanes with a grassed median and paved shoulders. It transitions briefly to six lanes
near NC 152 and then becomes a four-lane facility.
US 29-601 serves as the primary connector between Concord,Landis, and China Grove.
For most of its length in the project area,US 29-601 runs in a north-south direction on the
western side of and parallel to I-85.
Other important local roads include NC 152,which is a major east-west collector, SR 2126
(Dale Earnhardt Boulevard/Copperfield Boulevard), SR 2180 (Lane Street), and SR 1221
(Old Beatty Ford Road). All of these, except SR 1221 (Old Beatty Ford Road) have
interchanges with I-85.
Table 1 lists and describes roads with interchanges in the project area.
Table 1. Intersecting Roads with Interchanges in the Project Area
Intersecting Road Exit Description Interchange Type
US 29-601 58 Four lanes with grass shoulders and a speed Full Cloverleaf
limit of 45 mph.
SR 2126 (Dale Earnhardt Four-lane curb and gutter with a sidewalk
Half Diamond/Partial
Boulevard/Copperfield 60 on the south side west of I-85. The speed Cloverleaf
Boulevard limit is 45 mph.
East of I-85,Lane Street is two lanes with
SR 2180 (Lane Street) 63 grass shoulders and a speed limit of 35 Full Diamond
mph.West of I-85,Lane Street is four lanes
with curb and gutter.
Partial Diamond with
NC 152 68 Two lanes with a speed limit of 55 mph. access/egress for I-85N
to NC 152 and NC 152
to I-85S
Partial Diamond with
US 29-601 Connector 68 Four lanes with turn lanes and a concrete access/egress provided
median. The speed limit is 45 mph. to and from I-85 to the
north
12-20-13
2-2

2.4.2 MODAL INTERRELATIONSHIPS
RAILROADS
I-85 crosses a railroad with a bridge just west of the US 29-601 interchange. This rail
corridor is owned by North Carolina Railroad. Norfolk Southern Railway leases and
operates the two rail lines in this area. Norfolk Southern provides the major freight service
within the Cabarrus-Rowan metropolitan area. Up to 30 freight trains per day travel through
the project area at a maximum speed of 50 mph.
Two Amtrak trains, the Piedmont and the Carolinian, serve the project area along the same
section of Norfolk Southern track. The Piedmont is based in Raleigh and operates between
Raleigh and Charlotte. In addition to these two cities,it provides daily service to Cary,
Durham, Burlington, Greensboro,High Point, Salisbury, and Kannapolis. The Carolinian
travels the same route from Charlotte with extended daily service to New York City.
Approximately six passenger trains per day travel through the project area at a maximum
speed of 79 mph.
The State of North Carolina and the Commonwealth of Virginia are collaborating to
complete an Environmental Impact Statement for the Southeast High Speed Rail Corridor.
The corridor is designated from Washington,DC to Richmond,Virginia to Raleigh, North
Carolina and on to Charlotte,North Carolina. A recommendation report for the corridor
between Washington, DC and Raleigh, NC was completed in 2012. The maximum speed of
the overall system is anticipated to be 110 mph,but the final design criteria are not yet
determined.
AIRPORTS
The nearest commercial airport is Charlotte/Douglas International Airport,which is
approximately 30 miles southwest of the project area. This airport serves domestic and
international travelers, and in 2011 served more than 39 million passengers.
There are two other regional and local airports near the project area: Concord Regional
Airport (CRA) and Rowan County Airport. The City of Concord owns CRA,which is
North Carolina's fourth busiest airport. One hundred eighty-four privately owned aircraft,
several corporations, and NASCAR Racing Teams are based at CRA. The airport is
approximately seven miles south of the NC 73/I-85 interchange in Cabarrus County. The
Rowan County Airport is a general aviation airport operated by Rowan County. More than
85 aircraft are housed there. It is located along US 29, approximately six miles north of the
project area on the western side of I-85.
TRANSIT
A number of transit providers serve the project area. The cities of Concord and Kannapolis
have partnered to provide the RIDER Transit System,which is a fixed-route system
operating ten buses on seven routes in or near the project area. According to the transit
manager, the system is on pace to transport 460,000 passengers in 2012. A new, state of the
art transit center opened in 2010 on S. Ridge Avenue, near US 29 and I-85. All seven routes
arrive and depart from the transit center. Operational features of the Rider Transit Center
include 10 covered bus bays, customer seating, on site customer service agent, employee
break room, conference room, expansion space for Rider staff and restrooms.
12-20-13
2-3

The Rowan Transit System (RTS) provides public transportation services primarily to
seniors 60 years of age and older,individuals with disabilities, and the rural general public.
There are 28 vehicles in the RTS fleet providing approximately 75,000 trips per year.
The Cabarrus County Transportation System (CCTS) provides similar services as RTS.
Public transportation is provided to numerous human service agencies and Cabarrus
County-based non-profit organizations. Most trips provided remain within the county,
although some medical trips are made out of the county. CCTS also provides paratransit
services for the Concord/Kannapoli s Area RIDER bus system. A fleet of more than 23
vans provides more than 100,000 trips annually.
The cities of Concord and Charlotte provide funding for the operation of the Commuter
Express,which operates during peak hours between Concord and Charlotte. There are four
trips provided in the morning and four trips in the afternoon,with the route operating
primarily along US 29.
Commuter rail service is being studied in the project vicinity. Commuter rail for the area
would likely include the Northeast Transit System and would connect to the Charlotte
Transit System. The rail line would run from northeast to southwest through the Cabarrus-
Rowan Urban Area,beginning in downtown Kannapolis at the Cannon Village Station. It
would continue parallel to the Norfolk Southern railroad tracks to Concord, crossing I-85
and traveling along US 29.
2.5 ROADWAY CAPACITY
This section summarizes the results of the traffic operations analysis. The full report can be
reviewed at the NCDOT Project Development and Environmental Analysis Unit, 1000
Birch Ridge Drive, Raleigh.
A traffic operations analysis was prepared to evaluate Existing and 2035 No-Build
conditions along I-85 between NC 73 and Webb Road. The 2035 No-Build condition
assumes that I-85 would not be widened and there would be no roadway improvements to
the existing transportation system beyond those projects already programmed and
incorporated in the 2035 roadway network. The following seven interchanges and rest area
were included in the traffic analysis:
• I-85 at US 29-601
• I-85 at Rest Area north of US 29-601 interchange
• I-85 at Dale Earnhardt Boulevard
• I-85 at Lane Street
• I-85 at NC 152
• I-85 at US 29-601 Connector
US 29-601 at NC 152
Traffic operations are described in terms of levels of service ranging from A to F, where
level of service (LOS) A represents little to no delay and free-flow conditions and LOS F
represents unacceptably long delays. LOS F indicates that the volume of traffic exceeds the
capacity of the roadway.
12-20-13
2-4

2.5. 1 MAINLINE ANALYSIS
2005 MA/NL/NE ANALYS/S
A mainline capacity analysis was performed for 38 freeway segments. These are the portions
of I-85 between the interchanges. The analysis shows that 63 percent of the segments
function at LOS D (acceptable delays) or better during both AM and PM peak hours. The
remaining segments approach or exceed the roadway capacity (26 percent at LOS E and 11
percent at LOS F) during at least one peak hour of the day.
2035 N2-5u/LO MA/NL/NE ANALYS/S
Under the 2035 No-Build condition, the mainline capacity analysis indicates that only 21
percent of segments in the study area operate at LOS D or better during both AM and PM
peak hours. The remaining 79 percent of the segments will function at Level of Service F
during at least one peak hour of the day.
Table 2 summarizes the mainline capacity analysis.
Table 2. Freeway Mainline Capacity Analysis
2008 Existing 2035 No-Build
Performance Measurement Conditions I Condition
38 Free ay Segments
LOS D or Better 24 (630/,) 8 21
LOSE 10 (260/,) -
LOS F 4 (11%) 30 (79%)
2.5.2 MERGE/DIVERGE ANALYSIS
2005 MERGE/O/VERGE ANALYS/S
A merge/diverge analysis was performed for 35 ramp junctions associated with the
interchanges and rest area along I-85, and with the US 29-601/NC 152 interchange. The
analysis indicates that 71 percent of the merge/diverge junctions function at LOS D or
better during both AM and PM peak hours; 9 percent and 20 percent of the merge/diverge
junctions function at LOS E and LOS F,respectively, during at least one peak hour of the
day.
2035 N2-5u/LO MERGE/O/VERGE ANALYS/S
For the 2035 No-Build condition, the study shows that traffic demand at 28 of the 35 ramp
junctions (80 percent) would exceed the roadway capacity limits during both peak hours.
The remaining seven segments (20 percent) will function at LOS D or better throughout the
day.
Table 3 summarizes the 2008 and 2035 merge/diverge capacity analyses.
12-20-13
2-5

Table 3. Freeway Merge/Diverge Capacity Analysis
2008 2035 No-Build
Performance Measurement Existing Condition
Conditions
35 Merge Diver a Segments
LOS D or Better 25 (71%) 7 200/,
LOS E 3 (90/,) --
LOS F 1 7 (20%) 28 (80%)
2.5.3 WEAVING ANALYSIS
Weaving segments are formed when an on-ramp (merge )unction) is closely followed by an
off-ramp (diverge )unction) and they are joined by an auxiliary lane less than 2,500 feet long.
Seven freeway weaving segments were analyzed within the study area.
2005 WEAVING CAPACITY ANALYSIS
The existing conditions analysis shows that traffic in all seven weaving segments flows
without any delay throughout the day.
2035 NO-SLJILO WEAVING SECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS
For the 2035 No-Build condition, the analysis shows that traffic in four of the seven weaving
segments (57 percent) operate at unacceptable conditions,with extremely long delays (LOS
F) during at least one peak hour.
2.5.4 TRAFFIC OPERATIONS SUMMARY
The existing conditions capacity analysis indicates that traffic demand along I-85 for most of
the study area either approaches or exceeds the roadway capacity limits. Between Dale
Earnhardt Boulevard and the northern end of the study area, traffic flows at Level of Service
D or better throughout the day, an acceptable rate of traffic flow.
Under the 2035 No-Build Condition, the freeway mainline capacity analysis indicates that
traffic demand along the entire length of I-85 in the study area will either approach or
exceed the roadway capacity limits during both peak hours of the day. These capacity
deficiencies indicate a need for roadway improvements in the study area to serve the
anticipated future development and related traffic demand in the study area.
2.6 CRASH ANALYSIS
A crash analysis was performed for I-85 from NC 73 to US 29-601 connector for the three
year period ending May 31,2010. A total of 1,085 crashes were reported along this section
of I-85. The majority of these accidents (nearly 41percent) were rear end collisions. These
types of collisions are often indicative of traffic congestion. Collisions with fixed objects, at
nearly 30 percent,were the second most frequently occurring type of accident reported
during this period. Table 4 shows the number and type of crashes for this section of
roadway.
Table 5 compares the crash rates for the studied portion of I-85 to similar facilities statewide.
NCDOT provides calculated rates for facility types,based on data collected statewide. The
critical crash rate is a statistically derived number used as a screening measure to identify
12-20-13
2-6

locations where crashes occur more than should be expected for a given facility type. The
overall accident rate for I-85 in the study area is slightly less than the statewide average for a
comparable roadway. The accident rates for fatal,night, and wet crashes are higher than the
statewide accident rate. However, none of the accident rates exceed the critical crash rate.
Table 4. Crash Summary
Crash Type Number of Crashes Percent of Total
Angle 9 0.83
Animal 25 2.3
Fixed Object 322 29.68
Head On 1 0.09
Jackknife 5 0.46
Left Turn, Same Roadway 3 0.28
Movable Object 50 4.61
Other Collision with Vehicle 12 1.11
Other Non-Collision 15 1.38
Overturn/Rollover 20 1.84
Parked Motor Vehicle 9 0.83
Pedestrian 1 0.09
Ran Off Road 20 1.84
Rear-End, Slow or Stop 443 40.83
Right Turn, Same Roadway 2 0.18
Sideswipe, Opposite 2 0.18
Direction
Sideswipe, Same Direction 145 13.36
Unknown 1 0.09
Total 1,085 1
Note: Due to rounding, the total does not add up exactly to 100 percent.
12-20-13
2-7

Table 5. Crash Rate Comparison
Does
Accident
Crashes Crash Rate' Statewide Critical Rate
Rate Rate Exceed
Critical
Rate?
Total 1085 99.17 99.27 104.27 No
Fatal 5 0.46 0.37 0.72 No
Non-Fatal 273 24.95 29.07 31.8 No
Night 277 1 25.32 1 24.64 1 27.16 1 No
Wet 281 1 25.68 24.57 27.08 No
Crashes per 100 million vehicle miles
2007-2009 statewide crash rate for urban interstate routes
'Based on the statewide crash rate, 99.5 percent level of confidence
2.7 TRANSPORTATION PLANS
2.7. 1 STATE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
The NCDOT 2072-2078 State Trans ortation Improvement Program (TIP) and the NCDOT Draft
STIP 2013-2023 list the proposed project as I-3802 and I-3610. TIP Project B-5365 is listed
in the NCDOT DraftSTIP 2013-2023. Selected road improvement projects in the vicinity of
the proposed project are shown in Table 6 and illustrated on Figure 2.
Two interstate projects that connect to I-3802 are either under construction or were recently
completed. Project I-3803, south of the proposed project,is under construction. When
complete,it will add four additional lanes to I-85 between US 29-NC 49 Connector in
Mecklenburg County and NC 73 in Cabarrus County. Project I-2511, north of the proposed
project,is complete. It added lanes and rehabilitated bridges along the I-85 corridor from
US 29-601 Connector to north of SR 2120 in Rowan County.
2.7.2 NCDOT STRATEGIC HIGHWAY CORRIDORS
I-85 has been identified as a Strategic Highway Corridor (SHC) in the SHC Vision Plan,
which was adopted by NCDOT in 2004. The subject project is located in SHC Corridor 16,
I-85 from Spartanburg, South Carolina to Petersburg,Virginia. This corridor is designated
as a freeway facility in the SHC Vision Plan. The purpose of the Strategic Highway Corridor
initiative is to protect and maximize the mobility and connectivity on a core set of highway
corridors throughout North Carolina. The vision seeks to promote environmental
stewardship through the use of existing facilities to the extent possible and to foster
economic prosperity through the quick and efficient movement of people and goods.
2.7.3 OTHER TRANSPORTATION PLANS
The proposed project is included in the Cabarrus-Rowan Metropolitan Planning
Organization (CRMPO) 2035 Long Range Transportation Plan. The widening of I-85 is the
top priority of CRMPO. Cabarrus County,Rowan County, Concord, Kannapolis, China
Grove, and Landis are members of CRMPO and support the transportation plan.
12-20-13
2-8

2.8 SUMMARY OF PURPOSE AND NEED
The purpose of this project is to improve level of service on I-85 to accommodate the
growth in traffic forecasted over the next 20 to 25 years. By matching the lane
configurations of projects, the recently completed widening to the south and I-3803 to the
north, the proposed project will provide a continuous eight-lane freeway from Mecklenburg
County to Rowan County. Many of the existing bridges carrying roadways over I-85 were
constructed in the 1960s and have substandard vertical clearances. These will require
replacement or reconstruction to meet current standards. Similarly, some existing
interchanges have ramps or loops that do not comply with current standards and require
upgrading. Finally, some interchange configurations will not be able to accommodate the
traffic forecasted at an adequate level of service and must be reconstructed.
12-20-13
2-9

Table 6. TIP Projects in the Vicinity of I-3802
TIP
Project Description Schedule
No.*
US 29, NC 152,Rowan County. Norfolk Right-of-way—2017
B-5365 Southern Railroad and US 29. Replace Bridge Construction—2019
Nos. 21 and 34.
B-5136 Southern Railroad. Cabarrus County. Replace Right-of-way—2013
Bridge Nos. 66 and 69. Construction—2015
I-85, Mecklenburg-Cabarrus Counties. US 29- SR 2894 to NC 73-under
I-3803 NC 49 Connector in Mecklenburg County to construction; south of
NC 73 in Cabarrus County. Add additional US 29-NC 49 connector to
lanes. SR 2894—complete
SR 1221 (Old Beatty Ford Road),Rowan
County. At SR 1006 convert in Under construction (not
W-5146 from four-legged crossroad to two T- shown on map because it is
intersections and improve sight distance. beyond the viewing extent)
SR 1221 (Old Beatty Ford Road),Rowan
W-5313 County. Widen and install rumble strips from CRight-of-way n ruction—2014
SR 2335 to SR 1337. Construction—2015
Right-of-way
SR 1394 (Poplar Tent Road). Woodhaven A: 2017
Place/Gable Oaks Lane to US 29/601 Bypass B: 2020
U-3415 in Concord. Widen to multi-lanes. Construction
Coordinated with I-3803. A: 2023
B: 2030
Right-of-way
A: Unfunded
New route, Cabarrus County. George Liles B: 2011
R-2246 Parkway,NC 49 to south of I-85. Widen to
four lanes divided, some on new location. Construction
A: 2030
B: 2013
B-4809 Replace Bridge No. 221 on Moose Road (SR Right-of-way—2011
1308) over Lake Fisher, Rowan County. Construction—2013
*Included in the NCDOT Draft 2013-2023 STIP, "Policy to Projects"
12-20-13
2-10

3.0 ALTERNATIVES
3. 1 No-BUILD ALTERNATIVE
The No-Build Alternative assumes that no transportation improvements are made. This
alternative will not meet the purpose of the project, as explained in Chapter 2.0. In fact,it
could result in adverse social and economic impacts,given the increased congestion along
I-85 and increased delay at local intersections. In addition,lane continuity would not be
provided with the eight-lane cross sections on I-85 south of US 29-601 in Concord and
north of US 29-601 Connector in China Grove. Therefore, the No-Build Alternative is not
recommended.
3.2 ALTERNATE MODES OF TRANSPORTATION
As discussed in Section 2.4.2, several agencies provide transit service in the project area,
including the Charlotte Area Transit System (CATS), the Cities of Concord and Kannapolis,
and Rowan County. In addition,Amtrak operates rail passenger service in the project area,
with daily service offered by the Piedmont and Carolinian routes. Studies are underway for
commuter rail service,including the Southeast High Speed Rail Corridor and the CATS
Northeast Corridor Light Rail Transit Project. While these alternate modes of
transportation could help reduce congestion along I-85, they alone will not meet the
purposes identified in Section 2.0. They would not provide the level of benefit of the
proposed I-85 improvements nor the lane continuity between the existing eight-lane
segments north and south of the proposed project. Therefore, the Alternate Modes of
Transportation Alternative in lieu of the proposed I-85 improvements is not recommended.
3.3 TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVE
Transportation Management Alternative improvements include Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) and Transportation System Management (TSM) strategies. TDM
improvements focus on reducing the peak travel demand and involve programs to
encourage travelers to use alternatives to driving alone, and in some cases, to encourage
motorists to not travel at all. A major purpose of TDM is to reduce the number of single-
occupant vehicles on the road during peak travel periods when the roads are most
congested. These programs can include car/van pools, telecommuting, flexible work hours
and park and ride lots served by transit.
TSM improvements focus on operational and physical improvements to roadways and
intersections. A major purpose of TSM is to achieve the maximum efficiency, safety,
productivity and utility of the existing transportation system. TDM programs do not
typically require right-of-way or construction costs. Some TSM projects will require right-
of-way acquisition and will incur construction costs. These projects will have the potential
to disrupt existing roadways during construction. Some actions may have impacts on the
natural, human and physical environment. Transportation Management Alternative
strategies are an important component of efficient transportation; however, these strategies
alone will not adequately address the needs of the proposed project. In addition,lane
continuity would not be provided with the eight-lane cross sections, on I-85 south of US 29-
12-2❑-1 3
3-1

601 in Concord and north of US 29-601 Connector in China Grove. Therefore, the
Transportation Management Alternative is not recommended.
3.4 NEw LOCATION ALTERNATIVE
The New Location Alternative would involve constructing a new freeway in another
location. Given the amount of development in and near the I-85 corridor, this alternative
would cause substantial environmental impacts. It would not be a cost-effective means of
addressing the highway capacity deficiency. In addition,lane continuity may not be provided
with the eight-lane cross sections north and south of the proposed project. Therefore, the
New Location Alternative is not recommended.
3.5 IMPROVE EXISTING FACILITY ALTERNATIVE (NCDOT-PREFERRED
ALTERNATIVE)
The Improve Existing Facility Alternative assumes that existing I-85 between NC 73 and the
US 29-601 Connector will be reconstructed and widened to four lanes in each direction. At
least one auxiliary lane in each direction will be provided between NC 73 and Dale
Earnhardt Boulevard and US 29-601 Connector and Webb Road. Interchange
improvements are proposed at US 29-601,Dale Earnhardt Boulevard,Lane Street, and
NC 152. Improvements are also proposed at the interchange of US 29-601 and NC 152 and
at the Winecoff School Road railroad crossing.
With the proposed improvements in place,level of service on the mainline is improved,
bridges,interchanges, and rail crossings will meet design standards, and lane continuity is
provided between the eight-lane sections north and south of the proposed project. The
Improve Existing Facility Alternative will meet the purpose and need of the proposed
project.
The remainder of this chapter describes the proposed improvements associated with the
preferred alternative (Figures 4, 5 and 6).
3.5. 1 RECONSTRUCTION AND WIDENING OF MAINLINE
It is expected that four additional lanes (two in each direction) will be constructed in the
existing 68-foot grassed median from NC 73 to just north of US 29-601 Connector. Minor
widening,generally within NCDOT right-of-way, could also be required to the outside of
the existing lanes and at interchange locations. Auxiliary lanes are proposed on I-85 between
Dale Earnhardt Boulevard and US 29-601 and between Dale Earnhardt Boulevard and Lane
Street. In these areas,widening could extend outside of the right-of-way.
Interchange improvements are proposed at US 29-601, Dale Earnhardt Boulevard,Lane
Street, and NC 152. Improvements are also proposed at US 29-601 Connector and NC 152.
ROADWAY CROSS SECT/ON (1-55)
The proposed typical section for I-85 is an eight-lane median-divided freeway with 12-foot
travel lanes and 14-foot outside shoulders (12-foot paved). The proposed typical section is
shown in Figure 3A. The northbound and southbound lanes will be divided by a 22-foot
12-20-13
3-2

median,which will include a concrete barrier and 10-foot paved shoulders on either side of
the barrier.
AUXILIARY LANES
Auxiliary lanes are proposed on I-85 between US 29-601 and Lane Street. The auxiliary
lanes will improve operating conditions by better accommodating vehicles entering and
exiting I-85.
A single auxiliary lane in the southbound direction of I-85 is proposed from Lane Street to
US 29-601, a distance of approximately 4.5 miles. This auxiliary lane,which will be
constructed to the outside of existing I-85,will bring the total number of lanes in the
southbound direction in this area to five (four through lanes and one auxiliary lane).
Southbound motorists in the auxiliary lane will be required to exit at US 29-601.
An auxiliary lane is proposed in the northbound direction between the US 29-601 and Dale
Earnhardt Boulevard interchanges (a distance of approximately 1.9 miles) and between the
Dale Earnhardt Boulevard interchange and Lane Street interchange (approximately 2.6
miles). The auxiliary lane will be constructed to the outside of existing I-85 and will bring
the total number of lanes in the northbound direction in these areas to five. Northbound
motorists in the auxiliary lanes will be required to exit at Dale Earnhardt Boulevard or Lane
Street,respectively.
OESISN SPEED
The proposed design speed is 70 mph for I-85. The design speeds for intersecting roadways
vary from 40 mph to 60 mph, depending on the roadway.
SPEED LIMIT
It is anticipated the existing speed limit on I-85 (65 mph) will be maintained. Speed limits
for intersecting roads,with the exception of Winecoff School Road, are also expected to be
maintained. The design speed for Winecoff School Road is 30 mph.
AN7,1cIPA7,ED OES/SN EXCEPT IONS
A design exception might be required on Brantley Road, as the vertical curves at the tie-ins
do not meet the statutory speed limit. A lower design speed is proposed to avoid Fisher
Lake. A design exception might also be required for Center Grove Road because of the
proposed grade.
3.5.2 INTERCHANGE ALTERNATIVES
In addition to the improvements described in the previous section, this project also proposes
improvements to five interchanges in the study area. The methodology for developing
interchange configurations and selecting a preferred interchange configuration involved a
four-tier approach. The tiered approach allows for the consideration of many alternatives
while investing resources in practicable alternatives. For each tier,interchange
configurations were screened to eliminate less feasible alternatives,narrowing the focus to
one preferred interchange concept. The intent of this approach was to create a record of the
options considered for each location. As an alternative moved down the screening"funnel,"
additional detailed analysis was performed. This analysis included a design sketch planning
12-20-13
3-3

exercise, an initial screening of environmental, right-of-way and construction impacts using
aerial photography and GIS mapping, and a qualitative assessment of traffic operations
(based on Synchro data). Based on the tier analysis, a recommended interchange
configuration was selected for each location. With the selected interchange improvements in
place, all of the ramp termini intersections,with the exception of the I-85 southbound ramp
at Dale Earnhardt Boulevard,will operate at LOS C or better (Table 7). The following
discussion highlights the qualitative screening process that was used to select each
interchange configuration for detailed study. Quantitative impacts are discussed in Chapter
4.0.
Table 7. Interchange Ramp Capacity Analysis Summary (2035 Build Level of Service)
Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
US 29-601 at I-85 NB Ramps C C
US 29-601 at I-85 SB Ramps C C
Dale Earnhardt Blvd. at 1-85 SB Ramps/Roxie St. D C
Dale Earnhardt Blvd. at I-85 NB Ramps C C
Lane St. at I-85 SB Ramps C C
Lane St. at 1-85 NB Ramps B B
US 29 at US 29-601 SB Ramps B C
US 29 at US 29-601 NB Ramps B B
NC 152 at I-85 SB Ramps C C
NC 152 at I-85 NB Ramps B B
1-55 Ar LIS 29-601
Currently, at US 29-601, a cloverleaf interchange provides access to and from I-85. The
2035 No-Build Conditions capacity analysis indicates the traffic demand at this interchange
would exceed the roadway capacity limits during both the AM and PM peak hours,resulting
in a need for future roadway improvements. The capacity analysis also indicates that
improvements are needed at the ramps (freeway merge and diverge areas) to accommodate
the anticipated future growth in this area. Based on the design sketch planning exercise, the
following five interchange configurations were developed for this location:
• Diamond
• Partial Cloverleaf Type A (ParClo A)
• Partial Cloverleaf Type B (ParClo B)
Single Point Urban Interchange (SPUI)
• Diverging Diamond Interchange (DDI)
The tier analysis results indicate the peak hour traffic along the I-85 mainline would flow
similarly under any of these five interchange configurations. The peak hour intersection
capacity analysis indicates that the DDI configuration has the best traffic operations. Under
the DDI configuration, the ramp termini intersections along US 29-601 would operate at
LOS C or better throughout the day.
12-20-13
3-4

A key element of the DDI configuration is the crossing of the arterial street prior to the
bridge,resulting in traffic traveling on the left side of the roadway,with opposing traffic on
the right side. This travel pattern allows unopposed left-turn movements at the ramp
termini beyond the bridge. With this configuration, the number of crossing conflict points is
reduced from four to two, potentially reducing crashes by 50 percent. All associated traffic
signals are two phases.
The area around the US 29-601 interchange is heavily developed with few remaining natural
resources so impacts to the natural environment would be minor with the DDI
configuration. Two unnamed tributaries to Threemile Branch may be affected by
improvements to the interchange. Right-of-way impacts are comparable among the five
options considered. Based on traffic operations and the minor environmental impacts, the
DDI is recommended at this location.
Reconstruction will include removing the loops and ramps from each quadrant,removing
the collector-distributor lanes along I-85, replacing the existing dual three-lane bridges over
I-85 with a single, six-lane bridge, and building new ramps from the interstate to US 29-601
(Figure 4B and Figure 5). The new bridge will be located slightly west of the existing bridge
so traffic can be maintained during construction.
1-55 AT DALE EARNHARDT BOULEVARD
The current interchange design at Dale Earnhardt Boulevard is a folded diamond. The 2035
No-Build Conditions capacity analysis shows the traffic demand at the ramp termini
intersections would exceed the roadway capacity limits during both the AM and PM peak
hours. The capacity analysis also indicates improvements are needed at the ramps (freeway
merge and diverge areas) to accommodate the anticipated future growth in this area. The
following five interchange concepts were developed for this location:
• Improved Folded Diamond
• Half Cloverleaf
• Improved Diamond with Slip Ramp in Roxie Street Quadrant
• Improved Diamond with Relocated, Elongated Loop
• Improved Diamond with Relocated,Elongated Loop across from Knowles Street
The tier analysis results indicate the peak hour traffic along the I-85 mainline would flow
similarly under any of these interchange configurations. However, options that involve
expanding the existing loop are not desirable because they would require replacing the
interchange bridge. In addition, the existing loop is not large enough to accommodate an
additional lane. In addition to the issues with the loop, the Improved Diamond with Slip
Ramp option also experiences long queues,which could result in traffic backing up onto
I-85. This option would also result in substantial impacts to four businesses in the area. In
addition, there would be a short weave area where merging traffic from the slip ramp would
interfere with I-85 southbound traffic exiting to the rest area.
The Improved Diamond with Relocated,Elongated Loop was recommended as the
preferred configuration at this location because it offers the best traffic operations, does not
12-20-13
3-5

require a two-lane loop,requires a smaller,less expensive bridge over I-85, and has the least
likelihood of needing additional improvements during the project's design life.
Based on public comment received at and after Design Public Meetings in November 2012
(Section 5.3), an additional configuration was developed that relocated the elongated loop
across from Knowles Street instead of at Jaycee Road. It was determined the signalized
ramp intersection was too close to the signalized Roxie Street intersection and the loop was
too short to accommodate multiple turn lanes from Dale Earnhardt Boulevard. Traffic
analyses indicated of the two elongated loop options, the one at Jaycee Road offers better
traffic operations for the I-85 ramps and the Dale Earnhardt Boulevard corridor.
The Improved Diamond with Relocated,Elongated Loop involves modifying the ramp in
the southeast quadrant,building a new loop and modifying the ramp configuration in the
northeast quadrant,removing the existing loop and ramp in the northwest quadrant, and
relocating the northwest ramp and loop to the existing Jaycee Road right-of-way (Figures 4F,
4G, and 6). The bridge on Dale Earnhardt Boulevard over I-85 could be retained with this
option.
Additionally,Dale Earnhardt Boulevard will be widened from just north of Old Earnhardt
Road to south of Vinehaven Drive to provide adequate turn lanes to accommodate existing
and projected traffic. Dale Earnhardt Boulevard will become a median-divided roadway
with curb and gutter. Shoulder sections will be provided in the interchange area. Roxie
Street will also be widened as part of these improvements to allow for turn lanes at Dale
Earnhardt Boulevard. The old ramp in the northwest quadrant will be modified to serve as
the main access for the Lowe's Home Improvement store,gas station, Chamber of
Commerce Building, and F&M Bank.
Impacts to the natural environment are expected to be minor with any of the configurations
because the area is mostly built out. Two unnamed tributaries and a small associated
wetland may be affected by the reconstruction of the interchange. Residential impacts are
greater in the northwest quadrant with this option and commercial impacts are greater with
the other options. Based on the analysis, the Improved Diamond with Relocated, Elongated
Loop interchange configuration is recommended for this location.
1-55 AT LANE STREET
Currently at Lane Street, a diamond interchange provides access to and from I-85. The 2035
No-Build Conditions capacity analysis indicates the traffic demand at the ramp termini
intersections would exceed the roadway capacity limits during both the AM and PM peak
hours. The capacity analysis also indicates improvements are needed at the ramps (freeway
merge and diverge areas) to accommodate the anticipated future growth in this area. Based
on the design sketch planning exercise, the following four interchange concepts were
developed for this location:
• Diamond
• Diamond with Loop in Northwest Quadrant
• Diamond with Roundabouts
• Diverging Diamond Interchange (DDI)
12-20-13
3-6

The tier analysis indicates the peak hour traffic demand along I-85 would flow similarly with
any of these four interchange configurations. The peak hour intersection capacity analysis
indicates the Diamond with Roundabouts concept would require the least number of lanes
(four) across the I-85 overpass and would substantially improve traffic flow at the Lane
Street interchange. This configuration and the Diamond with Loop in Northwest Quadrant
configuration would have higher right-of-way impacts than the diamond or DDL Natural
resource impacts are comparable for all options. Based on the screening analysis, the
Diamond with Roundabouts configuration is recommended at this location.
The recommended reconstruction of the Lane Street interchange includes reconstructing
ramps in all four quadrants, providing roundabouts at the ramp terminals with Lane Street,
providing allowance for a future loop in the northwest quadrant, replacing the existing three-
lane bridge on Lane Street over I-85 with a four-lane,median-divided bridge, and widening
Lane Street to accommodate a concrete median and turn lanes through the interchange area
(Figure 41). As part of these improvements, the new bridge over I-85 will be constructed to
the north of the existing bridge in order to maintain traffic during construction. Lane Street
will have curb and gutter outside the interchange area and shoulders and ditches within the
interchange area. Additional improvements include a roundabout at the intersection of Lane
Street and Royce Street/Turkey Road.
1-55 AT NC 152
Currently at NC 152, a partial diamond interchange provides access from I-85 northbound
to NC 152 and from NC 152 to I-85 southbound. NCDOT TIP Project I-3610 proposes to
reconstruct this interchange with the addition of two ramps to serve NC 152 to I-85
northbound and I-85 southbound to NC 152. Therefore, the interchange alternatives for
I-85 at NC 152 were analyzed as full movement interchanges. Based on the design sketch
planning exercise, the following three interchange concepts were developed for this location:
• Diamond
• Diamond with Loop in Northeast Quadrant
• Diamond with Roundabouts
The tier analysis results indicate the peak hour traffic along the I-85 mainline would flow
similarly under either of these three interchange configurations. The peak hour intersection
capacity analysis shows the Diamond with Roundabouts configuration operates best. The
peak hour traffic along the I-85 mainline would flow similarly under any of these three
interchange configurations. The ramp termini intersections along NC 152 would operate at
LOS C or better throughout the day under these configurations.
Reconstruction of the interchange would involve roundabouts at the ramp terminals and
new ramps in each of the four quadrants (Figure 4P). The existing NC 152 bridge over I-85
will be retained. NC 152 will be widened to accommodate a concrete median and turn lanes.
It will remain a shoulder and ditch section.
The tier analysis results indicate comparable impacts for the Diamond with Loop and
Diamond with Roundabout. The Diamond with Roundabouts configuration is
recommended at this location.
12-20-13
3-7

LIS 29-601 CONNECTOR AT NC 152
Currently, at US 29-601 Connector, a cloverleaf interchange provides access to and from
NC 152. TIP Project I-3610 proposes to reconstruct this interchange as a half-diamond
interchange with ramps in the southeast and southwest quadrants and traffic signals at both
ramp termini intersections. To accommodate projected traffic, NC 152 is proposed to be
widened between its interchange with I-85 to the vicinity of Hitachi Metals Drive.
Proposed reconstruction at this interchange includes removing all three loops and both
ramps. A five-lane bridge with a concrete median is proposed over US 29,west of the
existing bridge. Yost Hill Road is proposed to be realigned to intersect with NC 152 across
from the US 29 eastbound exit ramp. Madison Road will be realigned to intersect with
NC 152 across from the US 29 westbound entrance ramp. These improvements are shown
on Figure 4P.
With the half-diamond configuration, the ramp termini intersections at the US 29-601
Connector/NC 152 interchange would operate at LOS C or better throughout the day.
Right-of-way and environmental impacts would be minor. Natural resources likely to be
affected include tributaries to Town Creek, along with possible impacts to wetlands
associated with these tributaries. A half-diamond configuration is recommended for this
location.
3.5.3 RIGHT-OF-WAY AND ACCESS CONTROL
Sufficient right-of-way and easements will be acquired to accommodate the proposed
improvements. Most improvements will occur within the existing I-85 right-of-way. Minor
amounts of additional right-of-way will be required at some sections along I-85 to
accommodate the widening. Additional right-of-way will be required along some of the
cross streets to accommodate widening or other improvements associated with interchange
reconstruction.
Full control of access will be maintained along I-85. For intersecting streets, controlled
access will be utilized at the following locations:
• US 29-601 from just south of Cloverleaf Plaza to just north of the new intersection
with S. Main Street (Figure 413, 4C,4D, and Figure 5).
• Concord Lake Road/Lake Concord Road from just south of Cloverleaf Parkway to
Country Club Drive (Figure 4E).
• S. Main Street/Kannapolis Highway from south of Stewart Street to north of Mills
Avenue (Figure 413, Figure 5).
• S. Ridge Avenue, approximately 200 feet on either side of the bridge over I-85
(Figure 413, Figure 5).
• Dale Earnhardt Boulevard from north of Coldwater Ridge Drive to south of the
Denwood Street, and from Roxie Street to Dickens Place (Figures 4F, 4G, and 6).
• Along both sides of Centergrove Road, approximately 150 feet on either side of the
12-20-13
3-B

proposed bridge (Figure 4H).
• Brantley Road, approximately 250 feet on either side of the proposed bridge (Figure
41).
• From approximately 950 feet west of the proposed Lane Street bridge to
approximately 1,300 feet east of the proposed bridge (Figure 41).
• Pine Ridge Road, from approximately 200 feet west of the proposed bridge over I-85
to approximately 100 feet east of the bridge. On the east side of I-85, an additional
100 feet of controlled access will be purchased to maintain an existing driveway
(Figure 4N).
• Approximately 300 feet west of the proposed bridge on Lentz Road over I-85 to
approximately 150 feet east of the proposed bridge (Figure 40).
• NC 152 from the intersection of the newly aligned Power Street to Hitachi Metals
Drive. A break in the control of access is provided,just east of Ketchie Estates
Road to maintain an existing driveway (Figure 4P).
• US 29/NC 152 from south of N. Main Street (US 29A) to west of realigned Power
Street (through the current interchange area) (Figure 4P).
3.5.4 INTERSECTING ROADWAYS
Improvements are proposed to some of the roadways that cross I-85 in the study area.
These improvements are described below.
• S. Main Street is proposed to be realigned to the west. A new four-lane bridge over
I-85 is proposed (Figure 5). Sidewalks are included on both sides of the bridge. The
northbound inside through lane will become a left turn only lane at a point north of
Stewart Street.
• The crossing over I-85 on S. Ridge Avenue is proposed to be removed (Figure 5).
The south end will be tied to the newly realigned S. Main Street. Right-in/right out
access is provided to address operational issues associated with eliminating left turns
from the proximity of the intersection of S. Main Street and US 29.
• The existing at-grade railroad crossing on Winecoff School Road will be closed.
Winecoff School Road will be realigned to the south and a bridge carrying it over the
railroad, S. Main Street, and S. Ridge Avenue will be constructed (Figure 4D). A
roundabout is proposed to provide a free flow connection from Winecoff School
Road to S. Main Street. The new road will tie back into S. Ridge Avenue just south
of Carolina Memorial Park.
• Country Club Drive is proposed to be widened from three to four lanes at its
intersection with US 29-601 (Figure 4C). Curb and gutter and sidewalks will be
provided along most of the widening, except where the improved road tapers back
into the existing alignment.
12-20-13
3-9

• Concord Lake Road/Lake Concord Road is proposed to be widened to five lanes
with curb and gutter from Cloverleaf Parkway to Country Club Drive (Figure 4E).
The existing two-lane bridge over I-85 will be replaced with a five-lane bridge.
Sidewalks are included on both sides of the bridge.
• A number of improvements are proposed to roads along Dale Earnhardt Boulevard
as part of its interchange reconstruction. These are shown on Figures 4F,4G, and 6
and include:
• Minor intersection improvements on Vinehaven Drive.
• A small, concrete island is proposed on Dickens Place at its intersection with
Dale Earnhardt Boulevard. Dickens Place will become right-in/right-out
access only.
• Roxie Street will be widened to the north to provide two westbound through
lanes, an exclusive left turn lane, a shared left/through lane, and dual right
turn lanes at its intersection with Dale Earnhardt Boulevard.
• The existing I-85 ramp in the northwest quadrant will become the main
access for the Lowe's Home Improvement store with one eastbound through
lane, an exclusive left turn lane, a shared left/through lane and a single right
turn lane at its intersection with Dale Earnhardt Boulevard.
• Jaycee Road is proposed to be widened to the west. This road is proposed to
become the southbound I-85 exit ramp/entrance loop. No access to
adjacent properties will be allowed from the ramp. Access to the bank and
Lowe's will be provided from Dale Earnhardt Boulevard and the new service
road. The exit ramp will have dual left turn lanes and a single right turn lane
at its intersection with Dale Earnhardt Boulevard.
• A roundabout is proposed on Lane Street at Royce Street/Turkey Road (Figure 4I).
Lane Street is proposed to be widened to four lanes with curb and gutter from east
of Stadium Drive to west of Royce Street/Turkey Road. Access will be maintained
at the Pilot Truck Stop,Waffle House,Motel 6, and Brantley property.
• N. Main Street is proposed to tie into US 29 with a five-lane shoulder section (Figure
4P). A tie-in west of NC 152 will provide dual left turn lanes and an exclusive right
turn lane.
3.5.5 RAILROADS AND RAILROAD CROSSINGS
The North Carolina Railroad crosses I-85 with a bridge just west of the US 29-601
interchange. Proposed improvements include re-aligning the tracks and constructing a new
bridge over I-85 west of the existing bridge to provide sufficient vertical clearance over I-85.
The new bridge location affects the railroad tracks through the Winecoff School Road
crossing. The existing crossing is badly humped,with little distance between S. Ridge
Avenue and S. Main Street. This makes it impossible to raise the railroad grade and keep the
crossing in operation.
12-20-13
3-10

A new bridge carrying Winecoff School Road over the railroad, S. Ridge Avenue and S. Main
Street will be constructed to meet current standards. The existing at-grade crossing will be
closed. The proposed bridge will maintain the connection the at-grade crossing now
provides. In addition, the proposed bridge will allow for the elimination of the S. Ridge
Avenue bridge over I-85, creating a cost-saving opportunity without substantially affecting
local travel patterns.
Three design options were evaluated for the proposed crossing. The recommended design
proposes to realign Winecoff School Road south of the existing road and tie back into S.
Ridge Avenue just south of Carolina Memorial Park to minimize impacts to properties that
are eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. It includes a roundabout that
provides a free flow connection from Winecoff School Road to S. Main Street. This
improvement is shown in Figure 4D.
The bridge on US 29 over the railroad is proposed to be replaced in its existing location.
The railroad crossings will allow for the addition of future tracks associated with the high
speed rail project.
3.5.6 STRUCTURES
The project study area includes 25 bridges,including four on I-85 that cross streams, 13 on
intersecting roadways, six interchange bridges, and two railroad bridges. The proposed
treatment for each of these is shown in Table 8. Proposed bridge dimensions are based on
preliminary design and could change slightly in final design. Proposed new structures over
I-85 will provide an additional 16 feet on each side to accommodate two additional future
lanes.
12-20-13
3-1 1

Table 8. Bridges in the Study Area
Bridge Route Across Proposed Treatment Figure
Number Number
86 I-85 NB Irish Buffalo Replace both bridges with
Creek a single bridge,
4A
88 I-85 SB Irish Buffalo
approximately 145 feet
Creek wide and 175 feet long.
107 Winecoff School I-85 Retain 4B
Road
39 S. Main I-85 Replace with 4-lane curb 4B
Street/Kannapoh s and gutter bridge west of
Highway existing location.
Proposed bridge will be
approximately 65 feet
wide and 330 feet long.
Sidewalks are proposed
on both sides.
R-119 Railroad I-85 Realign tracks to the west 4B
of existing alignment.
Replace bridge over I-85
with bridge approximately
40 feet wide and 340 feet
long.
R-32 Railroad S. Main Street Realign tracks to the west 4B
of the existing alignment.
Replace bridge over S.
Main Street. Proposed
bridge would be
approximately 40 feet
wide and 195 feet long.
122 S. Ridge Avenue I-85 Remove 4B
New Bridge Winecoff School Railroad, S. New Bridge,
Road Main Street, S. approximately 47 feet 4D
Ridge Avenue wide and 224 feet long.
12-20-13
3-12

Table 8. Bridges in the Study Area (continued)
Bridge Route Across Proposed Treatment Figure
Number Number
89 US 29-601 SB I-85 Replace both bridges with
a single bridge, 4B
87 US 29-601 NB I-85 approximately 110 feet
wide and 300 feet long.
40 Concord Lake I-85 Replace 2-lane bridge with
Road/Lake Concord 5-lane bridge, 4E
Road approximately 75 feet
wide and 330 feet long.
133 Dale Earnhardt I-85 Retain and widen
Boulevard approximately 12 feet to
4F
the west to accommodate
additional lane.
134 I-85 NB Cold Water Replace both bridges with
Creek a single bridge,
136 I-85 SB Cold Water
approximately 165 feet 4G
Creek wide and 240 feet long.
139 Centergrove Road I-85 Replace on existing
location with bridge, 4H
approximately 30 feet
wide and 305 feet long.
144 Brantley Road I-85 Replace north of existing
location with bridge 4I
approximately 30 feet
wide and 330 feet long.
147 Lane Street I-85 Replace north of existing
location with bridge 4I
approximately 60 feet
wide and 285 feet long.
32 Moose Road I-85 Retain 4J
65 Old Beatty Ford I-85 Retain 4L
Road
12-20-13
3-13

Table 8. Bridges in the Study Area (continued)
Bridge Route Across Proposed Treatment Figure
Number Number
84 Daugherty Road I-85 Retain 4M
87 Pine Ridge Road I-85 Replace north of existing
location with bridge 4N
approximately 30 feet
wide and 335 feet long.
91 Lentz Road I-85 Replace north of existing
location with bridge 40
approximately 30 feet
wide and 280 feet long.
68 NC 152 I-85 Retain 4P
34 US 29/NC 152 US 29 Replace 3-lane bridge with
5-lane bridge west of
existing alignment. 4P
Proposed bridge will be
approximately 75 feet long
and 290 feet wide.
21 US 29/NC 152 Railroad Replace 4-lane bridge with
4-lane, divided bridge in
existing location. 4P
Proposed bridge would be
approximately 75 feet
wide and 300 feet long.
94 Mt. Hope Church I-85 Retain 4P
Road
12-20-13
3-14

3.5.7 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES AND GREENWAYS
BICYCLE FACILITIES
According to the Cabarrus-Rowan Metropolitan Planning Organization (CRMPO)
Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP) Bicycle Map (August 2011), there are four
bicycle routes in the study area. Route 1 is a loop route that extends along local roads east
and west of I-85, crosses I-85 on Concord Lake Road, and crosses the interstate again on
Moose Road (Figures 4D, 4E and 4J). Fourteen-foot outside lanes are proposed on
Concord Lake Road. In addition,bicycle-safe rails will be provided on the new bridge. No
work is proposed on Moose Road.
Route 2 crosses I-85 on Centergrove Road (Figure 4H). It extends east and west of I-85
along local roads. Four-foot paved shoulders and bicycle-safe rails are proposed on the
Centergrove Road bridge replacement.
The bicycle map also shows an unnumbered, on-road bicycle route that follows Main Street
and Shue Road in Rowan County (Figure 4P). No work is proposed on these streets.
An additional unnumbered route crosses I-85 on Mt. Hope Church Road (Figure 4Q). No
work is proposed on Mt. Hope Church Road.
PEGESTR/AN FAC/L/T/ES
Existing sidewalk information was obtained from field observations. There is a sidewalk
along the south side of Dale Earnhardt Boulevard west of I-85 and another along US 29
(Cannon Boulevard) east of I-85. There is also a sidewalk along S. Main Street/Kannapoli s
Highway over I-85. Other sidewalks,primarily associated with shopping centers or strip
developments, are scattered throughout the study area.
The proposed improvements include sidewalks primarily to replace those that will be
removed for cross street improvements. In some instances,new sidewalk sections are
included to complete existing sections. NCDOT will coordinate, on a case-by-case basis,
with the Cities of Concord and Kannapolis and Rider Transit on the location of additional
sidewalks. Currently, sidewalks are proposed along:
• Winecoff School Road (Figure 4D and Figure 5)
o Sidewalk on one side of the bridge
• Cannon Boulevard/US 29-601 (Figure 4C and Figure 5)
• South side from S. Main Street to Mall Drive (replace existing)
• North side from Goodman Circle to Mall Drive (new)
• Country Club Drive (Figure 4C)
o Both sides from Cannon Boulevard/US 29-601 to mall entrance (some
existing)
• Kannapolis Highway (Figure 4D)
o Both sides of the proposed bridge No. 39 (replace existing)
12-20-13
3-15

• Concord Lake Road (Figure 4E)
o Both sides of the proposed bridge replacement
• Dale Earnhardt Boulevard (Figures 4F, 4G and 6)
• Both sides from Old Earnhardt Boulevard to Roxie Street (some existing)
• Both sides from ramps to Vinehaven Drive (some existing)
• Roxie Street (Figure 4F and Figure 6)
o Both sides from just south of Wonder Drive to Dale Earnhardt Boulevard
(replace existing)
NCDOT will continue to coordinate with local officials to address sidewalk
accommodations on a case-by-case basis and determine cost-sharing arrangements.
GREENWAYS
County GIS files, the City of Kannapolis Greenways brochure, and the Livable Community
Blueprint for Cabarrus County (February 2002) indicate no existing greenways in the study
area but two are proposed. The future Irish Buffalo Creek Greenway will cross under I-85
in the study area (Figure 413). This portion of the greenway would extend on the east side of
Irish Buffalo Creek from North Cabarrus Park,under I-85, and eventually to the Carolina
Thread Trail. The proposed replacement of Bridge Numbers 86 and 88 over Irish Buffalo
Creek will accommodate this future greenway crossing.
The Harold B. McEachern Greenway is currently outside of this project's study area.
However, there are plans to extend the greenway along Three Mile Branch Creek, ending in
the vicinity of Carolinas Medical Center NorthEast (Figure 4C and 4E). According to the
Kannapolis Parks and Recreation Director, the greenway extension will cross I-85 on Lake
Concord Road. The proposed improvements include sidewalks and wide outside lanes on
both sides of the bridge on Lake Concord Road,which will accommodate this greenway
crossing.
3.5.B NOISE BARRIERS
Five noise barriers are recommended as part of the proposed improvements. These
recommendations are based on the preliminary design and are subject to change during final
design. Additional public involvement will be conducted if noise mitigation measures are
warranted. A summary of the traffic noise analysis is presented in Section 4.10.
3.5.9 UTILITIES
Numerous utility lines are within the study area. These include:
• Duke Energy (Distribution and Transmission, aerial and underground)
• AT&T of NC (Telephone, aerial and underground)
• Time Warner Cable (Cable television)
• Water and Sewer Authority of Concord (underground)
• PSNC (natural gas, underground)
12-20-13
3-1 6

There are three transmission crossings inside the project limits of I-85 and six major
crossings along cross streets in the study area.
3.5. 1 O WORK ZONE, TRAFFIC CONTROL AND CONSTRUCTION
PHASING
The proposed project is within the Cabarrus-Rowan Metropolitan Planning Organization
area,which has been designated a Transportation Management Area (TMA), and is
considered "significant'with regard to the NCDOT Work Zone Safety and Mobility Policy.
Significant projects require, at a minimum, the following measures to ensure the safety and
mobility of workers and road users:
• A transportation management plan that provides detailed construction sequencing
through a temporary traffic control plan, addresses transportation operations and
direct impacts on the transportation network, and incorporates public information
into the planning, design, and construction of the project;
• Consideration of possible alternative delivery techniques to minimize impacts and
durations of those impacts; and
• Appropriate work zone strategies, such as enforcement and incident management
techniques and technologies, to create a more efficient and effective work zone.
In addition, during construction of the project, the work zone strategies, practices, and
procedures that were put into place for the project will be continuously monitored, assessed,
and improved.
During project construction,four lanes of traffic on I-85 will be maintained as much as
possible. Some lane closures and traffic shifts will be required. For the replacement of
Bridge No. 139 on Centergrove Road, an offsite detour will be used (Figure 7).
Construction for NC 152/I-85/US 601 is proposed to be done in four phases, some of
which will require detouring some local traffic to other local roads (Figure 8). Construction
of the Winecoff School Road is proposed to be done as much as possible while the current
at-grade crossing remains open. Appropriate signing will be provided for the detours.
Changeable message signs and dynamic message signs will be used to notify motorists of
construction activities and lane shifts. Other methods to notify motorists of changing traffic
conditions may also be used as part of the public information efforts. Efforts will be made
to provide continuous access to businesses and residences,while ensuring work zone safety
and efficiency.
12-20-13
3-17

4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF PROPOSED
ACTT O N
4. 1 BIOTIC RESOURCES
4. 1 . 1 TERRESTRIAL COMMUNITIES
Five terrestrial communities were identified in the study area: maintained/disturbed, mixed
pine/hardwood forest, oak-hickory forest,Piedmont alluvial forest, and bamboo forest.
Table 9 shows the coverage for each community within the study area and the anticipated
impacts to each as a result of the proposed improvements. Impacts were determined using a
25-foot buffer outside the construction limits.
Table 9. Terrestrial Community Impacts
Community Coverage in Study Anticipated
Area (acres) Impacts (acres)
Maintained/ Disturbed 912.4 11.0
Mixed Pine/Hardwood Forest 350.6 98.9
Oak-Hickory Forest 75.8 26.6
Piedmont Alluvial Forest 148.6 38.0
Bamboo Forest 0.5 -
Total 1,487.9 174.5
4. 1 .2 AQUATIC COMMUNITIES
Aquatic communities in the study area consist of both perennial and intermittent piedmont
streams, as well as still water ponds and reservoir lakes. Perennial streams in the study area
could support bluehead chub, redlip shiner,northern dusky salamander, and redbreast
sunfish. Intermittent streams in the study area are relatively small in size and would support
aquatic communities of spring peeper,various crayfish, and various benthic
macroinvertebrates. Pond and lake habitats could support bluegill, channel catfish,green
frog, and banded water snake. Stream impacts are detailed in Section 4.2.
4.2 JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS
Eighty-nine jurisdictional streams were identified in the study area. These streams are shown
on Figure 4. Stream characteristics and anticipated impacts are shown in Table 10. All
streams are located within USGS Hydrologic Units 03040105 and 03040103. All
jurisdictional streams in the study area have been designated as warm water streams for
purposes of stream mitigation.
Forty-five jurisdictional wetlands were identified in the study area (Figure 4). Wetland
classification and quality rating data, along with anticipated impacts, are presented in Table
11.
12-20-13
4-1

Table 10.Jurisdictional Streams in the Study Area
Impact (linear feet)
ID Figure Stream Name Stream Type Length Within Within 25' Total(Slope
No. (linear feet) Slope Clearing stakes +25
Stakes Zone feet)
BC-Buffalo Crk 4A Irish Buffalo Creek Perennial 640 - - -
UTF 4A UT Irish Buffalo Creek Perennial 468 40 40
UTI 4A UT Irish Buffalo Creek Intermittent 467 18 44 62
UTJ1 4A UT Irish Buffalo Creek Perennial 1732 - - -
UTJ2 4A UT Irish Buffalo Creek Perennial 356 - - -
UTJA 4A UT Irish Buffalo Creek Intermittent 22 - - -
UTJB 4A UT Irish Buffalo Creek Intermittent 326 - - -
UTK 4A UT Irish Buffalo Creek Intermittent 131 - 12 12
SA 4B UT Irish Buffalo Creek Intermittent 311 - 79 79
SBA 4B UT Irish Buffalo Creek Intermittent 120 - - -
SBB 4B UT Irish Buffalo Creek Intermittent 605 118 116 234
SBC 4B UT Irish Buffalo Creek Intermittent 26 - - -
SCZ 4B UT Irish Buffalo Creek Perennial 137 35 45 80
SCZA 4B UT Irish Buffalo Creek Perennial 260 146 36 182
SC-2 4D UT Threemile Branch Perennial 745 318 101 419
SCA 4D UT Threemile Branch Intermittent 673 290 81 371
12-20-13
4-2

Table 10.Jurisdictional Streams in the Study Area (continued)
Impact(linear feet)
ID Figure Stream Name Stream Type Length Within Within 25' Total(Slope
No. (linear feet) Slope Clearing stakes +25
Stakes Zone feet)
SC-R 4D Threemile Branch Perennial 1113 - - -
SD-2 4D UT Threemile Branch Intermittent 217 159 58 217
SG-2 4D UT Irish Buffalo Creek Intermittent 25 - - -
SCAR 4D/4E UT Threemile Branch Intermittent 102 102 - 102
SC-1 4E Threemile Branch Perennial 721 44 26 70
SCBA 4E UT Threemile Branch Intermittent 1258 11 62 73
SCC 4E UT Threemile Branch Intermittent 371 - - -
SCCA 4E UT Threemile Branch Intermittent 546 - 99 99
SDA 4E UT Cold Water Creek Perennial 457 95 66 161
SDAA 4E UT Cold Water Creek Intermittent 1150 - 545 545
SD-1 4F UT Cold Water Creek Perennial 304 57 51 108
SDBA 4F UT Cold Water Creek Intermittent 307 89 63 152
SDBBA 4F UT Cold Water Creek Intermittent 327 90 32 122
SCX 4G UT Cold Water Creek Intermittent 704 83 28 111
SE 4G Cold Water Creek Perennial 1280 18 110 128
1 2-2❑-1 3
4-3

Table 10.Jurisdictional Streams in the Study Area (continued)
Impact(linear feet)
ID Figure Stream Name Stream Type Length Within Within 25' Total(Slope
No. (linear feet) Slope Clearing stakes +25
Stakes Zone feet)
SEA 4G UT Cold Water Creek Intermittent 575 136 57 193
SEAR 4G UT Cold Water Creek Intermittent 56 40 16 56
SEB 4G UT Cold Water Creek Perennial 876 208 102 310
SEC 4G UT Cold Water Creek Intermittent 654.83 - - -
SED 4G UT Cold Water Creek Perennial 279 104 35 139
SEF 4G UT Cold Water Creek Intermittent 634 263 73 336
SFB 4H UT Cold Water Creek Perennial 440 91 52 143
SFC 4H UT Lake Fisher Perennial 991 110 161 271
SFD 4I UT Lake Fisher Perennial 521 94 70 164
SFDA 4I UT Lake Fisher Intermittent 183 - - -
SFE 4I UT Lake Fisher Intermittent 555 34 93 127
SFEB 4I UT Lake Fisher Intermittent 17 - - -
SGA 4I UT Lake Fisher Int/Per 518 73 88 161
SGAC 4I UT Lake Fisher Intermittent 47 - - -
SGAD 4I UT Lake Fisher Intermittent 52 - 23 23
SGC 4I UT Lake Fisher Intermittent 372 163 25 188
SG-1 4J UT Lake Fisher Perennial 319 - 25 25
1 2-2❑-1 3
4-4

Table 10.Jurisdictional Streams in the Study Area (continued)
Impact(linear feet)
ID Figure Stream Name Stream Type Length Within Within 25' Total(Slope
No. (linear feet) Slope Clearing stakes +25
Stakes Zone feet)
SGB 4J UT Lake Fisher Intermittent 54 - 50 50
SH 4J UT Lake Fisher Perennial 618 26 26 52
SHA 4J UT Lake Fisher Intermittent 828 - 439 439
SIA 4K UT Cold Water Creek Intermittent 207 - 16 16
SIC 4K UT Cold Water Creek Intermittent 514 19 53 72
SIE/SBF 4K UT Cold Water Creek Perennial 1577 41 326 367
SI 4K/4L Cold Water Creek Perennial 1407 - - -
SJC 4L UT Cold Water Creek Perennial 192 - - -
SZD 4L UT Cold Water Creek Perennial 779 - - -
Si 4L/4M/4N Cold Water Creek Perennial 9392 - - -
SJA 4M UT Cold Water Creek Intermittent 187 - 8.53 8.53
SJAA 4M UT Cold Water Creek Intermittent 59 -
SJB 4M UT Cold Water Creek Perennial 1166 34 148 182
SJBA 4M UT Cold Water Creek Intermittent 578 - - -
SJE 4M UT Cold Water Creek Intermittent 343 6 26 32
SJF 4M UT Cold Water Creek Perennial 555 - - -
SJFA 4M UT Cold Water Creek Intermittent 821 - - -
1 2-2❑-1 3
4-5

Table 10.Jurisdictional Streams in the Study Area (continued)
Impact(linear feet)
ID Figure Stream Name Stream Type Length Within Within 25' Total(Slope
No. (linear feet) Slope Clearing stakes +25
Stakes Zone feet)
SJG 4M UT Cold Water Creek Perennial 236 - - -
SJH 4N UT Cold Water Creek Intermittent 260 - 40 40
SJI 4N UT Cold Water Creek Intermittent 90 - - -
SJJ 4N UT Cold Water Creek Intermittent 362 - 24 24
SKA 4N UT Cold Water Creek Perennial 380 197 36 233
SKB 4N UT Cold Water Creek Perennial 268 - - -
SK 4N/4O/4P Cold Water Creek Perennial 8827 219 879 1098
SKC 40 UT Cold Water Creek Intermittent 62 - 5 5
SKID 40 UT Cold Water Creek Intermittent 183 22 67 89
SKE 40 UT Cold Water Creek Intermittent 140 57 29 86
SKF 40 UT Cold Water Creek Perennial 311 9 53 62
SKG 40 UT Cold Water Creek Intermittent 232 - 23 3
SKH 40 UT Cold Water Creek Perennial 387 - 9 9
SKI 4P UT Cold Water Creek Intermittent 698 408 51 459
SKJ 4P UT Cold Water Creek Perennial 288 - - -
SKJA 4P UT Cold Water Creek Intermittent 166 - - -
SKL. 4P UT Cold Water Creek Intermittent 831 202 137 339
1 2-2❑-1 3
4-6

Table 10.Jurisdictional Streams in the Study Area (continued)
Impact(linear feet)
ID Figure Stream Name Stream Type Length Within Within 25' Total(Slope
No. (linear feet) Slope Clearing stakes +25
Stakes Zone feet)
SKI.A 4P UT Cold Water Creek Intermittent 16 - - -
SKN 4P UT Cold Water Creek Intermittent 185 - - -
SKO 4P UT Cold Water Creek Intermittent 188 28 14 42
SZG 4P UT Cold Water Creek Perennial 14 - - -
SKM 4P/4Q Cold Water Creek Intermittent 519 - - -
SL 4Q Town Creek Perennial 1957 - - -
SLA 4Q UT Town Creek Intermittent 496 - - -
Total 59,367 4,257 4,973 9,230
Total Intermittent 19,370 2,411 2,576 4,987
Total Perennial 39,997 1,846 2,397 4,243
1 2-2❑-1 3
4-7

Table 11. Wetlands in the Project Area
Impacts
Figure NCWAM DWQ Acres in
Name No. Classification Classification Rating Study Within Within 25 Total(Slope
Area Slope clearing stakes +25
Stakes zone feet)
WBL 4A Headwater Forest Riparian 39 <0.1 - - -
WBK 4A Headwater Forest Riparian 58 0.1 - - -
WA-1 4A Bottomland Riparian 67 0.7 - - -
Hardwood Forest
WG-R 4B Headwater Forest Riparian 26 - - - -
WH-1 4B Headwater Forest Riparian 58 0.1 - - -
WA-2 4D Bottomland Riparian 33 0.6 - - -
Hardwood Forest
WC 4D Headwater Forest Riparian 10 0.1 - - -
WB 4D Headwater Forest Riparian 10 - - - -
WG 4D Headwater Forest Riparian 19 0.1 - - -
1 2-2❑-1 3
4-8

Table 11. Wetlands in the Study Area (continued)
Impacts
Acres in
Name Figure NCWAM Classification DWQ Study Within Within 25' Total(Slope
No. Classification Rating
Area Slope clearing stakes +25
Stakes zone feet)
WCX 4F Headwater Forest Riparian 8 -
WP 4F Headwater Forest Riparian 63 0.5 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
WQ 4F Headwater Forest Riparian 50 0.1 <0.1 0.1 0.1
WR 4F Headwater Forest Non-Riparian 0 <0.1 <0.1 - <0.1
WV 4G Headwater Forest Riparian 34 0.1 - - -
WU 4G Headwater Forest Non-Riparian 40 <0.1 - <0.1 <0.1
WW 4G Headwater Forest Riparian 35 <0.1 - <0.1 <0.1
WBB 4H Headwater Forest Riparian 57 0.3 - <0.1 <0.1
WLZA 4I Bottomland Riparian 76 0.1 - - -
Hardwood Forest
WY 4I Headwater Forest Riparian 39 0.1 - - -
WAE 4J Bottomland Riparian 70 0.3 - - -
Hardwood Forest
1 2-2❑-1 3
4-9

Table 11. Wetlands in the Study Area (continued)
Impacts
Acres in
Name Figure NCWAM Classification DWQ Study Within Within 25' Total(Slope
No. Classification Rating
Area Slope clearing stakes +25
Stakes zone feet)
WAK 4J Small Basin Non-Riparian 22 <0.1 - - -
WAL 4J Headwater Forest Riparian 41 0.2 <0.1 0.1 0.1
WAF 4K Bottomland Riparian 53 0.9 - - -
Hardwood Forest
WAI 4K Bottomland Riparian 21 <0.1 - - -
Hardwood Forest
WAN 4K,4L Bottomland Riparian 68 3.7 <0.1 0.5 0.5
Hardwood Forest
WAM 4L Bottomland Riparian 48 <0.1 - - -
Hardwood Forest
WAO 4L Bottomland Riparian 29 0.2 - - -
Hardwood Forest
WAP 4L Bottomland Riparian 30 0.4 - - -
Hardwood Forest
WAG 4K,4L Bottomland Riparian 58 1.0 - - -
Hardwood Forest
WAH 4L Headwater Forest Riparian 27 0.1 - - -
WAT 4L Bottomland Riparian 30 1.5 - - -
Hardwood Forest
12-20-13
4-10

Table 11. Wetlands in the Study Area (continued)
Impacts
Acres in
Name Figure NCWAM Classification DWQ Study Within Within 25' Total(Slope
No. Classification Rating
Area Slope clearing stakes +25
Stakes zone feet)
WAQ 4L Headwater Forest Non-Riparian 24 0.7 <0.1 0.2 0.2
WAR 4M Bottomland Riparian 53 2.2 - 0.3 0.3
Hardwood Forest
WAS 4M Bottomland Riparian 34 1.0 - 0.1 0.1
Hardwood Forest
WAV 4M Headwater Forest Non-Riparian 15 0.6 - 0.2 0.2
WAW 4N Small Basin Non-Riparian 17 0.1 0.1 - 0.1
WZZ 4N Small Basin Riparian 17 <0.1 - - -
WBB** 4P Headwater Forest Riparian 64 - - - -
WBD 4P Headwater Forest Riparian 48 0.2 - - -
WBG 4P Headwater Forest Riparian 44 0.1 - - -
WBH 4Q Headwater Forest Riparian 50 0.6 - - -
WBI 4Q Bottomland Riparian 48 <0.1 - - -
Hardwood Forest
1 2-2❑-1 3
4-1 1

Table 11. Wetlands in the Study Area (continued)
Impacts
Acres in
Name Figure NCWAM Classification DWQ Study Within Within 25' Total(Slope
No. Classification Rating
Area Slope clearing stakes +25
Stakes zone feet)
WH-2 4Q Bottomland Riparian 62 2.3 - - -
Hardwood Forest
WSLB 4Q Headwater Forest Non-Riparian 62 <0.1
WSL 4Q Headwater Forest Riparian 35 0.1
Total 19.1 0.2 1.5 1.7
Total Riparian 17.6 0.1 1.1 1.2
Total Non-Riparian 1.5 0.1 0.4 0.5
1 2-2❑-1 3
4-12

Approximately 9,230 linear feet of jurisdictional streams will be affected as a result of the
proposed project,including 4,257 linear feet within slope stake limits and 4,973 linear feet
within a clearing area 25 feet beyond the slope stake lines.
The proposed project will impact approximately 1.7 acres of jurisdictional wetlands,
including 0.2 acre within slope stake limits and 1.5 acres within a clearing area 25 feet beyond
the slope stake limits.
These impacts are based upon preliminary design mapping and could change during final
project design.
4.2. 1 CLEAN WATER ACT PERMITS
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act requires regulation of discharges into Waters of the
United States. The US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) is the principal
administrative agency of the Clean Water Act;however, the US Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) has the responsibility for implementation,permitting, and enforcement of the
provisions of the Act. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act grants authority to individual
States for regulation of discharges into Waters of the United States. Under North Carolina
General Statutes,NCAC 15A, the NC Division of Water Resources (NCDWR) has the
responsibility for implementation, permitting, and enforcement of the provisions of the Act.
Under the current Section 404 permitting requirements,it is expected the project will require
an Individual Permit (IP). In general, the USACE Wilmington District issues an IP for
projects that result in 0.5 acre or more of fill to Waters of the US or 300 linear feet or more
of stream impacts or if the project is considered by the agency to be a major action. This
permit requires a full public interest review,including public notices and coordination with
involved agencies,interested parties, and the general public.
A Section 401 Water Quality Certification (WQC) is required for any activity,including
maintenance or construction activities which may result in a discharge into Waters of the US.
The NCDWR issues an Individual WQC when the USACE issues an IP. Impacts to waters
deemed isolated by the USACE exceeding 150 linear feet of intermittent or perennial stream
channel or 0.10 acre of wetland will require an isolated waters permit from NCDWR.
4.2.2 CONSTRUCTION MORATORIA
The NC Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) has indicated that there are no
moratoria related to construction within the study area.
4.2.3 NC RIVER BASIN BUFFER RULES
There are currently no municipal, state, or federal buffer rules that apply to any jurisdictional
surface waters within the study area.
4.2.4 RIVERS AND HARBORS SECTION 1 O NAVIGABLE WATERS
There are no waters designated by the USACE as a Navigable Water subject to Section 10 of
the Rivers and Harbors Act in the study area.
12-20-13
4-13

4.2.5 MITIGATION
AVOIDANCE AND M/N/M/ZAT/ON OF /MPACTS
Avoidance and minimization efforts have been incorporated in the preliminary design.
These include primarily using steep fill slopes (mostly 2:1) to avoid and minimize stream and
wetland impacts,particularly lateral stream impacts. These efforts resulted in the complete
avoidance of impacts to Irish Buffalo Creek (BC). Of the 19,626 linear feet of Cold Water
Creek that run parallel to I-85 in the study area, only 1,098 feet are impacted by the
proposed project. Out of a total of nearly 60,000 linear feet of jurisdictional streams in the
study area, only 9,230 linear feet are impacted. Out of approximately 19 acres of wetlands
identified in the study area, only 1.7 acres are affected by the proposed project.
Widening associated with the roadway improvements will be performed within the existing
right-of-way to the maximum extent possible to minimize impacts to areas which are
currently undisturbed.
NCDOT will investigate additional ways to minimize impacts during final design.
COMPENSATORY M/T/GAT/ON OF /MPACTS
NCDOT will investigate potential on-site stream and wetland mitigation opportunities for
the recommended alternative. If on-site mitigation is not feasible,mitigation will be
provided by the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP). In accordance with the "Memorandum of
Agreement Among the North Carolina Department of Transportation, and the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers,Wilmington District" (MOA),July 28, 2010, the EEP,will be requested
to provide off-site mitigation to satisfy the federal Clean Water Act compensatory mitigation
requirements for this project.
4.2.6 ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT
As of December 26,2012, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists two federally
protected species for Cabarrus and Rowan Counties (Table 12). A brief description of each
species' habitat requirements follows, along with the biological conclusion rendered based
on surveys conducted in the study area. Habitat requirements for each species are based on
the current best available information as per referenced literature and USFWS
correspondence.
Table 12. Federally Protected Species Listed for Cabarrus and Rowan Counties
Scientific Name Common Name County Federal Habitat Biological
Status Present Conclusion
Heliantbus scbzveinit�Zii Schweinitz's Cabarrus E Yes No Effect
sunflower Rowan
Lasmigona decorata Carolina heelsplitter* Cabarrus E Yes No Effect
E -Endangered
*Historic record(the species was last observed in the county more than 50 years ago)
12-20-13
4-14

Schweinitz's sunflower
USFWS optimal survey window: late August-October
Habitat Description: Schweinitz's sunflower is endemic to the Piedmont of North and South
Carolina. The few sites where this rhizomatous perennial herb occurs are in relatively natural
vegetation and are often found in Xeric Hardpan Forests. The species is also found along
roadside rights-of-way,maintained power lines and other utility rights-of-way, edges of
thickets and old pastures, clearings and edges of upland oak-pine-hickory woods and
Piedmont longleaf pine forests, and other sunny or semi-sunny habitats where disturbances
(e.g.,mowing, clearing,grazing,blow downs, storms, frequent fire) help create open or
partially open areas for sunlight. It is intolerant of full shade and excessive competition from
other vegetation. Schweinitz's sunflower occurs in a variety of soil series,including Badin,
Cecil, Cid,Enon, Gaston, Georgeville, Iredell, Mecklenburg, Misenheimer, Secrest,Tatum,
Uwharrie, and Zion, among others. It is generally found growing on shallow sandy soils
with high gravel content; shallow, poor, clayey hardpans; or shallow rocky soils, especially
those derived from mafic rocks.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Suitable habitat for Schweinitz's sunflower is present in the study area along roadside
shoulders,utility easements, and forest edges. Surveys were conducted by biologists
throughout areas of suitable habitat for the entire project study area on October 15 and 16,
2010;June 18, 2011; September 21, 2011; and September 2012. No individuals of
Schweinitz's sunflower were observed. A review of the NC Natural Heritage Program
(NCNHP) records, updated May 14, 2012,indicates no known occurrences within one mile
of the study area.
Carolina heelsplitter
USFWS optimal survey window: year round
Habitat Description: The Carolina heelsplitter, a freshwater mussel species,was historically
known from several locations within the Catawba and Pee Dee River systems in North
Carolina and the Pee Dee and Savannah River systems, and possibly the Saluda River system,
in South Carolina. In North Carolina, the species is now known only from a handful of
streams in the Rocky and Catawba River systems. The species exists in very low
abundances, usually within 6 feet of shorelines, throughout its known range. The general
habitat requirements for the Carolina heelsplitter are shaded areas in large rivers to small
streams, often burrowed into clay banks between the root systems of trees, or in runs along
steep banks with moderate current. The more recent habitat where the Carolina heelsplitter
has been found is in sections of streams containing bedrock with perpendicular crevices
filled with sand and gravel, and with wide riparian buffers.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Suitable habitat for Carolina heelsplitter is present in Threemile Branch, a perennial stream
in the study area. NCNHP records, updated May 14, 2012, do not list any occurrences of
the Carolina heelsplitter within a one-mile radius of the project area. The NCDOT
12-20-13
4-15

Biological Surveys Group conducted freshwater mussel surveys at five locations within the
project study area,including Threemile Branch, on December 17, 2007. No freshwater
mussel specimens of any species,including Carolina heelsplitter,were observed during these
surveys. An additional mussel survey was conducted in Threemile Branch on April 11, 2011.
No freshwater mussel specimens of any species,including Carolina heelsplitter,were found
during the survey. The NCDOT Biological Surveys Group determined that no additional
surveys are required. Given the results of the mussel surveys in 2007 and 2011,it is unlikely
that the Carolina heelsplitter occurs in any of the study area streams. Therefore, this project
will have No Effect on Carolina heelsplitter. The survey memorandum is available for
review at NCDOT Project Development&Environmental Analysis Unit, Century Center
Building A, 1010 Birch Ridge Drive,Raleigh.
4.2.7 BALD AND GOLDEN EAGLE PROTECTION ACT
Habitat for the bald eagle primarily consists of mature forest in proximity to large bodies of
open water for foraging. Large, dominant trees are utilized for nesting sites, typically within
one mile of open water. A desktop GIS assessment of the study area, as well as the area
within a 1.13 mile radius (1 mile plus 660 feet) of the project limits,was performed in May,
September, and November 2011 using 2010 ESRI color aerials. Two water bodies,Lake
Concord and Lake Fisher,are large enough and sufficiently open to be considered potential
feeding sources. No nests were observed during a survey of the study area and within 660
feet of the study area. A review of NCNHP records,updated December 2012,indicates no
known occurrences of the species within one mile of the study area. Discussions with
representatives of NCWRC and USFWS indicate there are no known bald eagle nesting sites
in the Lake Fisher area. Due to the lack of findings and known occurrences,it was
determined that this project will not affect this species.
4.2.B ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT CANDIDATE SPECIES
As of December 26,2012, the USFWS lists no candidate species for Cabarrus County and
one candidate species for Rowan County: Georgia aster (Sy mpbyotrzcbumgeorgianum). Suitable
habitat for Georgia aster is present in the study area. A review of NCNHP records, updated
December 2012,indicates no occurrence of George aster within one mile of the study area.
4.3 CULTURAL RESOURCES
4.3. 1 COMPLIANCE GUIDELINES
This project is subject to compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act of 1966, as amended, and implemented by the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified as 36 CFR Part 800.
Section 106 requires federal agencies to consider the effect of their undertakings (federally-
funded,licensed, or permitted) on properties included in or eligible for inclusion in the
National Register of Historic Places and to afford the Advisory Council a reasonable
opportunity to comment on such undertakings.
4.3.2 HISTORIC ARCHITECTURE
A field survey of the Area of Potential Effects (APE) was conducted by an architectural
historian in 2005. All structures within the APE were evaluated for National Register
eligibility, and the architectural historian concluded that there were two properties eligible
for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) within the APE: the Blake House and
12-20-13
4-1 6

Goodman Farm. The North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (HPO) concurred
with the findings in a memorandum dated March 9,2006. An additional survey conducted
in December 2010 determined that no additional properties were eligible for the National
Register. In a meeting between NCDOT, FHWA, and HPO on July 26, 2011,it was
determined that the proposed project would have no effect on either the Blake House or
Goodman Farm.
In September 2013, a third field survey was conducted to establish the historic architectural
eligibility of structures in an expanded study area that included Winecoff School Road. One
structure was recommended as potentially eligible for the NRHP,R.O. Caldwell House, near
the corner of Winecoff School Road and S. Main Street. In a memorandum dated October
30,2013,HPO concurred that the Caldwell House is eligible for the NRHP. HPO also
recommended an additional property,Dr. H.W. Barrier House as eligible. In addition, HPO
recommended a survey be done to determine the eligibility of Mt. Olivet Methodist Church
on Mt. Olivet Road. An alignment for the Winecoff School Road area improvements was
developed to minimize impacts to both of the NRHP-eligible properties, and completely
avoid the church. In a meeting between NCDOT, FHWA, and HPO on December 3, 2013,
it was determined the proposed project would have no adverse effect on either of the eligible
properties. The HPO also agreed Mt. Olivet Methodist Church is not in the APE of the
recommended alignment. However,NCDOT will evaluate the church in the event final
design changes its status with regard to the APE.
A copy of the signed concurrence forms is included in Appendix B.
4.3.3 ARCHAEOLOGY
The HPO,in a memorandum dated May 9, 2012, commented that based on their knowledge
of the area,it is unlikely any archaeological resources that may be eligible for the NRHP will
be affected by the proposed project. HPO recommended no archaeological investigation be
conducted for the project. In a second memorandum, dated July 9,2013,HPO reached the
same conclusion for the area of potential effects associated with the Winecoff School Road
improvements. Copies of both memoranda are located in Appendix B.
4.4 SECTIONS 4(F) AND 6(F) RESOURCES
4.4. 1 SECTION 4(F) RESOURCES
The US Department of Transportation Act of 1966 includes a special provision, Section 4(0,
which stipulates that the Federal Highway Administration and other DOT agencies cannot
approve the use of land from publicly owned parks,recreational areas,wildlife and waterfowl
refuges, or public and private historical sites unless the following conditions apply:
• There is no feasible and prudent alternative to the use of the land; and
• The action includes all possible planning to minimize harm to the property resulting
from that use.
The project study area contains one Section 4(f) property,North Cabarrus Park (Figure 4A).
It is a 90-acre park owned by the City of Kannapolis. The park is bounded by I-85 to the
east, Irish Buffalo Creek to the south, and Orphanage Road (SR 1778) to the west. All
12-20-13
4-17

proposed improvements are contained within the I-85 existing right-of-way at this location.
Therefore, there will be no impacts to the park.
4.4.2 SECTION 6(F) RESOURCES
According to state and county reports provided on the National Park Service Land and
Water Conservation Fund website, no properties within the study area were purchased or
improved using funds from Section 6(f) of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of
1965. Therefore, the proposed project will not impact Section 6(f) properties.
4.5 FARMLAND
As described in the land use discussion in Section 4.8, the proposed project is located in an
urbanized metropolitan area. Most land uses in the Cabarrus County portion of the study
area are residential or mixed use. In the Rowan County portion of the study area,land
adjacent to the interstate is considered urban or transitioning to urban. Much of it is
residential with some industrial in interchange areas. There is scattered agricultural land
along I-85 south of NC 152 but much of this is planned for low-density residential
development, according to local plans. It is therefore not subject to the Farmland Protection
Policy Act.
There are no Voluntary Agricultural Districts (VADs) located within the study area.
4.6 SOCIAL EFFECTS
4.6. 1 NEIGHBORHOODS/COMMUNITIES
A number of neighborhoods and subdivisions border I-85 through the study area, though
most are outside the project limits. They are labeled on Figures 4A-4Q. However, a few
neighborhoods fall within the study area,in particular at interchange areas. These include:
• A neighborhood north of I-85 on Tremont Avenue near Winecoff School Road
(Figures 4B and 4D). Residents in this area can expect right-of-way impacts as well
as a change in how they access Winecoff School Road. These access changes are a
result of the proposed termination of Tremont Avenue into a cul de sac south of
realigned Winecoff School Road. Residents will access Winecoff School Road from
Stewart Street or from S. Main Street via Stewart Street. It is expected the Winecoff
School Road improvements will displace two residences and six businesses.
• Homes on S. Ridge Avenue north of Mt. Olivet Road (Figure 4D) will experience
access changes as a result of the removal of the S. Ridge Avenue bridge over I-85.
To reach the other side of I-85,residents will have to access S. Main Street using the
proposed Winecoff School Road bridge or travel east on Mt. Olivet Road and south
on US 29.
• An older, established neighborhood south of I-85 near S. Main Street in Concord
(Figure 4B and Figure 5). Residents in this area can expect right-of-way impacts and
temporary inconvenience as a result of the multiple bridge replacements in this
general area (railroad, S. Ridge Avenue, S. Main Street/Kannapolis Highway) and the
realignment of S. Main Street and S. Ridge Avenue. Access to and from the
neighborhood will be maintained and is not expected to change after the project.
12-20-13
4-1 B

• Homes near Northlite Shopping Center, along Roxie Street and Knowles Street near
the Dale Earnhardt Boulevard/I-85 interchange (Figure 4F and Figure 6). This area
has a greater concentration of minority and low-income persons than the county as a
whole. More detail is provided in Section 4.6.3. The residential areas are
transitioning to commercial use, as evidenced by the amount of stores, restaurants,
and fast food establishments surrounding the residential area. Houses fronting Dale
Earnhardt Boulevard have been replaced by a Wendy's restaurant and an office park.
All but three houses along Roxie Street have been removed,with a gazebo and
decorative landscaping installed opposite one of the shopping center entrances. This
neighborhood is surrounded on all sides by existing commercial development or land
cleared and marketed for commercial development. In anticipation of future
redevelopment, the City of Kannapolis has rezoned this neighborhood for
commercial use. Some homes on Roxie Street and along Dale Earnhardt Boulevard,
between Roxie Street and Knowles Street, are expected to be displaced as a result of
the proposed project. Community cohesion is not expected to be an issue on Roxie
Street, as only a few homes exist there now.
• A portion of the Forestbrook neighborhood, along Windingbrook Drive (Figure 4G
and Figure 6). Homes along Windingbrook Drive are at the back of a series of
subdivisions along Forestbrook Drive. Forestbrook Drive accesses Centergrove
Road to the north of Dale Earnhardt Boulevard and outside of the study area. These
are newer and larger houses, on large lots,with four of the ten in the study area
having swimming pools. The demographics of this area reflect those of the DSA
and county, being predominantly white and middle income. These homes back up
to Jaycee Road,which is proposed to become the southbound I-85 exit
ramp/entrance loop. As a result of the improvements, some of the homes on
Windingbrook Drive will be displaced. While these impacts are not expected to
adversely affect community cohesion for the much larger Forestbrook
neighborhood,particularly as this is the outer edge of the neighborhood,it is
nonetheless an adverse impact to the homes on Windingbrook Drive. Because part
of Windingbrook Drive shifts towards Jaycee Road, either smaller front yard
setbacks and minimum lot sizes would need to be permitted by the local jurisdiction
or the resulting parcels will be undevelopable. Gaps between houses should not be a
concern in an area of large lot suburban development. Conversion of Jaycee Road to
an interchange ramp will eliminate secondary driveway access points for the
remaining residences,requiring all trips to be via Forestbrook Drive to Centergrove
Road. This change in travel pattern is anticipated to be a minor impact. The
remaining homes on Windingbrook Drive will experience more traffic and noise as
Jaycee Road,which is adjacent to the neighborhood,would now handle traffic
entering and exiting the interstate. Jaycee Road is currently a dead-end, dirt road.
The area will change visually, as well. Some sort of screening will be provided to
separate the neighborhood from the ramp. The details are being coordinated with
local officials.
• A small neighborhood on Centergrove Road,just east of I-85 (Figure 4H). Minor
right-of-way impacts are anticipated at these homes, as a result of the bridge
12-20-13
4-19

replacement on Centergrove Road. Access over I-85 will be temporarily affected as
an offsite detour is proposed during the bridge replacement.
• A portion of the Brantley Woods subdivision, along Brantley Road and east of I-85
(Figure 41). Minor right-of--way impacts are anticipated at this location, as a result of
the replacement of the bridge on Brantley Road.
• A small neighborhood on Turkey Road,near the Lane Street interchange,will
experience impacts as a result of the proposed roundabout at Turkey Road/Royce
Street. Some residential relocations are anticipated, and access to the neighborhood
will be permanently altered with construction of the roundabout.
• A neighborhood west of I-85 along Pine Ridge Road (Figure 4N) could experience
minor right-of-way impacts as a result of the proposed replacement of the bridge on
Pine Ridge Road. Traffic will be maintained onsite during bridge construction.
4.6.2 RELOCATION OF RESIDENCES AND BUSINESSES
Based on the preliminary design, 36 residences,20 businesses, and one church will be
displaced. These displacements occur across the five interchanges to be modified by this
project. A relocation report is included in Appendix C. The report includes preliminary
information regarding ownership status and income level of the anticipated displacees.
Information regarding NCDOT's Relocation Assistance Program is also included in
Appendix C.
4.6.3 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income Populations,provides that"each federal agency make
achieving environmental justice part of its mission by identifying and addressing, as
appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health and environmental effects of
its programs,policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income populations."
The following information is adapted from I-3802 Environmental Justice Tecbnical Memorandum
(NCDOT, October 2012). The U.S. Department of Transportation Order to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations (DOT Order
5680.1 —April 15, 1997) defines minority groups as being African-American,Hispanic,Asian
American,American Indian, and Alaskan Native. This same Order defines low-income as
being persons whose median household income is at or below the Department of Health
and Human Services (DHHS) poverty guidelines. The 2000 DHHS poverty guideline is
$17,050 for a family of four,which is similar to the 2000 US Census poverty threshold of
$17,603 for a family of four.
According to field observations, census data, and comments from local planners, the
neighborhood north of Roxie Street along Knowles and Denwood Streets appears to be
predominantly minority residents. As many homes in this area are older, smaller and often
lacking paved driveways, central air conditioning, or other improvements, the neighborhood
appears to be predominantly lower income, although not necessarily low income. Since this
neighborhood has a higher proportion of minority residents living in smaller, older and more
modest homes,it appears to be an Environmental Justice community. The positive and
12-20-13
4-20

negative impacts of this project on environmental justice populations have been compared
with the impacts on non-environmental justice populations. These impacts were detailed in
the preceding section and are summarized below.
• Knowles-Denwood neighborhood (Figure 4F and 6). Widening of Dale Earnhardt
Boulevard is expected to require the relocation of three residences fronting Dale
Earnhardt Boulevard south of Wendy's on both sides of Knowles Street. Widening
of Roxie Street is expected to require the relocation of the three remaining residences
fronting that street. Twenty-one houses on Knowles Street and four on Denwood
Street would remain. Extending medians along Dale Earnhardt Boulevard will
change Knowles and Denwood Streets from full movement to right-in/right-out
intersections. While sometimes inconvenient, medians and other access
management techniques are proposed to improve safety in this area. While this
change in access is not itself an impact,in conjunction with zoning and nearby
development,it may encourage the transition from residential to commercial
development.
• Forestbrook neighborhood (Figure 4G and 6). Widening and extending Jaycee Road
is expected to require the relocation of five residences backing up to the proposed
interchange ramp. Five houses south of Windingbrook Drive and four to the north
will remain, along with houses along intersecting streets. Because part of
Windingbrook Drive shifts towards Jaycee Road, either smaller front yard setbacks
and minimum lot sizes would need to be permitted by the local jurisdiction or the
resulting parcels will be undevelopable. Gaps between houses should not be a
concern in an area of large lot suburban development. Conversion of Jaycee Road to
an interchange ramp will eliminate secondary driveway access points for the
remaining residences,requiring all trips to be via Forestbrook Drive to Centergrove
Road. This change in travel pattern is anticipated to be a minor impact.
In summary,impacts to environmental justice populations in the Knowles-Denwood
neighborhood are roughly equivalent to impacts to non-environmental justice populations in
the Windingbrook neighborhood,both in the number of proposed relocations and in the
change in access/travel patterns.
The negative impacts of this project do not appear to be predominantly borne by a minority
population and/or low-income population,nor more severe than the adverse effect that will
be suffered by the non-minority and/or non-low-income population. Therefore, there are
no disproportionately high and adverse effects on minority and low-income populations.
4.6.4 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES
Bicycle and pedestrian facilities are described in Section 3.5.7. The proposed improvements
will not adversely affect any bicycle or pedestrian facilities,beyond temporary construction
impacts. Any facilities that are disturbed due to construction will be restored or replaced.
NCDOT is coordinating with local municipalities on the placement of and cost-sharing for
new sidewalks and pedestrian controls.
12-20-13
4-21

4.6.5 RECREATIONAL FACILITIES
Three parks are adjacent to I-85 along the project corridor. North Cabarrus Park, a Section
4(f) resource,was discussed in Section 4.4.1. The following is a review of impacts to non-
Section 4(o recreational facilities.
Overcash Soccer Complex is adjacent to northbound I-85 between Covenant Classical
School and Denbriar Drive (Figure 4A). It is a private facility comprised of soccer practice
fields for the Futbol Club Carolina Alliance,which is an alliance dedicated to youth soccer.
No impacts are anticipated to the complex.
CMC Northeast Stadium (formerly Fieldcrest Cannon Stadium) is located west of I-85
between Moose Road and Lane Street (Figure 4J). Access points are available from both
roads but the stadium advertises access from I-85 via Lane Street. The 4,700-seat facility is
home to the Kannapolis Intimidators, a Class A affiliate of the Chicago White Sox. No
impacts are anticipated at the stadium.
There are two public rest areas located off northbound and southbound I-85 between Dale
Earnhardt Boulevard and US 29-601. Impacts are limited to tying the reconfigured
interchange ramps to the rest area ramps.
4.6.6 OTHER PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES
Numerous health care facilities are located within the study area,most notably off of
Copperfield Boulevard,which turns into Dale Earnhardt Boulevard at the I-85 interchange.
Cabarrus Memorial Hospital is on Copperfield Boulevard (Figure 4E). An urgent care clinic
and pediatric center are in the area,near Concord Lake Road and I-85. Minor right-of-way
impacts could occur to some facilities as a result of the Lake Concord Road bridge
replacement. Traffic is expected to be maintained onsite during the bridge construction so
access will remain unchanged for the facilities. Northeast Medical Center, Cabarrus
County's largest employer,is located east of I-85 on US 29-601 (Figure 4C). It is outside of
the study area,but its proximity is expected to generate a large amount of traffic within the
study area near the US 29-601 interchange. The proposed project is not expected to affect
this facility.
Nearby schools include Winecoff Elementary School off of Winecoff School Road, and
Covenant Classical School,which is adjacent to northbound I-85 north of the I-85/NC 73
interchange. No impacts are expected to Covenant Classical School. Travel patterns to and
from Winecoff Elementary School will be affected by the closing of the Winecoff School
Road at-grade crossing and realignment of the road. Currently, drivers leaving the school
headed east can travel directly to S. Main Street and cross the at-grade railroad crossing to S.
Ridge Avenue. With the proposed improvements, these drivers will use the new roundabout
to access S. Main Street. They will use the new bridge over the railroad to travel to S. Ridge
Avenue. Direct access from Tremont Avenue to Winecoff School Road will be eliminated.
Drivers will no longer be able to queue on Tremont as they wait to access the adjacent
school entrance. Some residents have expressed concern that this traffic might instead
queue on S. Main Street.
La Petite Academy is the only daycare observed in the study area. It is on S. Ridge Avenue
near US 29-601 (Figure 413). S. Ridge Avenue access at US 29/S. Main Street may be
12-20-13
4-22

permanently changed, as it is proposed to become right-in/right-out only. This would not
affect direct access to the daycare center but could affect the way patrons travel to and from
the center. In addition,removal of the S. Ridge Avenue bridge over I-85 will eliminate direct
access to the center from the north. Drivers headed southbound on S. Ridge Avenue will
need to use the new Winecoff School Road bridge to S. Main Street to get back to S. Ridge
Avenue. They would then head north on S. Ridge Avenue to the daycare.
Five churches were observed in the study area: Cabarrus Fellowship (Figure 413),Mt. Olivet
Methodist Church (Figure 4D),River of Life Family Worship Center (Figure 4G),Lane
Street Church of God (Figure 41), and Foot of the Cross (Figure 4J). The proposed project
will displace Cabarrus Fellowship. No impacts are anticipated at the other four churches.
Carolina Memorial Gardens cemetery (Figure 2D) is located adjacent to US 29 (Cannon
Boulevard). Approximately 0.2 acre of the cemetery property would be affected by the
proposed project. No graves will be affected.
The Rider Transit Center, discussed in Section 2.4.2,is located on S. Ridge Avenue, near the
intersection of S. Ridge Avenue and US 29A/S. Main Street. According to the transit
manager, the proposed right-in/right-out access from S. Ridge Avenue to US 29A/S. Main
Street will have adverse effects on transit operations. To address this concern, a leftover is
proposed from northbound Cannon Boulevard to S. Ridge Avenue and access from S. Ridge
Avenue will be provided to the transit center.
4.7 ECONOMIC EFFECTS
It is anticipated improved mobility and access will have a positive economic effect in the
study area. Development at interchange areas is occurring without the project, and is
expected to follow current patterns. New access is not being provided with the proposed
project, so growth is not expected as a result of the project.
The project could result in negative impacts to some businesses that are relocated as a result
of interchange improvements. Other businesses could experience benefits as a result of
improved access.
Property values could increase in areas where access is improved. Conversely, a decrease in
value to some properties is possible where the proposed improvements extend close to
residential areas. A decrease in value could result from a loss in aesthetics,increase in noise,
or partial taking of some properties.
4.8 LAND USE
4.8. 1 EXISTING LAND USE
Land use surrounding the proposed project is a mixture of business and residential uses.
Abundant undeveloped property and agricultural land are located adjacent to I-85. Small
retail,gasoline, and other service-type businesses are common at interchanges. South of
Dale Earnhardt Boulevard in Cabarrus County, there is dense development,including big
box retail such as Lowe's,Walmart, and Kohl's. North of Dale Earnhardt Boulevard,land
adjacent to I-85 is predominantly undeveloped. Numerous shopping centers and other
commercial establishments are found throughout the study area. Carolina Mall is located on
12-20-13
4-23

US 29-601 south of the interchange with I-85.
4.8.2 FUTURE LAND USE
The proposed project extends through several planning areas, many with their own land use
plans. This section summarizes those plans.
City of Concord
City of Concord Land Use Plan
The City of Concord Land Use Plan was adopted in 2004 and revised in 2007. Mixed-use
Districts and Village Centers are key elements of the Plan, encouraging development that
reduces daily vehicle-miles of travel by creating compact, pedestrian-oriented development.
Mixed-use Districts are proposed at major intersections, primarily along existing or planned
transit routes. There are two Mixed-use Nodes along the I-85 project corridor: Concord
Parkway North (US 29) at I-85 and Copperfield Boulevard (Dale Earnhardt Boulevard
interchange). No Village Centers are along or adjacent to the I-85 corridor. The Mixed-use
Nodes are described below.
Concord Parkway North at I-85 is at Exit 58. This node is already a mixed-use area,with the
two primary uses being the Northeast Medical Center and Carolina Mall. Other medical
offices are present, as well as several commercial uses, a single-family residential
neighborhood, and apartments. This node is mostly developed,but in the future is expected
to continue with an emphasis on commercial and office at the core and multi-family housing
at the periphery.
The Copperfield Boulevard Node includes Copperfield Boulevard from Branchview Drive
north to I-85 at Exit 60. The headquarters of Concord Telephone Company are located
here, as well as medical offices, a Super Wal-Mart, and other big-box retail uses.
Development is expected to continue as primarily commercial and office uses. Future land
use may also include limited multi-family residential uses.
Center City Plan
The Center City Plan was developed to establish a set of strategies for the future
redevelopment and sustainability of the existing neighborhoods that surround the City of
Concord's downtown area. It is separated into 14 neighborhoods, one of which is near the
proposed project. The Northgate neighborhood is adjacent to I-85 and US 29-601.
Northgate is home to some of the City's key services and shopping,Northeast Medical
Center and Carolina Mall. Northgate is part of the previously discussed Concord Parkway
North at I-85 Mixed-use Node. Future plans for this neighborhood include expansion of
services by Northeast Medical Center, a bus transfer station near Carolina Mall and the
medical center, creating more pedestrian connections, and improving aesthetics by such
activities as burying overhead power lines and adding additional landscaping.
12-20-13
4-24

City of Kannapolis
City of Kannapolis 20/.5 Land Use Plan
The City of Kannapolis 20 1.5 Land Use Plan (adopted July, 2004) was created to establish
guidelines for development of the physical landscape of the City and its growth areas, and to
provide a decision-making tool for elected and/or appointed officials. In the short term, the
City's primary focus is the pursuit of economic development to increase the
commercial/industrial base and local job availability. In the longterm, the City will study
future growth areas and develop long-range strategies for development and annexation as
appropriate, and may pursue extension of water, sewer or other proprietary interests outside
City limits. The City of Kannapolis 20 1.5 Land Use Plan is separated into eight planning areas.
Four of these areas are adjacent to the I-85 widening corridor.
The Coddle Creek Planning Area includes the crossing of Kannapolis Parkway and I-85, as
well as one of the region's major east-west corridors, NC 73 (Davidson Highway). The
southern portion of this planning area,which is closest to I-85,is focused on business
development. Other parts of the planning area are outside of the project study area.
The South Kannapolis Planning Area includes two I-85 interchanges: US 29-601 (Cannon
Boulevard), and Dale Earnhardt Boulevard. Areas near Cannon Boulevard, S. Main Street,
and Dale Earnhardt Boulevard are expected to continue developing as retail and small-scale
non-residential uses. Most of the remaining South Kannapolis Planning Area is either
residential or undeveloped.
Bounded by Dale Earnhardt Boulevard and Centergrove Road to the south,I-85 to the east,
Lane Street to the north, and Cannon Boulevard to the west, the East Kannapolis Planning
Area has two water supply reservoirs: Lake Concord, and Lake Fisher. This planning area
includes the eastern edge of the Cannon Boulevard retail commercial corridor and the
southern edge of the Lane Street mixed-use corridor. Lane Street is developed as mostly
single-family housing;however, a large number of these structures are being converted to
office/low intensity commercial uses. Other parts of this planning area include mostly
single-family residential development.
The North Kannapolis Planning Area is bounded by Lane Street to the south, a railroad to
the west, the City and extra-territorial jurisdiction (ETJ) limits to the north, and Lake Fisher
to the east. This planning area contains the North Cannon Boulevard commercial corridor,
which the City considers to be a fragile economic area. Almost no new construction or
redevelopment initiatives have occurred along this thoroughfare and many sites are
deteriorating as they sit vacant or have high tenant turnover. The neighborhoods
surrounding this corridor are in decline as well. CMC Northeast Stadium (formerly
Fieldcrest Cannon Stadium) is located at the eastern edge of this planning area. The ETJ
area is mostly developed as low density residential.
The Eastern Growth Area is composed largely of land currently not within the planning and
zoning jurisdiction of the City of Kannapolis. It is located mostly east of I-85. In
cooperation with City of Concord officials, the area is being reserved for future Kannapolis
growth. The key factor in development of this eastern area is the maximization of the Lane
12-20-13
4-25

Street/I-85 interchange and associated water/sewer availability. In the vicinity of the Lane
Street/I-85 interchange a mix of commercial and light industrial land uses are proposed.
Most other areas are proposed as single-family residential.
Town of China Grove
The Town of China Grove does not have a land use plan. Zoning districts and a Unified
Development Ordinance are in place. Generalized zoning within the study area is mostly
residential or industrial.
Cabarrus County
NortbwestArea Plan
Cabarrus County is divided into several planning areas. Planning areas adjacent to the I-85
widening corridor include Northwest Area, Concord, Kannapolis, and Central Area. Of
these, a plan is available for the Northwest Area,which is west of I-85 and includes NC 73.
The NortbivestArea Plan shows proposed future land use adjacent to I-85 near the NC 73
interchange as Employment. Areas just north of the interchange are proposed as residential.
Rowan County
The Rowan County portion of the study area falls primarily within Planning Area Three, as
defined in the East Ronan County Land Use Plan (2012). General future land use
recommendations attempt to preserve the rural character of the area and encourage a mix of
uses around designated community nodes. Connectivity is encouraged between commercial
nodes and adjacent developments, as well as standards for promoting compatible land
development patterns. Specifically along the I-85 corridor the plan recommends the
designation of a regional node with the construction of a new interchange at Old Beatty
Ford Road. The Plan also encourages the continued siting of commercial and industrial uses
along this corridor, particularly those that could take advantage of the highway and rail
infrastructure and those that require frontage, acreage or visibility from I-85. Finally, the
plan recommends a detailed study of the potential for a regional node at I-85 and Old Beatty
Ford Road.
4.B.3 PROJECT COMPATIBILITY WITH LOCAL PLANS
The project is compatible with local plans. The Rowan County Land Use Plan and
Cabarrus-Rowan Urban Area MPO Long Range Transportation Plan both list widening I-85
and a new interchange at Old Beatty Ford Road as their top priority. The proposed project
addresses one of these two priorities and is therefore consistent with local plans. A decision
has been made by NCDOT and FHWA to consider a new interchange at Old Beatty Ford
Road as a separate project. The improvements for the proposed project,however, do not
preclude the future construction of this interchange nor the development planned in the
interchange area.
4.B.4 INDIRECT AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS
The following was summarized from Community ImpactAssessment andQualitative Indirect and
Cumulative Effects Assessment Uuly, 2008). The entire report can be viewed in the Project
12-20-13
4-26

Development&Environmental Analysis Unit, Century Center Building A, 1000 Birch Ridge
Drive, Raleigh.
Water resources in the study area,including a drinking water supply, could incur indirect and
cumulative effects. Some protection will be provided from development restrictions within
the Critical Area of the Water Supply Watershed, and to a lesser extent,in the Protected
Area. There are no High Quality Waters (HQW), Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW), or
Wild and Scenic Rivers in the FLUSA. Town Creek and Irish Buffalo Creek are 303(d)
streams.
Reduced congestion on I-85 and improvements to existing interchanges will likely contribute
to travel time savings in the study area.
An increase in development interests in the more rural portions of the study area could
eventually result in some of those areas transitioning to residential and business land use.
Local ordinances regulating development and designed to preserve agricultural lands will
guide this development.
4.9 FLOOD HAZARD EVALUATION
The proposed project crosses approximately 21 acres of 100-year floodplain, as shown in
Figure 4. The NCDOT Hydraulics Unit will coordinate with the NC Floodplain Mapping
Program (FMP), the delegated state agency for administering FEMA's National Flood
Insurance Program, to determine the status of the project with regard to applicability of
NCDOT'S Memorandum of Agreement with FMP, or approval of a Conditional Letter of
Map Revision (CLOMR) and subsequent final Letter of Map Revision (LOMR).
This project involves construction activities on or adjacent to FEMA-regulated streams.
Therefore, NCDOT Division Office shall submit sealed as-built construction plans to the
Hydraulics Unit upon completion of project construction, certifying that the drainage
structure(s) and roadway embankment that are located within the 100-year floodplain were
built as shown in the construction plans,both horizontally and vertically.
4. 1 O TRAFFIC NOISE ANALYSIS
4. 1 0.1 INTRODUCTION
In accordance with Title 23 Code of Federal Regulations Part 772, Procedures for Abatement of
Higbia)ay Tra�c Noise and Construction Noise (23 CFR 772) and the North Carolina Department
of Transportation Traffic Noise Abatement Policy, each Type I highway project must be
analyzed for predicted traffic noise impacts. In general,Type I projects are proposed
Federal or Federal-aid highway projects for construction of a highway or interchange on new
location,improvements of an existing highway which significantly changes the horizontal or
vertical alignment or increases the vehicle capacity, or projects that involve new construction
or substantial alteration of transportation facilities such as weigh stations,rest stops,ride-
share lots or toll plazas.
Predicted Design Year Traffic noise impacts are determined through implementing the
current Traffic Noise Model (TNM 2.5) approved by the Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA) and following procedures detailed in 23 CFR and the NCDOT Traffic Noise
12-20-13
4-27

Analysis and Abatement Manual. When traffic noise impacts are predicted, examination and
evaluation of alternative noise abatement measures must be considered for reducing or
eliminating these impacts. Temporary and localized noise impacts will likely occur as a result
of project construction activities. Construction noise control measures will be incorporated
into the project plans and specifications.
A copy of the full technical report entitled Trapc Noire Analysis, I-85 Widening from NC 73 to
LIS 29-60/ Connector WP Pr iea I-3802 and Multple Intercbange Improvements (77P Projects I-36 0
and B-5365, Cabanas and Royran Counties(Martin/Alexiou/Bryson, 2013) can be viewed in
the Project Development&Environmental Analysis Unit, Century Center Building A, 1000
Birch Ridge Drive, Raleigh. A supplemental analysis to address the Winecoff School Road
grade-separation was prepared and is also available in the project file. No additional
impacted receptors are noted in that report.
4. 1 0.2 TRAFFIC NOISE IMPACTS AND NOISE CONTOURS
The maximum number of receptors (locations that receive highway traffic noise) in each
project alternative predicted to become impacted (as defined by the NCDOT Traffic Noise
Abatement Policy) by future traffic noise is shown in Table 13. The table includes those
receptors expected to experience traffic noise impacts by either approaching or exceeding
the FHWA Noise Abatement Criteria or by a substantial increase in exterior noise levels.
The table shows a total of 308 impacted receptors. However, this is an increase of only 61
receptors over existing impacted receptors (55 residences, two institutions, and four
businesses).
The maximum extent of the 71- and 66- dB(A) noise level contours measured from the
center of the proposed roadway is 323 feet and 561 feet,respectively.
4. 1 0.3 No-BUILD ALTERNATIVE
The Traffic Noise Analysis also considered traffic noise impacts for the No-Build alternative.
If the proposed project does not occur, 276 existing receptors are predicted to experience
traffic noise impacts and the future traffic noise levels will increase by less than 1-dBA.
Based upon research,humans barely detect noise level changes of 2-3 dBA. A 5-dBA
change is more readily noticeable. Therefore,most people working and living near the
roadway will not notice this predicted increase.
4. 1 0.4 TRAFFIC NOISE ABATEMENT MEASURES
Measures for reducing or eliminating the traffic noise impacts were considered for all
impacted receptors in each alternative. The primary noise abatement measures evaluated for
highway projects include highway alignment changes, traffic system management measures,
establishment of buffer zones,noise barriers and noise insulation (NAC D only). For each
of these measures,benefits versus costs (reasonableness), engineering feasibility,
effectiveness and practicability and other factors were included in the noise abatement
considerations.
12-20-13
4-2B

Table 13. Predicted Traffic Noise Impacts by Alternative*
Traffic Noise Impacts
Alternative Residential Churches/Schools, etc. Businesses Total
(NAC B) (NAC C &D) (NAC E)
Existing 211 24 12 247
No-Build 234 23 19 276
Build 266 26 16 308
Difference
Between +55 +2 +4 +61
Existing
and Build
*Per TNM 0'2.5 and in accordance with 23 CFR Part 772
Substantially changing the highway alignment to minimize noise impacts is not considered to
be a viable option for this project due to engineering and/or environmental factors. Traffic
system management measures are not considered viable for noise abatement due to the
negative impact they would have on the capacity and level of service of the proposed
roadway. Costs to acquire buffer zones for impacted receptors will exceed the NCDOT
base dollar value of$37,500 per benefited receptor, causing this abatement measure to be
unreasonable.
4. 1 0.5 NOISE BARRIERS
Noise barriers include two basic types: earthen berms and noise walls. These structures act
to diffract, absorb and reflect highway traffic noise. For this project, earthen berms are not
found to be a viable abatement measure because the additional right of way required for
their construction does not meet reasonableness criteria found in the NCDOT Traffic Noise
Abatement Policy. Noise abatement measures, such as noise barriers, that are found to be
feasible and reasonable in accordance with the NCDOT Policy will be analyzed in more
detail during project final design.
Noise barrier evaluations were conducted at eleven noise study areas within the project
limits,utilizing the Traffic Noise Model (TNM 2.5) software developed by the FHWA.
Determinations were made regarding each of these barriers' ability to meet feasibility and
reasonableness criteria defined in the NCDOT Policy.
The first noise study area is along northbound I-85, north of the NC 73 interchange at
Mistletoe Place and Dennbriar Drive. The proposed noise barrier would benefit five
receptors at an average of 3,030 square feet per benefited receptor. This quantity of noise
wall exceeds the maximum allowable quantity of 2,605 square feet. Based upon the
NCDOT Policy reasonableness criteria, this barrier is not recommended for further analysis.
12-20-13
4-29

The second noise study area is located along the northbound lane of I-85,immediately south
of the Winecoff School Road overpass. The proposed barrier would benefit 34 receptors at
an average of 2,333 square feet per benefited receptor. This quantity of noise wall is below
the maximum allowable quantity of 2,605 square feet. Based upon the NCDOT Policy
criteria, this barrier is recommended for further analysis during the project's final design.
The third noise study area is located along northbound I-85,immediately east Winecoff
School Road overpass. The preliminary design of a concrete wall at this location would
benefit four receptors at an average of 4,440 square feet per benefited receptor,which
exceeds the maximum allowable quantity of 2,570 square feet. Based upon reasonableness
criteria in the NCDOT Policy, this barrier is not recommended for further analysis.
The fourth noise study area is located at along northbound I-85,immediately west of
US 29A (Kannapolis Highway) at Mills Avenue. The proposed barrier at this location would
benefit five receptors at an average of 1,488 square feet per benefited receptor,which is
below the maximum allowable quantity of 2,675 square feet. Based upon the NCDOT
Policy reasonableness criteria, this barrier is recommended for further analysis.
The fifth noise study area lies along northbound I-85,between US 29 (Concord Parkway)
and NC 3 (Lake Concord Road). The preliminary design of a noise wall at this location
would benefit 47 receptors at an average of 507 square feet per benefited receptor,below the
maximum allowable quantity of 2,500 square feet. Based upon reasonableness criteria
defined in the NCDOT Policy, this barrier is recommended for further analysis.
The sixth noise study area is located along southbound I-85,immediately south of the
Centergrove Road overpass at Anchor Way. A potential barrier in this location would
benefit 15 receptors at an average of 2,229 square feet per benefited receptor. This quantity
of noise wall is below the maximum allowable quantity of 2,605 square feet and, therefore,is
recommended for further analysis in accordance with the NCDOT Policy.
The seventh noise study area lies along northbound I-85,immediately south of Brantley
Road. A proposed barrier at this location would benefit three receptors at an average of
5,019 square feet per benefited receptor,which exceeds the maximum allowable quantity of
2,570 square feet. Based upon reasonableness criteria defined in the NCDOT Policy, this
barrier is not recommended for further consideration.
The eighth noise study area is adjacent to northbound I-85 and straddles the Cabarrus —
Rowan County line at Wensil Lane. The preliminary design of an optimized concrete wall at
this location would benefit seven receptors at an average of 2,906 square feet per benefited
receptor. This quantity of noise wall exceeds the maximum allowable quantity of 2,570
square feet and,based upon reasonableness criteria in the NCDOT Policy, this barrier is not
recommended for further analysis.
The ninth noise study area is located along northbound I-85 immediately north of Old
Beatty Ford Road at Ivory Lane. A proposed noise wall here would benefit four receptors at
an average of 2,099 square feet per benefited receptor,which is below the maximum
allowable quantity of 2,605 square feet. Based upon the NCDOT Policy reasonableness
criteria, this barrier is recommended for further analysis.
12-20-13
4-30

The tenth noise study area is located along northbound I-85,immediately north of the Lentz
Road overpass. A noise wall at this would benefit five receptors at an average of 3,029
square feet per benefited receptor. This quantity of noise wall exceeds the maximum
allowable quantity of 2,605 square feet. Based upon NCDOT Policy reasonableness criteria,
this barrier is not recommended for further analysis.
The eleventh potential barrier location is along northbound I-85,immediately north of Mt.
Hope Church Road. The preliminary design of an optimized noise wall at this location
would benefit six receptors at an average of 3,980 square feet per benefited receptor,which
exceeds the maximum allowable quantity of 2,535 square feet. Based upon reasonableness
criteria in the NCDOT Policy, this barrier is not recommended for further analysis.
4. 1 0.6 SUMMARY
Based on the preliminary Traffic Noise Analysis, traffic noise abatement is recommended
and noise abatement measures are proposed at five of eleven noise study areas analyzed for
this project. This evaluation partially completes the highway traffic noise requirements of 23
CFR 772. These are preliminary findings only, for use in the project environmental
document. An additional noise analysis (Design Noise Report) will be performed during
final design of this project to develop more detailed locations and dimensions of the
recommended noise barriers.
In accordance with NCDOT Traffic Noise Abatement Policy, the federal and state
governments are not responsible for noise analyses or for providing noise abatement
measures for new development for which building permits are issued after the Date of
Public Knowledge. The Date of Public Knowledge of the proposed highway project will be
the approval date of the project Categorical Exclusion (CE). For development occurring
after this date,local governing bodies are responsible to ensure that noise compatible designs
are utilized along the proposed facility.
4. 1 1 CONSTRUCTION NOISE
The major construction elements of this project are expected to be earth removal, hauling,
grading, and paving. General construction noise impacts, such as temporary speech
interference for passers-by and those individuals living or working near the project, can be
expected, particularly from paving operations and from the earth moving equipment during
grading operations. However, considering the relatively short-term nature of construction
noise, these impacts are not expected to be substantial. Nearby natural elements and man-
made structures are expected to serve as a buffer to moderate the effects of intrusive
construction noise.
4. 12 AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS
Air pollution originates from various sources. Emissions from industry and internal
combustion engines are the most prevalent sources. The impact resulting from highway
construction ranges from intensifying existing air pollution problems to improving the
ambient air quality. Changing traffic patterns are a primary concern when determining the
impact of a new highway facility or the improvement of an existing highway facility. Motor
vehicles emit carbon monoxide (CO),nitrogen oxide (NO),hydrocarbons (HC), particulate
matter, sulfur dioxide (S02), and lead (Pb) (listed in order of decreasing emission rate).
12-20-13
4-31

4. 1 2.1 ATTAINMENT STATUS
The project is located in Rowan and Cabarrus counties,which are within the Charlotte-
Gastonia-Rock Hill nonattainment area for ozone (0) as defined by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA). This area was designated moderate nonattainment for 03 under
the eight-hour ozone standard effective June 15,2004. Section 176(c) of the CAAA requires
that transportation plans, programs, and projects conform to the intent of the state air
quality implementation plan (SIP). The current SIP does not contain any transportation
control measures for Rowan County. The Cabarrus-Rowan Metropolitan Planning
Organization 2035 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) and the FY 2012-2018
Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) conform to the intent of the SIP (or base year
emissions,in areas where no SIP is approved or found adequate). The EPA made a
conformity determination on the LRTP and the TIP on September 13, 2013, and is included
in Appendix B. The current conformity determination is consistent with the final
conformity rule found in 40 CFR Parts 51 and 93. There are no significant changes in the
project's design concept or scope, as used in the conformity analyses.
4. 1 2.2 CARBON MONOXIDE
Automobiles are considered the major source of CO in the project area. In order to
determine the ambient CO concentration at a receptor near a highway, two concentration
components must be used:local and background. The local concentration is defined as the
CO emissions from cars operating on highways in the near vicinity (i.e., distances within 400
feet) of the receptor location. The background concentration is defined by the North
Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources as "the concentration
of a pollutant at a point that is the result of emissions outside the local vicinity; that is, the
concentration at the upwind edge of the local sources." In accordance with 40 CFR 93.126,
this project is an air quality neutral project. It is not required to be included in the regional
emissions analysis (if applicable) and a project level CO analysis is not required.
4. 1 2.3 OZONE AND NITROGEN DIOXIDE
Automobiles are regarded as sources of hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides. Hydrocarbons
and nitrogen oxides emitted from cars are carried into the atmosphere where they react with
sunlight to form ozone (03) and nitrogen dioxide (NOS. Automotive emissions of HC and
NOx are expected to decrease in the future due to the continued installation and
maintenance of pollution control devices on new cars. However,regarding area-wide
emissions, these technological improvements may be offset by the increasing number of cars
on the transportation facilities of the area.
The photochemical reactions that form ozone and nitrogen dioxide require several hours to
occur. For this reason, the peak levels of ozone generally occur ten to twenty kilometers
downwind of the source of hydrocarbon emissions. Urban areas as a whole are regarded as
sources of hydrocarbons, not individual streets and highways. The emissions of all sources
in an urban area mix in the atmosphere, and,in the presence of sunlight, this mixture reacts
to form ozone,nitrogen dioxide, and other photochemical oxidants. The best example of
this type of air pollution is the smog that forms in Los Angeles, California.
12-20-13
4-32

4. 1 2.4 PARTICULATE MATTER AND SULFUR
Automobiles are not regarded as significant sources of particulate matter (PM) and sulfur
dioxide (SO, . Nationwide,highway sources account for less than seven percent of
particulate matter emissions and less than two percent of sulfur dioxide emissions.
Particulate matter and sulfur dioxide emissions are predominantly the result of non-highway
sources (e.g.,industrial, commercial, and agricultural). Because emissions of particulate
matter and sulfur dioxide from automobiles are very low, there is no reason to suspect that
traffic on the project will cause air quality standards for particulate matter and sulfur dioxide
to exceed the NAAQS.
4. 1 2.5 MOBILE SOURCE AIR Toxics
Projected traffic volumes for the proposed project exceed the 150,000 AADT threshold
requiring a quantitative MSAT analysis. Therefore, a quantitative MSAT analysis was
prepared for the proposed project. This section details the development of a Quantitative
Mobile Source Air Toxics (MSAT) Analysis to comply with the interim guidance issued by
FHWA concerning MSATs.
Controlling air toxic emissions became a national priority with the passage of the Clean Air
Act Amendments (CAAA) of 1990,whereby Congress mandated that the EPA regulate 188
air toxics, also known as hazardous air pollutants. The EPA has assessed this expansive list
in their latest rule on the Control of Hazardous Air Pollutants from Mobile Sources (Federal
Register,Vol. 72, No. 37,page 8430, February 26, 2007) and identified a group of 93
compounds emitted from mobile sources that are listed in their Integrated Risk Information
System (IRIS) (http://www.epa.gov/ncea/iris/index.html). In addition,EPA identified
seven compounds with significant contributions from mobile sources that are among the
national and regional-scale cancer risk drivers from their 1999 National Air Toxics
Assessment (NATA) (http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/natal999/). These are acrolein,
benzene, 1,3-butadiene, diesel particulate matter plus diesel exhaust organic gases (diesel
PM), formaldehyde, naphthalene, and polycyclic organic matter. While FHWA considers
these the priority mobile source air toxics, the list is subject to change and may be adjusted
in consideration of future EPA rules.
The 2007 EPA rule mentioned above requires controls that will dramatically decrease MSAT
emissions through cleaner fuels and cleaner engines. According to an FHWA analysis using
EPA's MOBILE6.2 model, even if vehicle activity (vehicle-miles travelled,VMT) increases
by 145 percent as assumed, a combined reduction of 72 percent in the total annual emission
rate for the priority MSAT is projected from 1999 to 2050, as shown in Graph 1.
QUANT/TAT/VE MSAT ANALYS/S
The MSAT analysis years included the existing year, opening year, and design year of project
I-3802. These scenarios include the following:
0 2008 base year
0 2016 project completion year No-Build (Pro)ect completion year, using the 2008
transportation network, along with project completion year socioeconomic data)
12-20-13
4-33

• 2016 project completion year Build (Pro)ect completion year, using the project
completion year transportation network and the project completion year
socioeconomic data)
0 2035 project design year No-Build (Project design year,using the 2008 transportation
network, along with project design year socioeconomic data)
• 2035 project design year Build (Project design year,using the project design year
transportation network and the project design year socioeconomic data)
Graph 1. National MSAT Emission Trends, 1999-2050 for Vehicles Operating on
Roadways (Using EPA's MOBILE6.2 Model)
1510000 7
fi A
J
I
J c
10U UU0 J rt
c
J r �
47 L-
_�
W 50000 '
�r
0 n
2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
Cal endar Year
Source:U.S.Environmental Protection Agency.MOBILE6.2 Model run 20 August 2009.
Notes:
(1)Annual emissions of polycychc organic matter are projected to be 561 tons/yr for 1999,decreasing to 373
tons/yr for 2050.
(2)Trends for specific locations may be different,depending on locally derived information representing vehicle-
miles travelled,vehicle speeds,vehicle mix,fuels,emission control programs,meteorology,and other factors.
Due to improvements in emissions technologies MSAT levels are expected to decrease over
time, even with an increase in overall VMT. For the study area,VMTs on the included
roadways are anticipated to increase approximately 10 percent between the base year and the
2016 no-build scenario. The VMT is also expected to increase eight percent between the
2016 no-build scenario and the 2016 build scenario. These relatively small increases are
indicative of the already high traffic volumes in the area, and also somewhat reflect the
impact of the proposed widening project to the area transportation network. Graph 2 shows
the forecasted VMTs for the modeled network links.
Table 14 shows the total emissions for each scenario for each of the modeled MSAT
12-20-13
4-34

pollutants. The construction of I-3802 is one portion of the overall widening and new
location projects proposed for the I-85 freeway. The overall impact of these I-85
improvements will be an additional draw of traffic to the area. With this shift in traffic, there
is also the potential for reductions in AADT on neighboring or supporting facilities. In
addition to the regional traffic being served by these facilities, there is also a significant
amount of local traffic being served in the future years. Growth in both residential and
employment populations will draw additional traffic to this area. This local traffic will be
served not only by the arterial network already in place,but also by the existing and future
interstate facilities.
Overall, the emission levels for the six MSATs modeled in EMIT in the study area are
anticipated to decrease by 49 percent between the 2008 base year and the 2035 design year
build condition. Four of the six MSATs modeled using this method experience decreases in
emissions during this period. Formaldehyde and acetaldehyde emissions are expected to
increase five percent each in the 2035 build scenario compared with the 2008 base condition.
Given the substantial increase in VMT between the No-Build and build scenarios
(particularly in 2035), this increase is perhaps not unexpected. The widening of I-85 in this
location will bring additional traffic volume that would have been otherwise served by
neighboring facilities. Therefore,while the overall regional and national trend in MSAT
emissions is a decrease in pollutant levels over time, the improved facility will cause more
pollutants to appear in this area. It is to be expected that the improvements to this facility
will help alleviate some traffic pressure on its neighboring facilities. So while some MSAT
emissions are increasing here, they may decrease somewhat in other areas. Graph 3 shows
the total MSAT emissions emanating from the studied network for each modeled scenario.
Due to the composition of roadway functional classes within the I-3802 Affected
Transportation Network, there may be localized areas with increased MSAT emission levels.
VMT fluctuations on sections of roadway network will likely occur as changes are made to
the transportation network and socioeconomic characteristics of the area shift.
12-20-13
4-35

Graph 2. Total Daily VMT within the 1-3802 Affected
Transportation Network
3,500,000
3,000,000
2,500,000 ..............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
co
2,000,000
Z 1,500,000
.0
1,000,000
500,000
........... ............
- ............
Na-Build Build FNo-Buil.d Build
2008 2016 2035
Table 14. Total Emissions for Each Air Toxic Pollutant (tons/year)
2016 2035
2008 % Change,2008
to 2035 Build
No-Build Build No-Build Build
Benzene 6.45 3.76 4.07 3.35 4.32 -33%
DPM 11.20 3.20 3.47 1.56 2.02 -82%
1,3 Butadiene 0.84 0.52 0.56 0.51 0.65 -23%
Formaldehyde 3.13 2.37 2.55 2.59 3.31 1 5%
Acetaldehyde 1.18 0.89 0.95 0.96 1.23 5%
Acrolein 0.16 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.16 -4%
Totals 22.96 j 10.85 j 11.73 9.10 11.69 -49%
12-20-13
4-36

Graph 3. Changes in MSAT Emissions Levels within the I-3802 Affected
Transportation Network
2s ....
20 ...... .. ......... ............... .............................. ............................... ...........................
L
15
t0
d
N
~ 10
s
0 .............. .......,.
No-Build Build No Build Build
2008 2016 2035
Additional Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs)
In addition to the air toxics analyzed with the EMIT program, FHWA mandates the study of
certain additional hazardous air pollutants. Specifically, exhaust emission rates for
Naphthalene and Polycyclic Organic Matter (POM) need to be considered. POM emission
rates are determined by summing the emission rates for the following air pollutants:
acenaphthene, acenaphthylene, anthracene,benzo(a)anthracene,benzo(a)pyrene,
benzo(b)fluoranthene,benzo(ghi)perylene,benzo(k)fluoranthene, chrysene,
dibenz(ah)anthracene, fluoranthene, fluorine,indeno(123cd)pyrene, naphthalene,
phenanthrene, and pyrene. Since emission rates change during winter and summer seasons,
conditions for both are included. A comparison has been conducted between the 2008 base
conditions and the 2035 build conditions. Winter emission rates for POM and naphthalene
decreased 35 percent and 34 percent respectively,and summer emission rates decreased 32
percent and 31 percent,respectively.
UNAVAILABLE /NFORMAT/ON FOR PROJECT SPEC/F/C MEAT IMPACT
ANALYS/S
This report includes a basic analysis of the likely MSAT emission impacts of this project.
However,available technical tools do not enable us to predict the project-specific health
impacts of the emission changes associated with the alternatives for the project. Due to these
limitations,the following discussion is included in accordance with CEQ regulations (40 CFR
1502.22) regarding incomplete or unavailable information:
12-20-13
4-37

Incomplete or Unavailable Information for Project-Specific MSAT Health Impacts
Analysis
In FHWA's view,information is incomplete or unavailable to credibly predict the project-
specific health impacts due to changes in MSAT emissions associated with a proposed set of
highway alternatives. The outcome of such an assessment,adverse or not,would be influenced
more by the uncertainty introduced into the process through assumption and speculation rather
than any genuine insight into the actual health impacts directly attributable to MSAT exposure
associated with a proposed action.
The EPA is responsible for protecting the public health and welfare from any known or
anticipated effect of an air pollutant. They are the lead authority for administering the Clean
Air Act and its amendments and have specific statutory obligations with respect to
hazardous air pollutants and MSATs. The EPA is in the continual process of assessing
human health effects, exposures, and risks posed by air pollutants. They maintain the
Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS),which is "a compilation of electronic reports on
specific substances found in the environment and their potential to cause human health
effects" (EPA, htW://www.ei2a.gov/ncea/iris/index.html). Each report contains
assessments of non- cancerous and cancerous effects for individual compounds and
quantitative estimates of risk levels from lifetime oral and inhalation exposures with
uncertainty spanning perhaps an order of magnitude.
Other organizations are also active in the research and analyses of the human health effects
of MSAT,including the Health Effects Institute (HEI). Two HEI studies are summarized in
Appendix D of FHWA's Interim Guidance Update on Mobile source Air Toxic Analysis in
NEPA Documents. Among the adverse health effects linked to MSAT compounds at high
exposures are cancer in humans in occupational settings; cancer in animals; and irritation to
the respiratory tract,including the exacerbation of asthma. Less obvious is the adverse
human health effects of MSAT compounds at current environmental concentrations (HEI,
http://pubs.healtheffects.org/view.php?id=282) or in the future as vehicle emissions
substantially decrease (HEI, http://pubs.healtheffects.org/view.php?id=306).
The methodologies for forecasting health impacts include emissions modeling; dispersion
modeling; exposure modeling; and then final determination of health impacts - each step in
the process building on the model predictions obtained in the previous step. All are
encumbered by technical shortcomings or uncertain science that prevents a more complete
differentiation of the MSAT health impacts among a set of project alternatives. These
difficulties are magnified for lifetime (i.e., 70 year) assessments, particularly because
unsupportable assumptions would have to be made regarding changes in travel patterns and
vehicle technology (which affects emissions rates) over that time frame, since such
information is unavailable. The results produced by the EPA's MOBILE6.2 model, the
California EPA's Emfac2007 model, and the EPA's DraftMOVES2009 model in forecasting
MSAT emissions are highly inconsistent. Indications from the development of the MOVES
model are that MOBILE6.2 significantly underestimates diesel particulate matter (PM)
emissions and significantly overestimates benzene emissions.
12-20-13
4-30

Regarding air dispersion modeling, an extensive evaluation of EPA's guideline CAL3QHC
model was conducted in an NCHRP study
http://www.epa.gov/scram001/dispersion_alt.htm#hyroad),which documents poor model
performance at ten sites across the country- three where intensive monitoring was
conducted plus an additional seven with less intensive monitoring. The study indicates a
bias of the CAL3QHC model to overestimate concentrations near highly congested
intersections and underestimate concentrations near uncongested intersections. The
consequence of this is a tendency to overstate the air quality benefits of mitigating
congestion at intersections. Such poor model performance is less difficult to manage for
demonstrating compliance with National Ambient Air Quality Standards for relatively short
time frames than it is for forecasting individual exposure over an entire lifetime, especially
given that some information needed for estimating 70-year lifetime exposure is unavailable.
It is particularly difficult to reliably forecast MSAT exposure near roadways, and to
determine the portion of time that people are actually exposed at a specific location.
There are considerable uncertainties associated with the existing estimates of toxicity of the
various MSAT,because of factors such as low-dose extrapolation and translation of
occupational exposure data to the general population, a concern expressed by HEI
(http://pubs.healtheffects.org/view.php?id=282). As a result, there is no national
consensus on air dose-response values assumed to protect the public health and welfare for
MSAT compounds, and in particular for diesel PM. The EPA
(http://www.epa.gov/risk/l)asicinformation.htm#g) and the HEI
(http://pubs.healtheffects.org/getfile.php?u=395) have not established a basis for
quantitative risk assessment of diesel PM in ambient settings.
There is also the lack of a national consensus on an acceptable level of risk. The current
context is the process used by the EPA as provided by the Clean Air Act to determine
whether more stringent controls are required in order to provide an ample margin of safety
to protect public health or to prevent an adverse environmental effect for industrial sources
subject to the maximum achievable control technology standards, such as benzene emissions
from refineries. The decision framework is a two-step process. The first step requires EPA
to determine a "safe" or "acceptable" level of risk due to emissions from a source,which is
generally no greater than approximately 100 in a million. Additional factors are considered
in the second step, the goal of which is to maximize the number of people with risks less
than 1 in a million due to emissions from a source. The results of this statutory two-step
process do not guarantee that cancer risks from exposure to air toxics are less than 1 in a
million;in some cases, the residual risk determination could result in maximum individual
cancer risks that are as high as approximately 100 in a million. In a June 2008 decision, the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit upheld EPA's approach to
addressing risk in its two step decision framework. Information is incomplete or unavailable
to establish that even the largest of highway projects would result in levels of risk greater
than safe or acceptable.
Because of the limitations in the methodologies for forecasting health impacts described, any
predicted difference in health impacts between alternatives is likely to be much smaller than
the uncertainties associated with predicting the impacts. Consequently, the results of such
assessments would not be useful to decision makers,who would need to weigh this
information against project benefits, such as reducing traffic congestion, accident rates, and
12-20-13
4-39

fatalities plus improved access for emergency response, that are better suited for quantitative
analysis.
POTENT/AL MEAT M/7'/GAT/ON STRATEG/ES
At this time, there is not a budget or standard in place to compare against forecasted project-
level emissions. The proposed widened I-85 compared to the existing I-85 is expected to see
MSAT levels decrease significantly from the base year level to the 2035 design year.
However,while there is an overall decrease, certain MSAT pollutants in this area are
expected to see slight increases over time. As a result, MSAT mitigation activities likely do
not need to be considered. However, a summary of potential mitigation measures is
contained below.
Mitigating for Construction MSAT Emissions
Construction activity may generate a temporary increase in MSAT emissions. Project-level
assessments that render a decision to pursue construction emission mitigation will benefit
from a number of technologies and operational practices that should help lower short-term
MSAT. In addition, the SAFETEA-LU has emphasized a host of diesel retrofit technologies
in the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) Program provisions -
technologies that are designed to lessen a number of MSATs.
Construction mitigation includes strategies that reduce engine activity or reduce emissions
per unit of operating time, such as reducing the numbers of trips and extended idling.
Operational agreements that reduce or redirect work or shift times to avoid community
exposures can have positive benefits when sites are near populated areas. For example,
agreements that stress work activity outside normal hours of an adjacent school campus
would be operations-oriented mitigation. Verified emissions control technology retrofits or
fleet modernization of engines for construction equipment could be appropriate mitigation
strategies. Technology retrofits could include particulate matter traps, oxidation catalysts,
and other devices that provide an after-treatment of exhaust emissions. Implementing
maintenance programs per manufacturers' specifications to ensure engines perform at EPA
certification levels, as applicable, and to ensure retrofit technologies perform at verified
standards, as applicable, could also be deemed appropriate. The use of clean fuels, such as
ultra-low sulfur diesel,biodiesel, or natural gas also can be a very cost-beneficial strategy.
The EPA has listed a number of approved diesel retrofit technologies;many of these can be
deployed as emissions mitigation measures for equipment used in construction. This listing
can be found at: www.epa.gov/otaq/retrofit/index.htm.
Post-Construction Mitigation for Projects with Potentially Significant MSAT Levels
Travel demand management strategies and techniques that reduce overall vehicle-mile of
travel; reduce a particular type of travel, such as long-haul freight or commuter travel; or
improve the transportation system's efficiency will mitigate MSAT emissions. Examples of
such strategies include congestion pricing, commuter incentive programs, and increases in
truck weight or length limits. Operational strategies that focus on speed limit enforcement
or traffic management policies may help reduce MSAT emissions even beyond the benefits
of fleet turnover. Well-traveled highways with high proportions of heavy-duty diesel truck
12-20-13
4-40

activity may benefit from active Intelligent Transportation System programs, such as traffic
management centers or incident management systems. Similarly, anti-idling strategies, such
as truck-stop electrification can complement projects that focus on new or increased freight
activity.
Planners also may want to consider the benefits of establishing buffer zones between new or
expanded highway alignments and populated areas. Modifications of local zoning or the
development of guidelines that are more protective also may be useful in separating
emissions and receptors.
The initial decision to pursue MSAT emissions mitigation should be the result of interagency
consultation at the earliest juncture. Options available to project sponsors should be
identified through careful information gathering and the required level of deliberation to
assure an effective course of action. Such options may include local programs,whether
voluntary or with incentives, to replace or rebuild older diesel engines with updated
emissions controls. Information on EPA diesel collaborative around the country can be
found at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/diesel/whereyouhve.htm.
SUMMARY
Vehicles are a major contributor to decreased air quality because they emit a variety of
pollutants into the air. Changing traffic patterns are a primary concern when determining
the impact of a new highway facility or the improvement of an existing highway facility.
New highways or the widening of existing highways increase localized levels of vehicle
emissions,but these increases could be offset due to increases in speeds from reductions in
congestion and because vehicle emissions will decrease in areas where traffic shifts to the
new roadway. Significant progress has been made in reducing criteria pollutant emissions
from motor vehicles and improving air quality, even as vehicle travel has increased rapidly.
The project is located in Cabarrus and Rowan Counties,which comply with the National
Ambient Air Quality Standards. This project will not add substantial new capacity or
creating a facility that is likely to meaningfully increase emissions. Therefore,it is not
anticipated to create any adverse effects on the air quality of this nonattainment area.
This project falls under MSAT Analysis Category Three (3) because AADT is projected to
be in the range of 140,000 to 150,000 or greater by the design year. Therefore, this project
requires a quantitative MSAT analysis. Because of the uncertainties outlined above, an exact
quantitative assessment of the effects of air toxic emissions impacts on human health cannot
be made at the project level. While available tools do allow us to reasonably predict relative
emissions changes between alternatives for larger projects, the amount of MSAT emissions
from each of the project alternatives and MSAT concentrations or exposures created by each
of the project alternatives cannot be predicted with enough accuracy to be useful in
estimating health impacts. (As noted above, the current emissions model is not capable of
serving as a meaningful emissions analysis tool for smaller pro)ects.) Therefore,it is not
possible to make a determination of whether any of the alternatives would have "significant"
adverse impacts on the human environment.
12-20-13
4-41

4. 1 3 UTILITIES
A utilities memorandum was prepared by NCDOT in January 2011 that listed the utility
providers and type of utilities in the project area (Section 3.5.9). Because of the number of
utilities that will need to be relocated as a result of the proposed improvements,impacts are
expected to be high.
4. 14 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Based on a hazardous materials evaluation prepared by NCDOT in September 2013,
seventeen sites presently or formerly containing petroleum underground storage tanks
(USTs) were identified within the project limits. These sites are listed in Table 15 and shown
on Figure 4. No hazardous waste sites or landfills were noted. Four other
geoenvironmental concerns were identified within the project limits: three automotive repair
facilities and one automotive salvage yard. These are also listed in Table 15. Soil and
groundwater assessments will be conducted at each of the UST sites prior to right-of-way
acquisition.
12-20-13
4-42

Table 15. USTs, Landfills and Other Potentially Contaminated Sites
Site Location UST Facility Property Name Property Owner Anticipated Impacts
ID Number I (UST Owner) (Severity)
1 1529 Concord Pkwy North 0-036520 Pantry 3960 National Retail Properties Petroleum contaminated soils
The Pant low
United Oil of the Carolinas, Petroleum contaminated soils
2 1561 Concord Pkwy North 0-004306 Little Buck Food Store Inc. (low)
same
3 503 Winecoff School Rd N/A Former G&S Computers Ruby Spears Petroleum contaminated soils
low
4 404 Winecoff School Rd N/A Former NC Sound of Earl&Mary Creech Petroleum contaminated soils
Charlotte low
5 2850 S. Cannon Blvd 0-036241 Rushco Food Store 14 Keith Hoogland Partnership Petroleum contaminated soils
usher Oil Co,Inc low
6 2020 Kannapolis Hwy 0-035762 Home Town Mart Satya SAI, Inc. Petroleum contaminated soils
same low
7 2044 Kannapolis Hwy 0-007545 Flowers Baking Co. James A. Fisher Petroleum contaminated soils
Thrift Store (Bost Bakery,Inc. low
Cabarrus Co DMV State of North Carolina Petroleum contaminated soils
8 2192 Kannapolis Hwy 0-021008 Enforcement Office CC&PS (low)
same
9 2200 Kannapolis Hwy N/A PDQ Services DSP Properties,LLC Petroleum contaminated soils
/A low
10 2201 Kannapolis Hwy N/A A-Complete Automotive Edward Cline &Wendy Hill Petroleum contaminated soils
Shop, Inc. /A low
Universal Automotive
11 2199 Kannapolis Hwy N/A Universal Automotive Service Inc. Petroleum contaminated soils
Service /A (low)
Carolina Oil of Concord, Petroleum contaminated soils
12 2909 S. Cannon Blvd N/A Cash& Carry Inc. (low)
/A
13 3020 S. Cannon Blvd N/A Freeway BP 120 Fresh Green Water,LLC Petroleum contaminated soils
/A low
1 2-2❑-1 3
4-43

Table 15. USTs,Landfills, and Other Potentially Contaminated Sites (continued)
Site Location UST Facility Property Name Property Owner Anticipated Impacts
ID Number (UST Owner) (Severity)
14 2355 Lake Concord Road 0-035492 Ken's Quick Stop South Central Oil Co. Inc. Petroleum contaminated soils
same low
15 540 Lake Concord Road 0-025770 Express Shoppe 12 Propost Bros Dist, Inc. Petroleum contaminated soils
same low
16 1145 Copperfield Blvd NE 0-034653 Pantry Store 860 Rachel LLC Petroleum contaminated soils
The Pantry Inc. low
17 1160 Copperfield Blvd NE 0-036494 Express Shoppe 3 Propost Bros Dist, Inc. Petroleum contaminated soils
same low
James Carver Properties, Petroleum contaminated soils
18 2399 Dale Earnhardt Blvd 0-036129 Pantry 3470 LLC (low)
he Pantry Inc.
19 2825 Lane Street 0-011084 Pilot Travel Centers 56 SSS Delaware,LLC Petroleum contaminated soils
(Pilot Travel Centers,LLC low
20 180 Wankel Drive N/A Mark Ortiz Automotive Estus &Phyllis White Petroleum contaminated soils
/A low
21 645 Lentz Road N/A C&D Salvage Scott D. Cook Petroleum contaminated soils
/A low
1 2-2❑-1 3
4-44

5.0 COMMENTS AND COORDINATION
This project was coordinated with appropriate federal, state, and local agencies and the
public. Four Local Officials Meetings and five public meetings were held during project
development. In addition, scoping letters were sent to interested agencies. A summary of
public and agency coordination is discussed in this section.
5. 1 LOCAL OFFICIALS MEETINGS
Twenty-three local officials attended a Local Officials Meeting on January 8,2008 at the
Kannapolis Railroad Station. Those attending included representatives from Cabarrus and
Rowan Counties, the Cabarrus-Rowan Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), the
Cities of Concord and Kannapolis, the Towns of China Grove and Landis, and the
NC House of Representatives. Three citizens also attended. Many of the questions and
comments related to the project's funding and schedule. Officials indicated strong support
for the project.
A Local Officials Informational Meeting was held on November 27, 2012 at the Kannapolis
Train Station. Fourteen local officials attended,including representatives from Cabarrus-
Rowan MPO, the Cities of Concord and Kannapolis, Concord-Kannapolis Area Transit,
Cabarrus County Schools,Mt. Mitchell Fire Department,Rowan County Emergency
Services, and Cabarrus County. Some officials expressed concern about impacts of the
proposed improvements to the Dale Earnhardt Boulevard interchange. One official
expressed concern about emergency response times without an interchange at Old Beatty
Ford Road. There were questions about whether the roundabouts on Lane Street could
accommodate tractor trailers and emergency vehicles. Another official stated that the B
section should be constructed the same time as Section A. There was also a discussion
about the process for setting local priorities and the role that traffic studies play in
determining priorities.
A Local Officials Informational Meeting was held on February 26,2013 at the Kannapolis
Train Station. Twenty-four local officials signed in. Comments and questions focused
primarily on project impacts near the US 29-601 interchange, Dale Earnhardt Boulevard, and
Lane Street interchanges. NCDOT officials explained changes that were being
recommended for final design to improve access to and from the Rider Transit Center.
Changes to improve access along Dale Earnhardt Boulevard and Lane Street were also
discussed. NCDOT officials explained the process used to evaluate various interchange
configurations at Dale Earnhardt Boulevard and the reasons for the recommended
configuration. Some officials stated the need for an interchange at Old Beatty Ford Road.
A Local Officials Informational Meeting was held on November 4,2013 at Winecoff
Elementary School. Twenty local officials attended,including representatives from the City
of Concord, the City of Kannapolis, Cabarrus County, Cabarrus-Rowan MPO, Cabarrus
County School System, Rider Transit, and the NC Railroad. The purpose of the meeting
was to inform the local officials of the need to make improvements to the Winecoff School
Road railroad crossing as a result of the improvements to the railroad bridge over I-85. In
addition, NCDOT officials noted that Alternate 2A was added after the meeting was
announced to avoid and minimize impacts to the Barrier House property that HPO
12-20-13
5-1

recommended eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. Many expressed their
appreciation to NCDOT for considering improvements to the Winecoff School Road rail
crossing. There were general questions about project schedule,impacts to recently identified
historic properties, and construction staging.
5.2 CITIZENS INFORMATIONAL WORKSHOP
A Citizens Informational Workshop was held on January 29,2008, at the Kannapolis
Railroad Station. The public meeting notice is included in Appendix D. Forty-six people
signed in at the workshop. Citizens were provided a meeting handout and comment sheets
(Appendix D), and three copies of an aerial showing the study area boundary were displayed
for viewing. Fourteen comment forms were received. Comments were generally supportive
of the project. Over half of the concerns were about noise impacts and requests for noise
walls. Commenters also expressed a desire for landscaping along interchange ramps. A few
comments mentioned the impact of this project on US 29 access.
5.3 DESIGN PUBLIC MEETINGS
Design Public Meetings were held on November 27,2012 at the Kannapolis Train Station
and November 29,2012 at J.C. Carson High School in China Grove. The meeting notice
and handout are included in Appendix D. A total of 259 people signed in at the meetings.
Citizens received a handout and comment forms and maps were displayed that showed the
recommended project design and project schedule. Detailed maps of the interchange areas
were displayed and available as handouts. Seventeen total comment forms were received at
both meetings. Seventy citizens submitted written comments from November 27 through
the end of the public comment period on December 14,2012. In general, comments
covered the following topics:
• Right-of-way impacts to property. Many property owners whose property would be
purchased as a result of the project had questions about the right-of-way acquisition and
relocation process.
• Changes in access or loss of multiple access points as a result of proposed medians on
cross streets.
• Local officials in Kannapolis expressed a desire for a connection between Winecoff
School Road and Mt. Olivet Road in lieu of replacing the bridge on S. Ridge Avenue.
• Impacts to the Rider Transit Center of the proposed right-in/right-out access from S.
Ridge Avenue to S. Main Street.
• Redesigned interchange at Dale Earnhardt Boulevard. Some residents of the Forest
Brook neighborhood expressed opposition over the proposed relocation of the
southbound ramp to Jaycee Boulevard. They indicated concern about noise and visual
impacts and a reduction in property values. Other residents whose homes would be
directly affected by the relocated ramp expressed support for the project.
• Lack of interchange at Old Beatty Ford Road. Some local officials commented that not
having an area where emergency vehicles could turn around in the median of I-85,
combined with the lack of an interchange for five miles,will create a safety hazard.
Others believe the interchange would foster economic development in southern Rowan
County.
12-20-13
5-2

• Roundabouts on Lane Street. Some commenters expressed concern over impacts of the
roundabout to businesses in that area,including the truck stop.
• Project schedule. Some officials in Rowan County requested that the schedule for the
"B" section of the project be moved up to coincide with the "A" section.
• Some residents and local officials expressed concern about modified access on US 29 in
China Grove.
• Some comments expressed concern over a perceived lack of coordination between
NCDOT and local municipalities.
5.4 PUBLIC MEETINGS
A public meeting was held on February 26,2013 at the Kannapolis Train Station. The
meeting notice and handout are included in Appendix D. One hundred fifty-six citizens
signed in to the meeting. Meeting handouts consisted of a project fact sheet and fact sheets
for each interchange in the study area. Recommended modifications to the US 29-601 and
Lane Street interchanges,based on public comment from the November Design Public
Meetings,were included on the fact sheets and shown on display boards. Two comment
forms were completed at the workshop. Both were requests for maps. Six comments were
received after the meeting through the end of the public comment period on March 12,
2013. One commenter expressed appreciation over proposed changes to the designs
presented at the November meeting. Others expressed concern about:
• The need for a service road to provide access to businesses along Dale Earnhardt
Boulevard between the existing ramp and Jaycee Road. Existing access on Jaycee Road
will be terminated with the proposed improvements and the proposed median will alter
access from Dale Earnhardt Boulevard. NCDOT is recommending a service road to
address this issue.
• Access at Dickens Place and Vinehaven Drive on Dale Earnhardt Boulevard. NCDOT
is recommending a roundabout study for Vinehaven Drive.
• The need for a sidewalk on Old Earnhardt Road. NCDOT will address new sidewalks
with local officials.
• The proximity of a residence to the widened Dale Earnhardt Boulevard.
• General questions about construction staging and the right-of-way acquisition process.
A public meeting was held on November 4,2013 at the Winecoff Elementary School. The
meeting notice and handout are included in Appendix D. One hundred fifty-six citizens
signed in to the meeting,which was held after the meeting with local officials. The meeting
handout included fact sheets that explained the overall combination of projects and the
proposed changes to the Winecoff School Road railroad crossing. Figures were provided
that showed all three design options. Maps showing the proposed design options were
displayed around the room. Nineteen comment forms were completed at the meeting and
an additional two were returned during the comment period. Six additional comments were
received by email or letter following the meeting through the end of the public comment
period (November 15, 2013). Additional comments were submitted after the comment
period ended. In the comment sheets, most participants noted a preference for Alternative
2A. Other written comments included:
12-20-13
5-3

• Request to consider school traffic circulation and a design that allows quality access.
• Requests to include a roundabout—in Alternative 2A— at S. Ridge Avenue and Mt.
Olivet Road.
• Two business owners noted the design will help their businesses on S. Ridge Avenue.
• Request to consider a traffic signal at the intersection of Country Club Drive and Lake
Concord Road.
• Two property owners noted their properties will be affected by all three alternatives,
likely resulting in relocation. A letter and emails were received from the vice president
and employees at Ketchie,Inc. expressed opposition to all of the proposed alternatives
for Winecoff School Road. A letter from the president of Carolina Memorial Gardens
expressed opposition to the proposed alternatives,in particular Alternatives 2B and 4A,
which crossed a portion of the property.
• A follow up email from the president of the neighborhood near Winecoff Elementary
School,including residents of Tremont Avenue and Stewart Street, noted concern over
loss of access, traffic congestion, and speeding. She indicated that area residents and
parents of students had concerns regarding any changes near the school and proposed
the following alternatives:
1. Eliminate the railroad crossing at Winecoff School Road and redistrict the fire
station utilized to respond to S. Ridge Avenue calls for service.
2. Re-do the existing S. Ridge Avenue bridge and train bridge with no other
changes in the area.
3. If any changes are to take place, approach the owners of the historic owned Mills
property [Caldwell House] and/or the historical society about moving the home.
Then locate Winecoff School Road through the property.
4. Request for a Public Hearing to voice concern and have a question and answer
session with NCDOT and the officials of the Cities of Kannapolis and Concord.
5.5 NEPA/SECTION 404 MERGER PROCESS
Because of potential impacts to natural resources, this project was subject to the
NEPA/Section 404 Merger Process. This process is based on concurrence from a Project
Merger Team at major milestones during the development of the project. The Merger Team
includes representatives from federal, state, and local agencies.
Concurrence was reached through the Merger Process on Concurrence Point 1 (Purpose and
Need and Study Area Defined) and Concurrence Point 2 (Design Options for Detailed-
Study) on December 16,2010. A Concurrent Point 2 Update meeting was held and
concurrence reached on January 16, 2013. The Merger Team concurred on Concurrence
Point 2A (Bridging Decisions and Alignment Review) on December 20, 2013. Copies of the
concurrence forms are included in Appendix D.
Coordination with the Merger Team will continue throughout the project development
phase for Concurrence Point 3 (Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative),
Concurrence Point 4A (Avoidance and Minimization of Impacts), Concurrence Point 4B (30
percent Hydraulic Design Review), and Concurrence Point 4C (Permit Drawings Review).
12-20-13
5-4

5.6 OTHER AGENCY COORDINATION
As part of the development of the Categorical Exclusion, a scoping letter was mailed on
February 16, 2005 to federal and state regulatory agencies and local officials to request
information regarding potential environmental impacts that could result from the proposed
project. The following agencies and local officials that were notified are listed below. An
asterisk (*) next to the name indicates that a written response was received. Agency
correspondence is included in Appendix B.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers*
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
U. S. Fish&Wildlife Service
North Carolina Department of Administration, State Clearinghouse*
Cabarrus County
Cabarrus County Emergency Management
Cabarrus County Schools
Cabarrus-Rowan Urban Area Metropolitan Planning Organization*
Centralina Council of Governments
City of Concord
City of Kannapolis*
Rowan County
Rowan County Emergency Services
Rowan-Salisbury School System
Town of China Grove
Town of Landis
Additional written responses were received by:
• Cabarrus County Soil Conservation Service (included in Appendix B)
• Concord Kannapolis Area Transit (Rider)
• Concord Parks and Recreation
• Kannapolis Parks and Recreation
12-20-13
5-5

6.0 BASIS FOR CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
Based upon the study of the proposed project presented in this document and comments
from federal, state, and local agencies and the public,it is determined that the project will
not have a significant impact upon the quality of the human or natural environment. The
project is not controversial from an environmental standpoint. No significant impacts on
natural, ecological, cultural, or scenic resources are expected. No significant impact on air or
water quality or on ambient noise levels is expected. The project is consistent with local
plans and will not divide or disrupt the communities along the project. The proposed
project will have no adverse effect on any historic properties. The proposed improvements
will have no effect on federally threatened or endangered species. Although the majority of
the I-85 widening will occur within the existing right-of-way, the proposed project will
require relocation of some homes and businesses. Attempts will be made to further
minimize relocation impacts during final design. The proposed project is not anticipated to
result in any significant impacts to the natural or human environment and is considered to
be a"categorical exclusion," as defined by the Federal Highway Administration's
environmental guidelines (23 CFR 771.117).
12-20-13
6-1

APPENDIX A - FIGURES

Figure 1
C2�' Project Vicinity
Project Area 1-85 Widening and Interchange Improvements From North of NC 73 to
US 29-601 Connector (1-3802/1-3610/13-5365)
D p L P (J�' iifi
a �' J Rowan and Cabarrus Counties, North Carolina
a
Ott r Wmk S
* � ,� ' North Carolina
* 'Ji"' 1+s1�u�ar � p � Department of Transportation
% ? ��re rt�,nn � t ^!�' fi� �, ,. "'"pryry ,�;
t�tl Y@ 210.^ 4 II fy
o ^��y' ra r r ._ uman
H i C,Pi I'll IGP � N'f x r �rNgI'N ckt
a
Protect VlanitY
a Sri snai b.r nnapolls
t� 5 Cie. M, R �R U
r..�),' Onco, 4 ,
P
gtII p��Y
llkt� 4
� V ,
Y
7
5 ;' 29
End Project
China Grove
53
Landis
M� ,
29
Row Daushe,�y Rd eta
an
C
aba�,.us
OBeatt
/d
Y FordRd
r
4110 R
3
� f
Kannapolis Legend
a ha ll1llI�1j1y1j Study Area-Section A
a C "
a Study Area-Section B
v �
n Protect County Boundary
f Begi o
r IR
Winecoff School Rd
o Waterbodies
73 �� Major Roads
i
a Roads
Streams
j 0 Interchanges
3 ,
0 0.5 1 2
�
601 i �� Miles

Figure 2"2-�'
TIP Projects in the Vicinity of 1-3802, 1-3610 and B-5365
Project Area 1-85 Widening and Interchange Improvements From North of NC 73 to
US 29-601 Connector (1-3802/1-3610/B-5365)
�� iifi
°
J �. Rowan and Cabarrus Counties, North Carolina
% ,
i til A4CF
ei
� �Irl glflri
/ `+k
!`J64 v 1
North Carolina
Department of Transportation
w 2Vtn r r
Nr S"�
HYY7 �'II� '„ ,wn �° 'a;�>r xrr �raghN"k�
ar"IC
t' Project Vicinity
P��a Sri snai � �us
nnapolis
if'111 Ville,' i t wn
vi x
t 0n lip ,
P
"
Mfr, w
/, N
� V �
91
0�
152 l 29
China Grove
53 End Project
B-5365
1-3610
Landis
29 "
'
RNWD
µ augherty Rq
ah 1-3602
C µ
abarr�""M�
4S y.
O/d Beatty Fo r
&45C39
00 `!Ra
M
0
s
3 .< e, Legend
G 1-3802/1-3610/B-5365
® TIP Project
Kannapolis County Boundary
n
/ zs Waterbodies
Begin Project r ° �°
...N e Major Roads
School Winecoff Scho Rd o
73 1 �e Roads
„wm J', CL
Streams
IN - 0 0.5 1 2
Miles
601

30' 14' (17'W/raR) 12' 12' 12' 12' 11' J 11' 12' 12' 12' 12' 14' 07'W/GR) 18' 6' 10'
i
O F N
12'FDPS 12'FDPS o D
0 cee CROWN �.,v
O POINT GRADE i GRADE CROWN
ORIGINAL GROUND
POINT POINT POINT _O
0.04 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.04 LL VARIABLE SLOPE
� 6�1
ORIGINAL GROUND 61 E 6'1 ORIGINAL GROUND
VARIABLE
SLOPE
ti^ TYPICAL SECTION
ORIGINAL GROUND
-L- I-85
30' 14' 07' W/GR) AUX.12' 12' 12' 12' 12' 11' 11' 12' 12' 12' 12' AUX.12' 14' 17' W/GR 18' 6' 10'
— 12' FDPS / / 12' FDPS
T T ORIGINAL
GROUND
I:P.IM POIM POIM POIM
0.02 0.0 0.02 0.0 0�_
VARIABLE SLOPE
6:1
ORIGINAL 6--1 8' C 6;1 ORIGINAL
GROUND GROUND
VARIABLE
SLOPE `
TYPICAL SECTION
ORIGINAL —L— 1-85
GROUND
—RR-
7.5' 28' IFUTURE 3RD 113NE:
6.5' 15' 6.5' 8.5' 6.5'
I I I
i
i
1 GRADE
POINT
ORIGINAL L
ORIGINAL
TYPICAL SECTION GROUND GRO NDL
-RR- RAILROAD
f ' Proposed Typical Sections
Prepared
For Figure
I-85 Widening and Interchange Improvements From North of NC 73 to
US 29-601 Connector (I-3802/1-3610/6-5365)
Rowan and Cabarrus Counties, North Carolina 3A
Not to Scale
Map Date:9/4/2012

-Y3-
30'-0" 8' 24' 8' 12' 6' 10'
(11' W/GR) (11' W/GR)
Z 4' 12' 12' 4'
ow FDPS DP Z
W LL
212 ORIGINAL
ZV GROUND
O cle ,
If z 0`08 0.02 0.02 002 002 0.08 =
6:1 4:1
ORIGINAL 6:1 '� 6c1 VARIABLE ORIGINAL
GROUND GRADE SLOPE GROUND
POINT
I
VARIABLE
SLOPE 3., TYPICAL SECTION
-Y3- KANNAPOLIS HWY
ORIGINAL
GROUND
-Y6-
8' 6' 24' 6'
9' W/GR
12' 12'
i
ORIGINAL
GROUND
008 002 O,pg
��B<F A:1 yqR ORIGINAL
GRADE GROUND
POINT
TYPICAL SECTION
-Y6- RIDGE AVE.
Ck —1'7-
-SBL- NBL-
CROSSOVER
�—NBL— -NBL- -SBL- —SBL-
30' 12' 15' W/GR VAR.12'-15' VAR.12'-15' VAR.12'-15' 5.5' VAR.0'-27' 5.5' VAR.12'-15' VAR.12' VAR.12'-15' 12' 15' W/GR 18' 6' 10'
Z
r12 PEDESTRIAN 4' 1 PDPS WAU(V/AY FDPS PDPS 4' 4'r PS �RPI DT I T ooh GRADE FDPS V ORIGINAL GROUND'Ir
S ,p QDY Qa yy =p .�••.� ORIGINAL GROUND
S S 6:,� RIG GROUND
6:1 4:1
ORIGINAL GROUND CONCRETE BARRIER VARIABLE
VARIABLE VNGLARE SCREEN SLOPE
SLOPE
TYPICAL SECTION
ORIGINAL GROUND -Y7- US 29 /601
f ' Proposed Typical Sections
Prepared
For Figure
I-85 Widening and Interchange Improvements From North of NC 73 to
US 29-601 Connector (I-3802/1-3610/6-5365)
Rowan and Cabarrus Counties, North Carolina 313
Not to Scale
Map Date:9/4/2012

4E Y8-
30' 8' 60' 8' 12' 6' 10'
(11' W/GR) (11' W/GR)
q' 12' 12' 6' 6' 12' 12' q' Z
d FDPS FDPS pw
=O a' ORIGINAL
Wv
U• GROUND
U- t t Oy08 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0._08 =O
6:1
q:1
ORIGINAL 6.1 6L1 ORIGINAL
GROUND GRADE GROUND
POINT j VARIABLE
SLOPE
I
VARIABLE
SLOPE
TYPICAL SECTION
-Y8- LAKE CONCORD RD.
ORIGINAL
GROUND
-v10-
I
10'-0" 12' 12' 12' 4' 12' 12' 12' 10'-0"
ORIGINAL (14' W/GR) t t (14' W/GR)
2' 2' ORIGINAL
GROUND GROUND
1
VARIABLE 4: 0-0202 0.02 0_`02 0.02 a:
SLOPE VS LBLE
4:1 4:1 SLOPE
GRADE
ORIGINAL POINT ORIGINAL
GROUND GROUND
TYPICAL SECTION
-Y10- DALE EARNHARDT BLVD.
8' 12' 8' 8'
(11' W/GR) (11' W/GR)
F- i
Z 4' 12' j 12' 4'
Q- FDPS i FDPS
W ORIGINAL
Z OGROUND
S I Vfr
0`08 0.02 0.02 0.02 0__02 0.08
ORIGINAL 4.1
GROUND 6.1
GRADE
VARIABLE POINT
SLOPE TYPICAL SECTION
:GROUND IGINAL
-Y11- CENTER GROVE RD.
f ' Proposed Typical Sections
Prepared
For: � I-85 Widening and Interchange Improvements From North of NC 73 to Figure
US 29-601 Connector (I-3802/1-3610/6-5365)
Rowan and Cabarrus Counties, North Carolina 3C
Not to Scale
Map Date:9/4/2012

i
-Y13-
10' 12' 12' VARIABLE 12' 12' 10'
ORIGINAL 70.0P2 W—W TO 17'-6" (14' W/GR) ORIGINAL
2 1—b" 1�" 2'
GROUND GROUND
4:1 4:1
0.02 0.02 0.02
VARIABLE 0.02 0.02 VARIABLE
SLOPE 4.1 SLOPE
GRADE i GRADE
ORIGINAL POINT POINT ORIGINAL
GROUND TYPICAL SECTION GROUND
—Y13— LANE ST.
Y17—,—Y22—,—Y24—,—Y25—,—Y26—,—Y27-
i
8' 8' 12' i 12' 8'
(11' W/GR) (11' W/GR)
t
ORIGINAL GROUND
i
ORIGINAL GROUND 008 0.02 ! 0y02 1 0,08
4:1 4:1
GRADE ORIGINAL GROUND
VARIABLE
SLOPE POINT i ? ORIGINAL GROUND
S
VARIABLE
SLOPE
TYPICAL SECTION
-Y17- PINE RIDGE RD.
-Y22- MADISON RD.
Y24- MYRTLE GOODNIGHT
Y25- POWER ST.
-Y26- YOST HILL RD.
-Y27- KETCHIE ESTATES
f ' Proposed Typical Sections
Prepared
For. Figure
I-85 Widening and Interchange Improvements From North of NC 73 to
US 29-601 Connector (I-3802/1-3610/6-5365)
Rowan and Cabarrus Counties, North Carolina 3D
Not to Scale
Map Date:9/4/2012

rk-Y18-
30' 8' 12' 12' 8' 12' 6' 10'
F (11' W/GR) (11' W/GR)
? F_
2' ! 2, 012
Z ee
FDPS FDPS W U
ORIGINAL GROUND
_"O ?L4E
ORIGI NAL GROUND
0`08 oow 0.02 ! 0.02 oox 0 08 =6.7 4:1 R AL GROUND
661 GRADE j ORIGINAL GROUND POINT i SL E
SLOPE
VARIABLE
SLOPE
TYPICAL SECTION
ORIGINAL GROUND —Y18— LENZT RD.
�-Yi9-
30' 8' 12' 12' 17'i6" 12' 12' 8' 12' 6' 10'
F (11' W/GR) (11' W/ F_
Z
06n I I ! Z
w LL 4 W W 1'�" V-6" 4
Z O DP 7 -0.02 DP ORIGINAL GROUND
0.02 ! 0.02 =0 �� ORIGINAL GROUND
0`08 0.02 0.02 0102 0.08
6:1 461 RI NAL GROUND
661 GRADE PORINT VAR BLE
ORIGINAL GROUND POINT SLOPE
VARIABLE ti., TYPICAL SECTION
-Y19- NC 152
ORIGINAL GROUND
f ' Proposed Typical Sections
Prepared
For:
I-85 Widening and Interchange Improvements From North of NC 73 to Figure
US 29-601 Connector (I-3802/1-3610/6-5365)
Rowan and Cabarrus Counties, North Carolina 3E
Not to Scale
Map Date:9/4/2012

L -Y2 C-
i
10'-0" 4' 12' I 12' 4' 10'-0"
(14' W/GR) BIKE LAN i IKE LAN (14' W/GR)
ORIGINAL GROUND 2' ! 2' ORIGINAL GROUND
i
4:1
VARIABLE 0.0.2 0.02 0.02 0:02 VARIABLE
SLOPE SLOPE
1
ORIGINAL GROUND 4. 4:1 ORIGINAL GROUND
GRADE
POINT
TYPICAL SECTION
-Y2 2A- WINECOFF SCHOOL RD.
1A L-1 L-�K -Y Proposed Typical Sections
Prepared
For: Figure
-85 Widening and Interchange Improvements From North of NC 73 to
)-
-
or (
Connector-
US 29 601 Ct13802/1 3610
3F
Rowan and Cabarrus Counties, North Carolina
Map Date:12/5/2013

r
I'
�rl
,J 1 VG `I G.Gr`U=` ti)a
Blake House
C...h-
Ig —
AP
1G.S CSI
ry AN
i ' • • F5 Ca
* Z 4` �
40
73 4
Y
I -
Illrntcu-Irn�atiican�all IF�u,�siincss IF��au-Ik �� ��
o
i
�r M U LK.E Legend
Proposed Improvements Study Area Proposed Bridge m�°. ' Jurisdictional Wetland Park © Hospital/Medical
Prepared ",. 1-85 Widening and Interchange Improvements From North of NC 73 to County Boundary Removed Bridge pond Historic APE Gov.Facility
�` Figure
For: g
U$ 29-601 Connector (1-3802/1-3610/8-5365 Road Retained Bridge WS-IV wsws Historic Site Business
Rowan and Cabarrus Counties, North Carolina Protected Area
�� Railroad "'� Proposed Culvert Hazmat t Cemetery
0 250 500 1,000 Source:NCDOT,Mulkey,Rowan and Cabarrus Co.GIS Proposed
WS-IV WSWS t t y 4A
Y Slo e Stake
Feet Orthophotography:ESRI Imagery Service(update 7/12)
Map Date:11/a/2o12 � P Existing Culvert �',! �> Critical Area � Church
1 $OO' This Exhibit is for planning puposesonly and is not intended tobe used for design orconstr uction. / PrOpOSed Edge of w•.. Stream 100-Year Floodplain j School
Wetland,Ponds,and Streams are approximate locations as the work was completed for in ventory purposes using a Trimble GeoXT/XH with supposed sub-m eter a ccure cy. Pavement

II 109 6 l`,J0 v
i
U�omiucrsal i � �
oRPHgNq
W I-N 1
I�r�vutl�rrttll?rDinitic:I� � j� I,lu ,.
GE RD C� u�rr�Ipc.Itics
YF
, 4�IIIII
MILLS AV ,A 1r�hult�e�r1 �
�r
n arm
E%I'
R� �ri�w'r� Ids. �' _•_ _° - :. - NCO
Goodma F E
III�II�II'� � '-,;Ar.uter Se�vicc
9A �'OO
� .... �O -�� es�`✓alur� VE^�Et
�laertc�rral
SA
� PAR�COD DR �
,1 l!' J,, a 10"';
O
�I i,.�11�;,� 11,�a 101..
LAKEWOOD Cl t( _
i��illiq ••. N� /A X/ m
N� D
K�1PYi 40 m
p0 r
NPVENgR 41N, c
RAY SUGGS PL m
4` rn -o
4L O
} SGUT`{ CIR
44, CARALE' VALLEY DR
t0
FP\��NG 40 CeFOs
400,
0
4'f' CFAy C'T
4 '0
�Pe
G
III "tip Proposed Improvements Legend Study Area Proposed Bridge l " �'' Jurisdictional Wetland Park © Hospital/Medical
Prepared 1-85 Widening nd Interchange Improvements From North of NC 73 to Count Boundary Removed Bride Q Gov. Facility
For
9 9 p Y ry
Bridge Historic APE Figure
US 29-601 Connector 1-3802/1-3610/13-5365
�/ r Road Retained Bridge WS-IV WSWS Historic Site Business
�
Rowan and Cabarrus Protected Area
Counties, IH� Railroad Proposed culvert
Hazmat t t t Cemetery wsws
4B
o zso 500
1,000 Source:NCDOT,Mulkey,Rowan and Cabarrus Co GIS Proposed Slope Stake ".��,. �!':� Critical ��°
Feet Orthophotography ESRI Imagery Service(update 7/12)
Map Date:12/3/2013 p p Existing Culvert Critical Area 10 Church
„_ This Exhibit is for planning purposes orllyand is not intended tobe used for design orconstruction. / Proposed Edge of . . Stream 100-Year Floodplain j School
1—500' Welland,Pontls,and Streams are approximate locations as the work was completed for inventory purposes using a Trimble GeoXT/XH with supposed sub-meter accuracy. Pavement

� � o
11 Iowa
ful
ccatlic r� l scl KING ; /��O
0�
Cgs % OQ�
�i�'9A � �vuta Sr�rvlee �
Felt��It�erllrohu t�cl�crl�rrral J �`/-
O� Z �p� VO G � li�i IIrll O� p
sz Q
V m � W
G
D �
� Q
r
O�
�NGGO P`1 "•
O� Q 4N
O
G )
z_
0 G� rt , 4
N N� ljjij11jj�:�'1jj!jj; 4A '4
O
n �
G
imtl�IS'd�L IIII "tip Proposed Improvements Legend Study Area Proposed Bridge l " �'' Jurisdictional Wetland Park © Hospital/Medical
Prepared 1-85 Widening nd Interchange Improvements From North of NC 73 to count Boundary Removed Bride Q Gov. Facility
For: 9 9 p Y ry
9 %� Pond Historic APE Figure
US 29-601 Connector 1-3802/1-3610/13-5365
r Road Retained Bridge WS-IV WSWS Historic Site Business
Protected Area
o zso �� Rowan and Cabarrus Counties, North Carolina IH�H Railroad Proposed culvert
p Hazmat t Cemetery
4G+
5�r; Ws-IV wsws t t ry
00 1,000 Source:NCDOT,Mulkey,Rowan and Cabarrus Co GIS Proposed Slope Stake ".��,. z Critical ��°
Feet Orthophotography ESRI Imagery Service(update 7/12)
Map Date:12/3/2013 � p p Existing Culvert Critical Area 6o Church
„_ This Exhbtis for planning purposes only and s not intended tobe used for design orconstruction. / Proposed Edge of �,. Stream 100-Year Floodplain j School
1—5�� Welland,Ponds,and Streams are approximate locations as the work was completed for inventory purposes using a Trimble GeoXT/XH with supposed sub-meter accuracy. Pavement

lireeii N Il:rand I
ORE
0
Ci,50777qs V771iry—I
Barrier W7
House
40, ttt
(P
Caldwell S 2 C1
House WC
WG
SG 2 te S
4E,
imt IWO
PA
Legend
Jurisdictional Wetland Park Hospital/Medical
hd iL l .............K E�:)(" Proposed Improvements Study Area Proposed Bridge
Prepared 1-85 Widening and Interchange Improvements From North of NC 73 to County Boundary
Removed Bridge Figure
Pond Historic APE Gov. Facility
For:
US 29-601 Connector (1-3802/1-361 O/B-5365) Retained Bridge
V Road WS-IV WSWS Historic Site Business
Protected Area
Rowan and Cabarrus Counties, North Carolina lt=4� Railroad - Proposed Culvert V Hazmat ttt Cemetery
5� %) WS.IV WSWS 4D
250 500 1,000 Source:NCDOT,Mulkey,Rowan and Cabarrus Co.GIS Map Date:12/3/2013 Proposed Slope Stake - Existing Culvert C_z Critical Area Church
Feet Orthophotography:ESRI Imagery Service(update 7/12) Proposed Edge of St -Year Floodplain School
1 500
* "= ' This Ex h ibit is for planning purposes only and is not intended to be used for design or construction.
10 Welland,Ponds,and Streams are approximate locations as the work was completed for inventory purposes using a Trimble GeoXTIXH with supposed sub-meter accuracy. Pavement ream 100

4 it i I,.� I uuuuuuu w
ar * 4r
r
���,,�� � III Y�I, {➢ ��
e
C
a�101�r1�p�1C4`�� i' �" '�^ '•
8 e
; Q
�QI l
4
4
{
-
I�
I
r
�Yr � 4 4
C.
r
"l�� M. LK, Pt"OpOSed �fllpt"OVeflleflt5 Legend StudyArea Proposed Bridge �i Tr Jurisdictional Wetland Park Hospital/Medical
Ir —_
Prepared ..... 1-85 Widening and Interchange Improvements From North of NC 73 to County Boundary Removed Bridge pond Historic APE Gov.Facility
For:
�` Figure
US 29-601 Connector (I-3802/1-3610/6-5365) j Road Retained Bridge ws-IV wsws Historic Site 0 Business
Protected Area
Rowan and Cabarrus Counties, North Carolina IH�H Railroad
Proposed culvert Hazmat t Cemetery
p <; WS-IV wsws t t y 4E
0 250 500 1,000 Source NCDOT Mulkey,Rowan and cabarrus co GIs Pro osed Sloe Stake i � � Critical Area
Feet Orthophotography ESRI Imagery Service(update 7/12)
Map Date:11/a/2012 P P ��� Existing Culvert �. �, Church
Th' Ehbt§forp/anningpuposeson/y,,disn of i—dedtob eusedt,,d,,ignorconstruction / Proposed Edge of w- Stream 100-Year Flood lain School
1 -SOON Wetl and,Ponds,and Streams are
pp—i­1 orations—the work was completed iorin--y purposes using a TrimbleG—XT/XH with supposed sub-metesa--,y. Pavement p

SF'
+i
C�
r a MBA
'h !% F
r � r
44
4
E) at
i
M . LK, Proposed Improvements Legend Study Area Proposed Bridge si r Jurisdictional Wetland Park Hospital/Medical
ital/Medical
�t °... ,., © P
Ir —_
Prepared 1-85 Widening and Interchange Improvements From North of NC 73 to County Boundary Removed Bridge Pond Historic APE Gov.Facility
' Figure
9
For: .�,
US 29-601 Connector (1-3802/1-3610/6-5365) j Road Retained Bridge WS-IV wsws Historic site Business
Protected Area
Rowan and Cabarrus Counties, North Carolina IHH Railroad Proposed Culvert Hazmat t Cemetery
p 5 <; WS-IV wsws t t y 4F
0 250 500 1,000 Source NCDOT Mulkey,Rowan and cabarrus co GIs Proposed Sloe Stake i � � Critical Area
Feet Orthophotography ESRI Imagery Service(update 7/12)
Map Date:11/a/2012 P P ��� Existing Culvert �. Church
Th" Ehbt§forp/anningpuposeson/y,,disn of i—dedtob eusedt,,d,,ignorconstruction / Proposed Edge of w- Stream 100-Year Flood lain School
1 -SOON Wetl and,Ponds,and Streams are
pp—i­1 orations—the work was completed iorin--y purposes using a TrimbleG—XT/XH with supposed sub-metesa--,y. Pavement p

F
'Mu;J ip4J
G: B
G`
P " `:>EA,
SEAA
l U
r"
I
�� Legend Jurisdictional Wetland Hospital/Medical"OpOSe Improvements Stud Area Proposed Bridg e �
Park
Prepared 1-85 Widening and Interchange Improvements From North of NC 73 to County Boundary Removed Bridge pond Historic APE Gov.Facility Figure
�� if;; For:
US 29-601 Connector (I-3802/1-3610/6-5365) j Road Retained Bridge ws-IV wsws Historic Site Business
Rowan and Cabarrus Counties, North Carolina Protected Area
�� Railroad Proposed Culvert Hazmat t Cemetery q
0 250 500 1,000 Source:NCDOT,Mulkey,Rowan and Cabarrus Co.GIS '" - Fi�� WS-N WSWS t t y 4,G
y Proposed Slope Stake Existin Culvert �' �� Critical Area ��
Orthophotography ESRI Imagery Service(update 7/12) Map Date:11/8/2012 � g -� J Church
Feet Proposed Edge of
`1"=500, Th' Ehbt,t,,planningpuposeson lyan disnot intendedtob eusedt,,d,,ignorconstruction / w�"� - Stream 100-Year Floodplain j School
Wetland,Ponds,and Streams are approximate locations as the work was completed forinventory purposes using a Trimble G—XT/XH with supposed,.bme accuracy Pavement

- 11 E ON PL
� °�—(.w� � • o � ��iii�illloi�,ili���,gppllllliiiiiiiiillll�l
m
c�
�a
4
r Y r
i
� o
i
..ln M U LK.E Legend
Proposed Improvements Study Area Proposed Bridge m�°. ' Jurisdictional Wetland Park © Hospital/Medical
Prepared ",. 1-85 Widening and Interchange Improvements From North of NC 73 to County Boundary Removed Bridge pond Historic APE Gov.Facility
�` Figure
For: � g
U$ 29-601 Connector (1-3802/1-3610/8-5365 Road Retained Bridge WS-IV wswS Historic Site Business
Rowan and Cabarrus Counties, North Carolina Protected Area
Railroad Proposed Culvert Hazmat t Cemetery
0 250 500 1,000 Source:NCDOT,Mulkey,Rowan and Cabarrus Co.GIS WS-IV WSWS t t y 4H
y � Proposed Slope Stake Existing Culvert �'✓ �� Critical Area
Orthophotography ESRI Imagery Service(update 7/12) Map Date:11/8/2012 g J Church
Feet -° Proposed Edge of
. „_ Th' EhbYsiorp/anningpurposeson/yandisnotintendedtobeusediordesignorcons(ruction / �"�- w••- Stream 100-Year Flood lain School
1 -SOON Wetl and,Ponds,and Streamsareappr imatel orations astheworkwascompletediorinven ypur posesusinga Trimble G—XT/XHwiths.pp—,ds.b-meterac—,y. Pavement p

I
g� l
iyI t I jr i
r.
I
r
W
U
a 40
l ;i 4
C' 4
4"f
40 40"
' - LKE '
J
Legend _ Stud y Area
Jurisdictional Wetland Park Hospital/Medical oposepovees Pro p osed Bride
Prepared I-85 Widening and Interchange Improvements From North of NC 73 to County Boundary Removed Bridge pond Historic APE Gov.Facility Figure
For: L -
/�'� 9 US 29-601 Connector (1-3802/1-3610/13-5365) �, " Road Retained Bridge WS-1v WSWS ® Historic site Business
Protected Area
' Rowan and CabarruS Counties, North Carolina IHH Railroad ---- Proposed Culvert Hazmat ttt Cemetery
wS-IV WSWS 41
250 500 1,000 Source NCDOT Mulkey,Rowan and Cabarrus Co GIS Proposed Slope Stake -� ��°
Feet Orthophotography ESRI Imagery Service(update 7/12)
Map Date 1va/2o12 � p p ��� Existing Culvert y �. � Critical Area 6o Church
„_ This anet f rplanning purposes only and is not intended tobe used for design orconstruotion. / Proposed Edge of .. Stream 100-Year Floodplain j School
1-5�� Wetland,Pon do,and Streams are approximate locations as the workwas completed for inventory purposes using aTimbleGeoXT&H with supposed sub-meteraccurecy Pavement

YCj" i
I
r
II
i
I I I
p i, I tl I, "" �'.tltiliSrY'IIWb�',91'� �u'�atlV'(p'K7�
i
N P
i
I 6
i
t �rrr�i r CviC)t� E
,r R
r►��r�erwrorMLI���11w-�ip
tl
� u
it
4 b Cb
4wfl�clr ryrll
41
Rowan County
�-
P�A �hJST
40,
r
"ln M. LK, Proposed In1prOV @nl @ntS Legend Study Area Proposed Bridge pi !�i Jurisdictional Wetland Park © Hospital/Medical
".t
1
Prepared I-85 Widening and Interchange Improvements From North of NC 73 to County Boundary Removed Bridge Pond Historic APE Gov.Facility
For: Figure
q US 29-601 Connector 1-3802/1-3610/13-5365
� ) �% Road Retained Bridge WS-IV WSWS Historic Site 0 Business
Protected Area
Rowan and CabarruS Counties, North Carolina IHH Railroad ---- Proposed Culvert Hazmat ttt Cemetery
ws-IV wsws 4J
0 250 500 11000 Source NCDOT Mulkey,Rowan and Cabarrus Co GIS Proposed Slope Stake -� ��
Feet Orthophotography ESRI Imagery Service(update 7/12)
Map Date Iva/ZO12 p p �� Existing Culvert �..�r Critical Area f Church
„_
This et
en " frplanning p poses only and is not intended to be used for design or construction. / Proposed Edge of .. Stream 100-Year Floodplain j School
*1"=SOON Wetland,Ponds,and Streams are approximate locations as the work was completed for inventory purposes using a Trimble GeoXT/XH with supposed sub-meter accuracy Pavement

m irm/i
I�
m
uuuuuuuu� u
�C�1N RO
ca
�a
.i,
I
M'
pa
C rr
i
�� J �� M LK Proposed �n1prOV @nl @ntS Legend Study Area �������� Proposed Bridge �� ,,i Jurisdictional Wetland Park © Hospital/Medical
i
Prepared 1-85 Widening and interchange Improvements From North Of NC 73 t0 1 County Boundary Removed Bridge Pond Historic APE T� Gov.Facility Figure
For. rt L-... ., g
US 29-601 Connector (1-3802/1-3610/13-5365) Road Retained Bridge WS-IV WSWS Historic site Business
Rowan and CabarruS Counties, North Carolina IHH Railroad ---- Proposed Culvert Protected Area Hazmat ttt Cemetery
"?<; WS-1v WSWS 4K
0 250 500 1,000 Source NCDOT Mulkey,Rowan and Cabarrus Co GIS Proposed Slope Stake -� ��
Feet Orthophotography ESRI Imagery Service(update 7/12)
Map Date 11/8/2012 p p �� Existing Culvert �..� Critical Area f Church
„_ This anet frplanning p poses only and is not intended to be used for design orconstructlon, / Proposed Edge of .. Stream 100-Year Floodplain j School
1–SOO Wetland,Ponds,and Streams are approximate locations as the work was completed forin—tory purposes using a Trimble GeoXT/XH with supposed sub-meteraccuracy. Pavement

r�
t
{
A;
40 40"
�e %"
WAN
MULK,1E1Y Proposed Improvements Legend Stud y Area � Pro p osed Bridg e Jurisdictional Wetland Park Hospital/Medical
Ir —
Prepared 1-85 Widening and Interchange Improvements From North of NC 73 to County Boundary Removed Bridge -50 Pond Historic APE Gov.Facility Figure
e�'y For: q US 29-601 Connector 1-3802/1-3610/13-5365
Road Retained Bridge WS-IV WSWS Historic Site 0 Business
Protected Area
Rowan and CabarruS Counties, North Carolina IHH Railroad ---- Proposed Culvert Hazmat ttt Cemetery
ws-IVwsws 4L
0 250 500 1,000 Source NCDOT Mulkey,Rowan and Cabarrus Co GIS Proposed Slope Stake -�
Feet Orthophotography ESRI Imagery Service(update 7/12)
Map Date Iva/ZO12 p p �� Existing Culvert �..,r Critical Area f Church
„_ This anet frplanning p poses only and is not intended to be used for design orconstructlon, / Proposed Edge of .. Stream 100-Year Floodplain j School
1–SOON Wetland,Ponds,and Streams are approximate locations as the work was completed forin—tory purposes using a Trimble GeoXT/XH with supposed sub-meteraccuracy. Pavement

f
l
I
i
^� q
I�
I.
�+1fl1SV4JG1f�Cd [�R
x, 11
I
i
I
40"
i
M- KE " Proposed �n1prOV @nl @ntS Legend Study Proposed Bridge pi r Jurisdictional Wetland Park Hospital/Medical
Ir
Prepared I-85 Widening and Interchange Improvements From North of NC 73 to County Boundary Removed Bridge Pond Historic APE L Gov.Facility
For: Figure
q US 29-601 Connector 1-3802/1-3610/13-5365
Road Retained Bridge WS-IV WSWS Historic Site Business
Protected Area
Rowan and CabarruS Counties, North Carolina IHH Railroad Proposed Culvert Hazmat ttt Cemetery
ws-IVwsws 4M
25� 5�� 1,000 Source NCDOT Mulkey,Rowan and Cabarrus Co GIS Proposed Slope Stake '/ -�
Feet Orthophotography ESRI Imagery Service(update 7/12)
Map Date 11/8/2012 p p �� Existing Culvert �..�r Critical Area f Church
„_ This anet frplanning p Poses only and is not intended to be used for design orconstructlon. / Proposed Edge of .. Stream 100-Year Floodplain j School
1—SOO Wetland,Ponds,and Streams are approximate locations as the work was completed for inventory purposes using a Trimble GeoXT/XH with supposed sub-meteraccuracy. Pavement

4"K
4J,
40"
Legend
M U Jurisdictional Wetland
LK,IEIY Study Area "I
Proposed Improvements Proposed Bridge Park Hospital/Medical
County Bou
Prepared 1-85 Widening and Interchange Improvements From North of NC 73 to ndary Removed Bridge fg$ HistoricAPE Gov.Facility
Fo r: L p Pond 0 Business Figure
W"
US 29-601 Connector (1-3802/1-3610/13-5365) WS-1v WSWS Historic Site
Road Retained Bridge
Rowan and Cabarrus Counties, North Carolina lt=i�I Railroad — Proposed Culvert Protected Area Hazmat ttt Cemetery 4N
WS-1v WSWS
0
0 250 500 1,00 Source:NCDOT,Mulkey,Rowan and Cabarrus Co.GIS Map Date:11/8/2012 Proposed Slope Stake — Existing Culvert Critical Area
Orthophotography:ESRI Imagery Service(update 7/12) Church
*1 500' Feet This Exhibit is for planning purposes only and is not intended to be used for design or conothuction, Proposed Edge of Stream 100-Year Floodplain School
() Weiland,Ponds,and Streams are approximate locations as the work was completed forin—tory purposes using a Trimble GeoXT1XH with supposed sub-mete'accuracy. Pavement I I

4"K
4J,
4"0 4rC'
MULKEY Legend
Proposed Improvements Study Area Proposed Bridge �11111 Jurisdictional Wetland Park Hospital/Medical
county Boundary Removed Bridge
Prepared 1-85 Widening and Interchange Improvements From North of NC 73 to 9-50 Pond HistoricAPE Gov.Facility Figure
Fo r: L
US 29-601 Connector (1-3802/1-3610/13-5365) Retained Bridge 0 Business
Road WS-1v WSWS Historic Site
Protected Area
Rowan and Cabarrus Counties, North Carolina lt=i�I Railroad Proposed Culvert WS-lV WSWS Hazmat ttt Cemetery 40
50 500 1,000 Source:NCDOT,Mulkey,Rowan and Cabarrus Co.GIS Existing Culvert Critical Area
Orthophotography:ESRI Imagery Service(update 7/12) Map Date:11/8/2012 Proposed Slope Stake Church
Feet This Exhibit is for planning purposes only and is not intended to be used for design or sonstrustion. Proposed Edge of
*1 500' Weiland,Ponds,and Streams are approximate losations as the—rk was completed forin—tory purposes using a Trimble GeoXT1XH with supposed sub-meteraccuracy. Pavement Stream 100-Year Floodplain School

WB�
40
4','N
441M
4K
z'' 7
4;
Legend
MULKEY Study Area Jurisdictional Wetland Park Hospital/M(
Proposed Improvements Proposed Bridge
HistoricAPE
Prepared 1-85 Widening and Interchange Improvements From North of NC 73 to County Boundary Removed Bridge fg$ Gov.Facility Figure
Fo r: L p Pond
WS-1v WSWS
US 29-601 Connector (1-3802/1-3610/13-5365) Retained Bridge
Historic Site 0 Business
Road
Protected Area
Rowan and Cabarrus Counties, North Carolina lt=i�I Railroad - Proposed Culvert Hazmat ttt Cemetery 4P
WS-1v WSWS
50 500 1,000 Source NCDOT,Mulkey,Rowan and Cabarrus Co.GIS Map Date 11/8/2012 Proposed Slope Stake - Existing Culvert Critical Area Church
Feet Orthophotography:ESRI Imagery Service(update 7/12) Proposed Edge of
*1 500' This Exhibit is for planning purposes only and is not intended to be used for design or constnuotion, Pavement Stream 100-Year Floodplain School
19 Wall-d,Pon do,and Streams are approximate locations as the—k—completed for in ventory purposes using a Trimble G esiXT&H with supposed sub-m eter a ocure cy. :&

WH-2
SL
WS L.
4','N
441M
4"K
4J'
LAI
44,
& A
2� MULK,1E1Y Legend Study Area Jurisdictional Wetland
Proposed Improvements Proposed Bridge Park Hospital/Medical
HistoricAPE
Prepared 1-85 Widening and Interchange Improvements From North of NC 73 to county Boundary Removed Bridge fg$ Gov.Facility Figure
L p Pond
Fo r:
US 29-601 Connector (1-3802/1-3610/13-5365) Road Retained Bridge WS-1v WSWS Historic Site 0 Business
Rowan and Cabarrus Counties, North Carolina lt=i� Railroad Proposed Culvert Protected Area Hazmat ttt Cemetery
WS-1v WSWS 4Q
0 250 500 1,000 Source NCDOT,Mulkey,Rowan and Cabarrus Co.GIS Proposed Slope Stake
Map Date 11/8/2012 Existing Culvert Critical Area Church
Feet Orthophotography:ESRI Imagery Service(update 7/12) Proposed Edge of
This Exhibit is for planning purposes only and is not intended to be used for design or construction. 100-Year Floodplain School
*1 500' Weiland,Ponds,and Streams are approximate locations as the—rk as completed for in ventory purposes using a Trimble GeoXT1XH with supposed sub-m eter a ocure cy. Pavement Stream

A
0
11111 111 jj�
UA
(D GD)DID
m
Mill
Legend
............ Proposed Improvements - US 29-601 Interchange Study Area Proposed Bridge
Prepared 1-85 Widening and Interchange Improvements From North of NC 73 to County Boundary
Removed Bridge
For: Figure
US 29-601 Connector (1-3802/1-3610/13-5365)
Road Retained Bridge
V
Rowan and Cabarrus Counties, North Carolina lt=4� Railroad Proposed Culvert
5
0 250 500 1,000 Feet Source:INCDOT,Mulkey,Rowan and Calbarrus Co.GIS Map Date:12/4/2013 Proposed Slope Stake Existing Culvert
IMME=Z3009Z=� Orthophotography:ESRI Imagery Service(update 7/12) Proposed Edge of
*1 500' a This Ex ibit is for planning purposes only and is not intended to be used for design or construction. Pavement
() ""and,Ponds,and Streams are ppro,dimhate locations as the work was completed for inventory purposes using a Trimble GeoXTIXH with supposed sub-meter accuracy.

N�ii
Jln MULKEY Lege d
Proposed Improvements - Dale Earnhardt Boulevard Interchange Study Area Proposed Bridge
Removed Bridge
Prepared 1-85 Widening and Interchange Improvements From North of NC 73 to County Boundary E:2
Fo r: Figure
-601 Connector (1-3802/1-3610/13-5365) .......
US 29 Road Retained Bridge
Rowan and Cabarrus Counties, North Carolina Railroad Proposed Culvert
0 200 400 800 Source NCDOT,Mulkey,Rowan and Cabarrus Co.GIS 6
Orthophotography:ESRI Imagery Service(update 7/12) Map Date 8/15/2012 Proposed Slope Stake Existing Culvert
Feet This Exhibit is for planning purposes only and is not intended to be used for design or sonstrustion. Proposed Edge of
*1"=400' -'-rd,Ponds,and Streams are approximate losations as the—rk as completed for in—tory purposes using a Trimble GeoXT/XH with supposed sub-meter—ulacy, Pavement

ROWAIVCOLWTy
2180 st- �4—7
0-1- C
2180
0 1002
2000 ;a*.
Brantle Rd.
2205 Lc%r%e st-
2202 10- 2180
2198
2154
2000 0,6
if
Brantley DA 2285 0
'u
2474
0 qj — 2000
0 �r
'M .47 .015
.32 .3
\V
1947
BRIDGE REPLACEMENT
2198
jjlo 2119 .78 0
.09 .98
2119 CV)
2154 Lake 2114 x 00
Conco 0 Q
0
e z
2114
0
3
04 0
2291
2126 ------ OFF-SITIE DIETOUR ROUTE
'Col. 2118 2114
MULKEY
V, Proposed Improvements - Centergrove Road Detour
Prepared
Fo r: Figure
1-85 Widening and Interchange Improvements From North of NC 73 to
US 29-601 Connector (1-3802/1-3610) 7
Rowan and Cabarrus Counties, North Carolina
Map Date:3/21/2013

1505 0
.7
1500
-C 1505
O�. 29 b
1500
2548
1506 1562 V
1505
2548 2549
Ed Weaver Rd.
29 In
1506 0
V
0 2547
"a
2587
N Ln
105 > China Grove 9- 2551
Nfid.Sch. 1505
6:0 rUse
C3 29
New Haven
Baptist
15
273 9 .19 Church
0
.... .......... LIP
15
1673
BRIDGE REPLACEMENTS
1505
2553 C
9 1337
/1 r_X
OFF-SITE DETOURROUTE PHASE 11
Lentz Rd. //BL OFF-SITE DETOUR ROUTE PHASE III
231 �'p C iurc
MULKEY
Prepared Proposed Improvements — NC 152/1-85/US 601 Detour
Fo r: Figure
1-85 Widening and Interchange Improvements From North of NC 73 to
-601 Connector (1-3802/1-3610)
US 29 8
Rowan and Cabarrus Counties, North Carolina
Map Date:3/21/2013

APPENDix B - AGENCY CORRESPONDENCE

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS RECOVED
Po.Box 1890
WILMINGTON,NOI3TH CAROLINA 28402-1890 MAR 14 2005
W RE-PLY REFER TO March 10,2005
ROVI or,FlIGHWAYS
Regulatory Division PDOOTICE OF fi/0 limml
SUBJECT: Action ID. 200520565;Environmental Study for the Proposed Widening and
Interchange Improvements of 1-85, Cabarrus and Rowan Counties,North Carolina,TIP Nos,I-
3802,1-3610 and B-3039.
Gregory J.Thorpe,Ph.D.
Environmental Management Director,PDEA
N.C. Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center P
Raleigh,NC 27699-1548
Dear Dr. Thorpe:
This is in response to your February 16, 2005 letter requesting comments for the proposed
environmental study being initiated for the Proposed Widening and Interchange Improvements of
1-85, from NC 73 in Cabarrus County,to US29/601 Connector in Rowan County,North
Carolina,TIP Nos. 1-3802,1-3610 and B-3039.
Prior Department of the Army permit authorization,pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act of 1977,as amended,will be required for the discharge of excavated or fill material
into waters and/or wetlands in con unction with this project,including temporary impacts for
construction access,temporary detours,site dewatering or bridge demolition, and the disposal of
construction debris.
Review of the project indicates that the proposed work will likely involve the discharge
of excavated or fill material into waters and wetlands. Based on the anticipated total impacts to
waters of the United States,and the likely requirement for an individual Department of the Army
permit,it is recommended that The Corps recommends That NCDOT conduct further evaluation
of this project through the full NEPA/404 Merger Process.
The Corps of Engineers must assess the impacts of the proposed activities on the aquatic
environment prior to issuing Department of the Army permits. Authorization of aquatic fill
activities requires that the project be water dependent and/or that no practicable alternatives are
available. Our initial review emphasis for this NCDOT project will focus on the impacts to
waters and/or wetlands. However, if degradation to other aspects of the natural environment

(e.g., habitat of endangered species)is considered to be of greater concern,an alternative
resulting in greater aquatic losses may be chosen as preferred.
In all cases, and in accordance with the Memorandum of Agreement between the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency and the Corps,the sequencing process of avoidance,
minimization,and compensatory mitigation of unavoidable wetland and stream impacts will be
satisfied prior to the final permit decision. The corps will not issue a Department of the Army
permit until a final plan for compensatory mitigation is approved.
Special attention should be given to avoiding impacts to stream/wetland corridors that
parallel the proposed project,particularly as followi: 1)The tributary to Irish Buffalo Creek,and
adjacent wetlands (shown on National Wetlands Inventory(NWI) mapping),that parallel the
north side of 1-85 just east of the NC 73 Interchange. 2) Cold Water Creek where it parallels the
west side of 1-85 from upstream of Lake Fisher to its headwaters. Avoidance and minimization
of impacts to jurisdictional waters of the United States can probably be best obtained by
considering asymmetrical widening as a practicable alternative.
Questions or comments pertaining to permits may be directed to me at telephone(919)
8'76-8441, ext. 23 (Web page litti)://www.saw.usace.aniiy.mil/WETLANDS).
Sincerely,
Eric C. Alsmeyer
Regulatory Project Manager

u
J.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action Id.200803229 County: Rowan&Cabarrus U.S.G.S.Quad: Concord
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Property Owner/Agent: Gregory Thorpe
Address: NC DOT
1598 Mail Service Center
Raleigh,NC 27699-1598
Telephone No.: 919 715-7217
Property description:
Size(acres) 400 Nearest Town China Grove
Nearest Waterway Town Creek/Cold Water Creek River Basin Yadkin River
USGS HUC 03040104 Coordinates N 35.477019 W-80.5790540
Location description 1-85 widening from the US 29-601 connector south to SR 1430 adiacent to Town Creek,Cold
Water Creek,and Irish Buffalo Creek,south of China Grove in Rowan and Caburrus Counties North Carolina TIP
1-3802,1-3804,and 1-3610
As requested by your letter(i.e.agent's letter Mulkey Engineering dated December 2,2010) and the documentation
included with your letter this existing jurisdictional determination is modified to include the field verified iurisdi_ctional
determinations assoicated with y-line interchanges to be include in the proposed 1-85 widenin8 project
As requested by your letter(i.e.agent's letter Mulkey Engineering dated September,26 2013)and the documentation
included with your letter this existing iurisdictional determination is modified to include in field JD verifications on
May 2,2012 and is extended with this modification to September 30 2018
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.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.
Page 1 of 2

Action ID: �04) 50 -3zzl
- 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.
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 919 554-4884 ext.25.
C. Basis For Determination
There are stream channels within your proiect site which are tributaries of Town Creek,Cold Water CrgL16 and Irish
Buffalo Creek which flows into the Yadkin River and the Atlantic Ocean.
D. Remarks
E. Appeals Information(This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations as indicated in
B. above)
This correspondence constitutes an approved jurisdictional determination for the above described site. If you objectto 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 Manuele,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 30,2013.
**ft is not necessary to submit an RFA fors to the District Office if you do not object to the determination in this
correspondence.**
Corps Regulatory Official:
.............................................. ....................
Date 09/30/2013 Expiration Date 09/30/2018
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://re 1A!gry.usaceSUrv0.com/ to
complete the survey online.
Copy furnished:
Mark Mickley/Cindy Carr,Mulkey Engineers&Consultants,P.O.Box 33127,Raleigh,NC 27636
Page 2 of 2

NOTlFICATION'OF, PROCESS AND
REQUEST FOR=APPEAL
Applicant: NC DOT/TIP 1-3$42, 1-3804, & I File Number: SAW 2008 Date: September 30, 2013
1-3614 03229
Attached is: See Section below
INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of A
permission)
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 ofthe above
decision. Additional 'information may be found at hftp://www,usace.army.mil/inet/functions/ew/ceewo/re or
Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331.
A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit.
a 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 pen-nit,
4 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 permit(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 a 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 60 days of the date of
this notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety,and waive all rights to appeal the approved 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 II of this form and sending the form to the district engineer. This form must be received by
the division engineer within 60 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 11-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 Mr.Mike Bell,Administrative Appeal Review Officer
CESAD-ET-CO-R
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, South Atlantic Division
60 Forsyth Street, Room 9M15
Atlanta, Georgia 303038801
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 appellant or agent.
For appeals on Initial Proffered Permits and approved Jurisdictional Determinations send this
form to:
District Engineer,Wilmington Regulatory Division,Atta:Jean Manuele,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, CESAD-ET-CO-R,60 Forsyth Street, Room 9M15,Atlanta,
Georgia 30303-8801

-0
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION 4
0 ATLANTA FEDERAL CENTER
61 FORSYTH STREET
PROI ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303-8960
September 13, 2013
John F. Sullivan, III,P.E.
Division Administrator
North Carolina Division Office
Federal Highway Administration
310 New Bern Avenue, Suite 410
Raleigh,North Carolina 27601
Dear Mr. Sullivan:
Thank you for your letter requesting our review of the transportation conformity determinations for the
8-hour ozone standard for the amended 2035 Long Range Transportation Plan(LRTP) and FY 2012-
2018 Transportation Improvement Program(TIP) for the Cabarrus-Rowan MPO located in the North
Carolina portion of the Charlotte bi-state nonattainment area. As allowed by the Transportation
Conformity Rule, the South Carolina portion of this nonattainment area implements transportation
conformity independent of the North Carolina portion of this area. We have completed our review, and
recommend a finding of conformity for 2008 8-hour ozone standard for the amended 2035 LR'f? and
FY 2012 -2018 TIP.
On August 15, 1997,July 1, 2014, and subsequently on May 6, 2005,the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency published revisions related to the criteria and procedures for determining that transportation
plans,program, and projects which are funded or approved under Title 23 U.S.C. or"the Federal Transit
Act" conform with State or Federal air quality implementation plans or"the Transportation Conformity
Rule(40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 93)". These revisions outline the criteria that must be met for
the 8-hour ozone standard. The EPA has reviewed the conformity determinations related to the 8-hour
ozone standard for the amended 2035 LR'f? and FY 2012-2018 TIP, and has concluded that all of the
criteria, including those outlined in the July 1,2004, conformity rule revision entitled, "Transportation
Conformity Rule Amendments: Conformity Amendments for New 8-hour Ozone and PM2.5 National
Ambient Air Quality Standards,Response to March 1999, Court Decision and Additional Rule
Changes," (69 FR 40004) and those outlined in the May 6, 2005, conformity rule revision entitled,
"Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments for the New PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality
Standard: PM2.5 Precursors," (70 FR 24280),have been met.
The EPA has considered this conformity determination in light of the current status of the Clean Air
Interstate Rule(CAIR). The EPA notes that the District of Columbia(D.C.) Circuit issued a decision on
July 11, 2008,vacating CAIR. North Carolina v. EPA 531 F.3d 896 (D.C. Cir. 2008). On September 24,
2008,the EPA and other parties in the case filed motions for rehearing asking the D.C. Circuit to
reconsider its decision in the case. On December 23, 2008,the court granted EPA's motion for rehearing
to the extent it agreed to remand CAIR without vacating it. However,the court made no other changes to
the July 11, 2008, opinion,remanding the case to the EPA for further rulemaking consistent with this
opinion. Therefore, the CAIR rule remained in place,but the EPA was required to promulgate another
rule consistent with the court's July 11, 2008, opinion.
Internet Address(LIRL)•http://www.epa.gov
Recycled/Recyclable e Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on Recycled Paper(Minimum 30%Postconsumer)

On August 8, 2011, (76 FR 48208)the EPA finalized the Cross State Air Pollution Rule(CSAPR)as
replacement for the remanded CAIR rule. The final rule was effective on October 7, 2011.
On December 30, 2011,the D.C. Circuit Court stayed the implementation of CSAPR pending its review
of the rule. The Court also ruled that EPA was expected to continue administering the CAIR pending the
Court's resolution of the petitions for review of CSAPR.
On August 21, 2012, the D.C. Circuit Court issued its decision on CSAPR. The Court vacated the rule
and the associated federal implementation plans. The Court further ruled that the EPA must continue to
administer CAIR pending the promulgation of a valid replacement. Therefore, CAIR remains in place.
(EME Homer City Generation v. EPA,No. 11-1302 (D.C. Cir))
Thank you again for the opportunity to review the conformity determinations for the amended 2035
LRTP and FY 2012-2018 TIP for the Cabarrus-Rowan MPO located in the North Carolina portion of the
Charlotte Bi-State nonattainment area. If you have any questions regarding this letter,please contact
Dianna Smith of the EPA Region 4 staff at(404) 562-9207.
Sincerely,
Brenda C. Johnson
Acting Chief
Air Quality Modeling
and Transportation Section
cc: Eddie Dancausse, FHWA NC
Loretta Barren,FHWA NC
Heather Hildebrandt,NC DAQ
Myra Immings,FTA Region 4

0
U.S.Depar`r North Carolina Division 310 New Bern Avenue, Suite 410
OfTransportafion Raleigh, NC 27601
Federal Highway [phone]
Administration September 17, 2013 [phone]
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ncdiv/
In Reply Refer To:
HDA-NC
Mr. Anthony J. Tata
Secretary
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1501 Mail Service Center
Raleigh,NC 27699-1501
Dear Secretary Tata:
We reviewed the Cabarrus Rowan Metropolitan Planning Organization (CRMPO)
Transportation Conformity Determination Report for the:
❑ The CRMPO 2035 LRTP (I-3802A/I-3802B/I-3803B)Amendment
❑ The CRMPO FY 2012-2018 TIP (I-3802A/I-3802B/I-3803B)Amendment
The CRMPO made a conformity determination on their 2035 LRTP Amendment/FY 2012-2018
TIP Amendment on the following date:
❑ CRMPO on August 28, 2013
The CRMPO amended FY 2012-2018 TIP is a direct subset of their amended 2035 LRTP.
The Federal Highway Administration and the Federal Transit Administration reviewed these
documents. We coordinated our review with the Environmental Protection Agency(EPA)
Region 4 and have enclosed their comments to this letter.
Based on our review and the comments provided to us by the EPA, we find that the following
conform to the purpose of the State Implementation Plan in accordance with 40 CFR Part 93:
❑ The CRMPO 2035 LRTP (I-3802A/I-3802B/I-3803B) Amendment
❑ The CRMPO FY 2012-2018 TIP (I-3802A/I-3802B/I-3803B) Amendment
Sincerely,
For John F. Sullivan, III, P.E.
Division Administrator
Enclosure

From: Mundt, Leza W
To: Nicole Bennett
Subject: FW: I-3802 improvements to Winecoff School Rd(Cabarrus Cc);archaeology
Date: Wednesday,November 20,2013 10:05:01 AM
Attachments: I3802 psh Winecoff Alt2A.PDF
From: Jones, Damon
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 9:55 AM
To: Mundt, Leza W
Cc: Weaver, Derrick G; Wilkerson, Matt T
Subject: RE: I-3802 improvements to Winecoff School Rd (Cabarrus Co); archaeology
Leza,
The amended APE for 1-3802 (improvements to Winecoff School Road and intersections With S.
Main and S. Ridge Ave) in Cabarrus County should not impact any significant archaeological
resources (PA 13-05-0015). The revised design plans found on attached PDF has the APE located
in an area that is severely disturbed from prior ground disturbing activities associated With urban
development. It also avoids any known historic features that might yield potentially significant
archaeological deposits. No subsurface testing is required. Should design plans change again,
please inform archaeology. Include this email and your new map as an appendix to the my original
"No Eligible or Listed Archaeological Sites Present or Affected" form for PA 13-05-0015 dated
7/09/13. If you have any further question, please call or email.
Thank You,
C. Damon Jones
Archaeologist 11
N.C. Department of Transportation
PDEA- Human Environment Unit
1598 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1598
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]
From: Mundt, Leza W
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 6:51 AM
To: Jones, Damon
Cc: Weaver, Derrick G
Subject: RE: I-3802 improvements to Winecoff School Rd (Cabarrus Co); archaeology
I....et me know if you Ihave questions.

NO NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES
kAI. ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES
PRESENT OR AFFECTED FORM
V , , w x pertains � ;
This form only
alid for Hi to s Archit ARCHAEOLOGICAL
and GLand ct pes. You mutest consult separately with the t °
Historic Architecture and Landscapes Group.
PROJECT INFORMATION
Project No: 1-3802 County: Cabarrus
WBS No: 36780.1.2 Document: CE
F.A. No: FANHIMF-085-2(61)55 Funding: ❑ State ® Federal
Federal Permit Required? ® Yes ❑ No Permit Type: Not known
Project Description:
The project is associated with the I-85 widening and interchange improvements. The current study area
reviewed by this PA was not previously included in the prior environmental analysis work. The current
project is a new alignment and bridge for Winecoff School Road(SR 1790) over an existing railroad,
South Main Street(SR 1008), and Ridge Avenue in Cabarrus County. The archaeological Area of
Potential Effects (APE)for the project is defined as an approximate 2,400 foot(731.52 m) long corridor
running from Winecoff School Road on the west side of South Main Street to Mt. Olivet Road on the east.
The corridor has a variable width of 100 feet(30.48 m) to 300 feet(91.44 m). The APE also includes an
extension leading from the new Winecoff School Road alignment to South Main Street and improvements
along Mt. Olivet Road from Ridge Avenue to Carolina Memorial Park. This current APE varies from the
initial APE that was defined on the previously submitted survey required form.
SUMMARY OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL FINDINGS
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)Archaeology Group reviewed
the subject project and determined:
® There are no National Register listed ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES within the project's
area of potential effects.
® No subsurface archaeological investigations are required for this project.
❑ Subsurface investigations did not reveal the presence of any archaeological resources.
❑ Subsurface investigations did not reveal the presence of any archaeological resources
considered eligible for the National Register.
❑ All identified archaeological sites located within the APE have been considered and all
compliance for archaeological resources with Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act and GS 121-12(a) has been completed for this project.
® There are no National Register Eligible or Listed ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES present
or affected by this project. (Attach any notes or documents as needed)
1

Brief description of review activities, results of review, and conclusions:
The project area is located just north of I-85 between Kannapolis to the north and Concord to the south in
the northwestern portion of Cabarrus County,North Carolina. The project area is plotted near the western
edge of the Concord USGS 7.5' topographic quadrangle(Figure 1).
A map review and site file search was conducted at the Office of State Archaeology(OSA) on May 28,
2013. No previously recorded archaeological sites have been identified within the APE or within a mile
radius. In addition, no existing National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), Determined Eligible(DE),
State Study Listed(SL), or Locally Designated(LD)properties are within or adjacent to the project area.
However, two Surveyed Site(SS)properties are in the vicinity(Figure 2). The Julius Shakespeare Harris
House 92 (CA 423)is found west of South Main Street within the APE (Figure 3), while the Mt Olive
Methodist Church(CA 503)is adjacent to the APE at its eastern end(Figure 4). Topographic maps,
USDA soil survey maps, aerial photographs (NC One Map), and historic maps (North Carolina maps
website)were utilized to gage environmental and cultural variables that may have contributed to
prehistoric or historic settlement within the project limits and to assess the level of ground disturbance.
An archaeological reconnaissance survey was carried out on June 26, 2013, to evaluate the project area.
The APE for the project area is situated mostly along a broad ridge top with only a small portion in the
east residing along gentle side slope(see Figure 2). No natural waterways are crossed, but water drains
off the ridge to the northwest and southeast into unnamed streams. These waterways are part of the
Yadkin-Pee Dee drainage basin. The area is a mix of urban development, residential properties, cleared
grassy lots, forest, and a transmission power line corridor. Ground disturbance is more severe than
initially reported. Soil erosion is heavy and previous earth moving activities have removed much of the
natural soil as a result of grading and/or digging.
According to the USDA soil survey map, the APE encompasses two soil types (Figure 5). Most of the
area including the ridge top is composed of Cecil-Urban land complex(CeB). These soils are typically
sandy clay loams. They are well drained with little slope. If soil is exposed as in disturbed areas, erosion
can be severe. Urban development on this soil type is a recognizable characteristic, which suggest heavy
ground disturbance. Some areas are recorded as having up to 20 in(51 cm) of fill covering the original
surface or the soil has been removed by a process of cutting/grading. Typically, urban disturbance only
covers less than half of this series throughout the county with Cecil soils making up the remainder. Cecil
soils cover 50 to 70 percent of the Cecil-Urban land complex and are described as only moderately
disturbed. The second identified soil type is the Cecil sandy clay loam(CcD2), which is found along the
side slope in the eastern half of the APE. This soil is well drained with a slope of 8 to 15 percent. Soil
erosion is considered moderate to heavy. If present, the surface layer is typically mixed with subsoil from
tillage. It is unlikely an intact and significant archaeological site will be encountered in areas of urban
development, but it was believed prior to the reconnaissance survey that intact deposits could be present
along the Cecil soils that have avoided erosion and modern ground alterations.
A review of the site files show that very few archaeological investigations have been conducted in the
vicinity of the project, and no sites have been identified within a mile. OSA has cleared several projects
in the area of further archaeological work due to severe ground disturbance related to modern urban
development. The current project falls into a similar setting as these cleared projects, but it appeared at
first that the Julius Shakespeare Harris House 92 and property adjacent to Carolina Memorial Park in the
east had avoided most major urban disturbances. It was thought that these small pockets of undeveloped
lands could contain intact archaeological deposits associated with the early settlement of the region in an
area where undisturbed and intact properties are rare.
2

A historic map review was also conducted prior to field work. Most early maps from the 18th and 19th
centuries provide few details of the region illustrating only major routes and settlements. The 1910 soil
survey map for Cabarrus County is one of the first in which the project area can be accurately identified
(Figure 6). This map shows an alignment of roads similar to present day Winecoff School Road, South
Main Street, Mt Olivet Road, and the railroad. The map also depicts Mt Olive Methodist Church, an
unidentified structure to the south of the church, and a third structure southwest of the current location of
the Julius Shakespeare Harris House 92. Other nearby structures fall outside of the APE and were not
considered for this study. Due to the scale and/or schematic nature of early maps, there is the possibility
that the location of these structures are off. Mt. Olive Church seems to be situated in the same location
plotted on the map. The unidentified structure to the south corresponds with a local doctor's house/office
and its smaller adjacent outbuildings (Figures 7 and 8). These structures can be seen on the aerial view
(see Figures 2). It is not immediately clear if these structures are related to the image depicted on the
map, but it appears likely. The third structure was first thought to be J.S. Harris House 92, but the current
house was not built until the 1920s according to the State Historic Preservation Office's (SHPO) site
survey file. The object on the map appears to be unidentified structure that falls outside of the APE. No
evidence for this structure remains as its location is now developed.
The archaeological investigations at the Winecoff School Road improvement project consisted of a
reconnaissance survey with a NC DOT architect historian and a surface inspection of the APE (see
Figures 2). No subsurface excavations were conducted due to severe ground disturbance and the presence
of good surface visibility. All structures within the APE date from the 20th century with the Julius
Shakespeare Harris House 92 and the doctor's house/office from the first half of the century(see Figures
3 and 7). Both structures are dilapidated with many of the household fixtures removed. General Julius
Shakespeare Harris (1845-1936)was a member of the 5th North Carolina Cavalry in the Civil War and
an active member of the community and the United Confederate Veterans (his papers are available at the
University of North Carolina Library). It is reported that he inherited a house and property from his
father, Charles J. Harris; but House 92 within the project area is not the original family home. The
original 19th century house and property was located a few miles to the southwest on Poplar Tent Road.
The currently standing J.S. Harris House 92 was built by Julius Shakespeare Harris for his adoptive
daughter (nice)Lula Jay Harris and her husband R(alph?).O. Caldwell in the 1920s (1921 or 1923).
SHPO's site file for the house says that the property consisting of 19 acres was not occupied prior to the
construction of House 92. East of the J.S. Harris House 92 is a grassy lot that contains a former drive
running parallel with Winecoff School Road(Figure 9). This drive leads to second 20th century house,
which has experienced severe fire damage(Figures 10 and 11). Other than the former drive and drainage
ditches, the property between the two houses show no landscape features such as surface depressions and
rises associated with the removal of historic structures. Investigations on the eastern half of the project
area around the doctor's house/office found severed soil erosion and disturbed landforms caused mostly
by earth moving activities (Figures 12 and 13). No significant features were observed within the APE as
subsoil is at the surface(Figure 14). The surface was inspected but no cultural material was recovered.
The archaeological investigations for the proposed Winecoff School Road improvements suggest no
significant archaeological sites or deposits are within the project limits. The soils are severely disturbed
from previous earth moving activities and suffer from heavy soil erosion. Subsoil was observed at the
surface making it unlikely for intact subsurface deposits to be present. A surface inspection of the
exposed areas also failed to produce cultural material. A historic review of the properties suggests that no
19th century or earlier structures were once present within the APE, and the current structures do not
appear to contain significant archaeological deposits that will provide new or important information
regarding the culture of the region during the early 20th century. As long as impacts to the subsurface
occur within the defined APE, no further archaeological work is required for this project. Should the
design or permit requirements change to extend outside of the defined APE, further archaeological
consultation might be necessary.
3

SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION
See attached: ® Map(s) ❑ Previous Survey Info ® Photos F1 Correspondence
Other: images of historic maps consulted
Signed:
„ .. ._,.., 7/09/13
C. Damon Jones Date
NCDOT ARCHAEOLOGIST
4

One
Around Pro�ectArea y
W w� ^wY9�'� W r✓ 4 �f � ! 6 l
h 4 .•`.a �M d ,Y^ � � tir r
Wlnecaff Sch00l ROad
Project Area (RED)
# t
/
a '�,�"' � a,� / l�//''!r'r';: ,µ.. TM 4 � 'M,� ;�; � � Y �� Y" � ° �, r���"„„�� 1�� ,t” rllr` ^�,•.r `.
�',,• �° ",;,, `"i�� l � M+ � �' any" r / ,l // Ji� ,r ��� 0 �"y�"�
w l
�y
r Sri , fi �'f 1, �, � �s 0�" #t 1 s " ♦* '� '�^.' "
✓""fir+"
'� i�� ��! 4s � d p ,��iG l/ } 017�i �� ,,. ', �'r,/% ✓�/� �' f P�/ 'w •,� ��,��"�"'^,^.
e 1.
• ` 1
RV
i a��~h`'� ✓ ,k»'`, � �� PA� ...,,„"` /°�r f��F7"` �1, �� "� F �>1� °"�H�,%;��^rf� ,. f l�.�f kR�� � t,�t'"' .�� i�# r��" 6'.
0 1
r x w v t
Mlles
w E
' 0 1,000
l=
Cabarrus County Meters S
Figure 1. Topographic Setting of Project Area, Concord(1969,photorevised 1987) and Kannapolis
(1993),NC, USGS 7.5'Topographic Quadrangle.
5

q y
u
Mt. Olive Methodist Church
Property
r
t
�a
Locatioin of Unidentified Structure
r on 1910 Soil Map
(Doctor's House and Office)
� n
0
" Julius Shakespeare
Harris House#2 Property
Burnt House
e q�Q4
The Winecoff School Road ^
Project Area (RED) `°
Contour at 4 feet
r
0 500 N
L.. Feet W E
? 0 200
Cabarrus County Meters S
Figure 2. Aerial photograph of the APE showing development, landforms, and the location of historic
properties within the near the project area.
6

k
� pp
ri
Figure 3. General View of the Julius Shakespeare Harris House 92 looking west.
i
i
i
U�r
i
Figure 4. General View of the Mt Olive Methodist Church looking north.
7

d
i
•
l
The Winecoff School Raad Im°°°111111
Project Area (RED)
�� Ir
�y
ire
4.
i
5 �
0 500
Gx ? t I Feet
0 200 W. E
Cabarrus County Meters S
Figure 5. Aerial photograph of the APE showing development and soils within and near the project area.
8

�
�,
�' b
14`�
r X11[
� /
/ ��/
%i
�` neaupr,�
i
/ a'mu pow»j
i/0)
i
Figure 6. The 1910 Soil Survey Map for Cabarrus County showing the location of the project area.
' rr�
ry
M
f f',
9�u
u
r
( as
tl � f av
Figure 7. General View of the local doctor's house/office looking southeast.
9

ap ���I '� r �7 �P �. ✓b � � A /�d
F ' P,
W
�4 4
Il �.? : ✓rc.,� y o �' b re+��� Y'�� q4 b //7 r I 7) /v ,� �Yqr 11�, f� r 1
IK �1 �Ir r Yrk r ,y6�, � �'r �^ �iY r f a�uJ f r ". fl✓ r V I G i/
�ai �r a����ti/rr ara �r;!�ri; � � e fi�.l✓�di�
r, �ofl
n,
Figure 8. General View of the adjacent garage and outbuilding looking east.
px�
r
r�.
Figure 9. General View of the property in front of the J.S. Harries House looking east.
10

I�it iM.
� 11
i
Figure 10. General View of fire damaged 20th century house within the APE looking north.
Pe
"N'
/
i� iq j1 I,
v I
�� IWlli
m ..,
w ..
,
t-
Figure 11. General View of fire damaged 20th century house within the APE looking south.
11

Y
a
1 V P y
y1 7 � o i�'! ��!'{gyp>�r4✓�wP,�✓Y�;,,, ;� ;,,.
w �
�� I f � u r� ,� r r ✓ ✓iii✓✓ > > ✓�r��1
�%r � ✓ ,✓D ,�� ✓'r,�-6/ t�j rr7✓'I,v1✓m�" � ai ���� i ill �`��
I✓
1
a i
I
1
P.
W` u,I ✓ I
/ a i
✓ �/��i 1 71�yr ,l 1 r✓Y ✓ /r/
IG, �,',,,I d fi "ytr✓rl;��✓itii���ol✓�ye�Fhll l��iXi�i�ry ;� r'�o� ``lair %� / , ........ flig,r ..
r
✓j'�� r��, ,� '��5 r t✓�* '� ���a✓✓��'�/��✓rr' j'�r�i ,�� ,yew r, ri
rr %ST✓i� L i�✓ ✓fiJ /�✓u✓ ✓N �; ,tt„
� � r �nr r Rio �/�f� � ✓✓�� �� r �
rr/, a ,n' i/ �p '�" N a / ✓� J✓/ ✓sv iJ /i w
H
i
Figure 12. General View of ground disturbance in the eastern half of the project area looking south.
r
ry,a
� � ,w �,,,� �'�����,, � �, it �✓
i
7y H
Figure 13. General View of ground disturbance in the eastern half of the project area looking south.
12

iuuimi r
,,,�i�%/,�%,��///%/iii
l!` � %/�� i irrrrrrrrrrrrrr�/
Figure 14. General View of exposed subsoil at the surface looking northeast.
13

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M.Barros,Administrator
Beverly Eaves Perdue,Governor Office of Archives and Histon
Linda X.Carlisle,Secretary Division of Historical Resources
Jefficyl.Ctm%,,Deputy Secretary David Brook,Director
May 9,2012
MEMORANDUM
TO: Matt Wilkerson
Office of Human Environment
NCDOT Division of Highways
FROM: Ramona M. Bartos AA 0 , 1
SUBJECT: Amendment for Widening 1-85 Between China Grove and Kannapolis,1-3802,
Rowan and Cabarrus Counties,ER 05-0376
Thank you for your letter of April 25,2012,concerning the above project.
There are no known archaeological sites within the proposed project area. Based on our knowledge of the
area,it is unlikely that any archaeological resources that may be eligible for inclusion in the National Register of
Historic Places will be affected by the project. We, therefore,recommend that no archaeological investigation
be conducted in connection with this project.
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. 1n 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/Fox:(9M807-6570/8fJ7-6599

Prgject Tracking No.(Internal Use
13-05-0015
HISTORIC ARCHICTECTURE AND LANDSCAPES
ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS FORM
' This form only pertains to Historic Architecture and Landscapes for this project. It
is not valid for Archaeological Resources. You must consult separately with the
Archaeology Group.
PROJECT INFORMATION
Project No: I-3802 County: Cabarrus
WBSNo.: 36780.1.2 Document CE
Type:
Fed.Aid No: FANHIMF-085-2(61) 55 Funding ❑ State ® Federal
Federal ® Yes ❑No Permit n/a
Permit(s): Type(s):
Project Description:
Realignment and new railroad crossing for Winecoff School Road in Cabarrus County as part of the
I-85 widening and interchange improvements from north of NC 71 to US 29-601 Connector.
SUMMARY OF HISTORIC ARCHICTECTURE AND LANDSCAPES REVIEW
Description of review activities, results, and conclusions:
On June 13, 2013 a review HPOGIS website revealed the presence of two historic properties in
the project vicinity. In September 2013, one of the properties was recommended eligible for
National Register Listing: R.O. Caldwell House (CA 423) while the other property,the Dr. H.W.
Barrier House (CA 1561) was recommended not eligible. In a letter dated October 20, 2013 NC
HPO found both properties National Register Eligible.
ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS
Property Name: R.O Caldwell House Status: DE
Survey Site No.: CA 423 PIN.
Effects
❑ No Effect ❑ No Adverse Effect ❑ Adverse Effect
Explanation of Effects Determination:
4A _ 'r-� P ova
_ �--. Sew�-h.y.-, .� �s.�-�-��• nQ ��vL VS� �,
v
Historic Architecture and Landscapes E}TEC"I'S ASS}:SSML'N1'form jm Nlinor T ranspormiion Projects as Ouahlied in the 2007 Progrannnatic•Agreement.
Page 1 of 3

_ List of Environmental Commitments:
Property Name: Dr. H.W. Barrier House Status: DE
Survey Site No.: CA 1561 PIN.-
Effects ----e� 6-- t,c
❑ No Effect ❑ No Adverse Effect ❑ Adverse Effect
Explanation of Effects Determination:
Af� `�s 6c-�ve-� ��.F2c" —
List of Environmental Commitments:
SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION
❑Map(s) ❑Previous Survey Info. ❑Photos ❑Correspondence ®Design Plans
Historic Architecture and Landscapes GFFZCIS ASSBSSML•'Nl'form Jot Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
Page 2 of 3

FINDING BY NCDOT AND STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE
Historic Architecture and Landscapes—ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS
aqj�,j sa
NCDOT Archit tural Histor' n Date
&-e.a,5�X ' -"A 1a . G . /
State Historic Preservation Office RepreQntative Date
FHWA, for the Division Administrator, or other Federal Agency Date
FHWA intends to use SHPO's concurrence as a basis of a"de minimis"finding for the following properties,pursuant to
Section 4(f):
Historic Architecture and Londvcape.r lit l EC7S ASSCSSMl3NTJorm jot Alinor"Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Progrannnatic Agreement.
Page 3 of 3

Federal Aid#: NHIMF-85-2(61)55 TIP#: 1-3802 County:Cabarrus
CONCURRENCE FORM FOR ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS
Project Description: Widen 1-85 from NC 73 to the US 29/601 Connector in Cabarrus County
On July 26,2011,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 on the
reverse of this signature page.
Signed:
-712�el 2Z41
Representativ CI)Ofr Date
?-2 6
FHWA,for the Division Administrator,or other Federal Agency Date
Representative,BPO Date
9 Q6./)
tate Historic Preservation Officer G Date

00
tx
c
� 0
V
A
in
kn
10,
tA
00
ur,
CL

Federal Aid g FANHIMF-085-2(61)55 TIP#1-3802/1-3610 County: Rowan/Cabarrus
CONCURRENCE FORM FOR PROPERTIES NOT ELIGIBLE FOR
THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES
Project Description:
On December 21,2010,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 at historic architectural resources photograph review session/consultation and
All parties present agreed
❑ There are no properties over fifty years old within the project's Area of Potential Effects(APE).
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 based on the historical information available
and the photographs of each property,the properties identified as �- 4 !J are considered not eligible for
the National Register and no further evaluation of them is necessary.Photographs of these.properties are attached.
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 b'ased
upon the above concurrence,all compliance for historic architecture with Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act and GS 121-12(a)has been completed for this project.
❑ More information is requested on properties
Signed:
Representative,NCDOtJ Date
FHWA,for the Division Administrator,or other Federal Agency Date
Representative,HPO Date
State Historic Preservation Officer bate
If a survey report is prepared,a final copy of this form mid the attached I ist will be included.

Federal Aid# TIN 1-3802 County: Rowan/Cabarrus
CONCURRENCE FORM FOR PROPERTIES NOT ELIGIBLE FOR
THE NATIONA1,REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES
I'rojecl,ascription: Widen 1-85 and improve interchanges
On March 24,2008 representatives of the
0 North Carolina Department of Transportation(NCDOT)
❑ Federal Highway Administration(FIIWA)
North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office(HPO)
❑ Other
Reviewed the subject project at
❑ Scoping meeting
M Historic architectural resources photograph review session/consultation
f-1 Other
All parties present agreed
❑ There are no properties over fifty years old within the project's area of potential effects.
There are no propertics less than fifty years old which are considered to meet Criteria Consideration G within the
project's,area of potential effects.
There are properties over fifty years old within the project's Area of Potential Efl'bets(APE),but based on the
historical information available and the photographs of each property,the properties identified as I are
considered not eligible for the National Register and no further evaluation of them is necessary.
There are no National Register-listed or Study Listed properties within the project's area of potential effects.
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 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act and GS 121-12(a)has been completed for this project,
There are no historic properties affected by this project. (Attach any notes or documents as needed)
Signed:
Refresentad7v-e,RCDOT T- Date
FHWA,for the Division Administrator,or other Federal Agency Date
Representative,BPO Date
State Historic Preservation Officer Date
If a survey report is prepared,a final copy ofthis form and the attached list will be included.

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M.Bartos,Administrator
Pat McCrory,Governor Office of Archives and History
Susan Kluttz,Secretary Division of Historical Resources
Kevin Cherry,Deputy Secretary
October 30, 2013
MEMORANDUM
TO: Shelby Reap, Architectural Historian
NCDOT/PDEA/HEU
FROM: Ramona Bartos
RE: Historic Architectural Eligiblity Evaluation, Realignment and New Railroad Crossing for
Winecoff School Road, WBS #36780.1,2, Cabarrus County, ER 13-2237
Thank you for your submittal of September 27, 2013, transmitting the above survey report.
For the purpose of compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, we concur
that the R. 0. Caldwell House (CA 0423, previously surveyed as the Second Julius Shakespeare Harris
House) is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion C for
architecture and that the proposed National Register boundaries appear appropriate.
At this time we cannot concur with the report's recommendation regarding the Dr. H. W. Barrier
House (CA 1561). The office and adjoining garage date to the 1940s (though the garage appears to have
been added later) and are well integrated into the 1935 house's design, with compatible style and scale
and matching materials. While the apartment was added later still, it appears to more likely date to the
1940s or 1950s, with much later interior renovations and stair additions. The apartment repeats design
elements of the original house, notably the soldier courses, and its siting, to the rear of the office, does
not substantially detract from the overall design of the house. The property illustrates a unique and
significant building evolution and we believe that it retains sufficient historic integrity to be eligible for
listing in the National Register under Criterion C for architecture. Our proposed National Register
boundaries correspond to the existing parcel lines for the property (Cabarrus County PIN
#56129239000000).
The submitted survey report makes no mention of the Mount Olivet Methodist Church (CA 0503),
which was identified during the 1981 Cabarrus County architectural survey, and is included in Peter
Kaplan's The Historic Architecture of Cabarrus County. The church falls within the project's area of
potential effect and is shown on the USGS map excerpt on page 2 of the report. We recommend that the
Location;109 East Jones Street,Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address:4617 Mail Service Center,Raleigh NC 276994617 Telephone/Fax:[phone]-6599

National Register eligibility of this church and its adjacent cemetery be evaluated and the findings
reported to us.
The above comments are offered in accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act and the regulations of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation at 36 CFR 800. If you have
questions concerning them, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, Environmental Review Coordinator,
at 919-807-6579 or [e-mail] . Thank you.
cc: Mary Pope Furr, NCDOT, [e-mail]

. r
�i 2006
North Ca>xo is Department of Cultural Resources # i "O a '
State Historic Preservation Office
Patar It.!SRadbeck,AdminisW%Wr .
Rlitltaci lf.l:txlry,(+txYriMir Offict of Archim and:listnry
l.ixlxth C.idrmtts,ti�cretary Dirixitar(if I lixtnrical iitx UMS
(:row,Deputy&Mtary [)a a Director
lirok, icectar
Jeffrry J.
March 9,2006
MEMORANDUM
TO: Greg'I`horpe,Ph.D.,Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
NCDOT Division of Highways
FROM: Peter Sandbeck ` �
SUBJECT: Historic Architectural Resources Survey Report,1-85 Widening From NC 73 to the US
29/601 Connector,NC 152 Interchange improvements at US 29/601 and 1-85 Bridge Over
US 29 on NC 152, 1-3802/1-3610/B-3029,Cabarrus and Rowan Counties$ ER 05-0376
Thank you for your letter of December 20,2006, transmitting the survey report by Debbie Bevin of Circa,
Inc.
For purposes of compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act,we concur that the
following properties are eligible for the National Register of Historic Places under the criterion cited:
• Blake House, E side of SR 1622 (trinity Church Road),.2 mi.N of junction with NC 73,Odell
School vicinity,is eligible for the National Register under Criterion C for architecture as a notable
example of an early-nineteenth-century Cabarrus County vernacular house. The house exhibits
Federal-style trite and is unusual for its enclosed stair that rises directly from the front porch.
We concur with the proposed National Register boundary as described,justified,and delineated in the
survey report.
• Goodman Farm,W side SR 1790(Winecoff Road) S of intersection with SR 1778 (Orphanage Road),
Concord vicinity,is eligible for the National Register under Criteria A and C for agriculture and
architecture. The property is a now rare example of the dairy farms that once doted the county in the
first quarter of the twentieth century. The complex is representative of a dairy farm of the period and
includes the 82-acre parcel, Queen Anne farmhouse,and suiviv.ing outbuildings,
VVe concur with the proposed National Register boundary as described,justified,and delineated in the
St1rYe)*report.
Locat(oa Mailing Addroaa Talepbmta/Fax
5117 N.lSkwnt'+inYi,Ital4i N(: dGI7 Mail tiantirr(kneer,Ralcih N(:2767'}4617 {91'n753-i763/73;Sr:53
.ADMINISTRATION !: J{' 753(547/71 5 41Nq
RESTORATION 515 N.PAIMnt StnYt,Rik#NC 46,17 hied Smice(kntcr,Ratco N(;2767746it7 t JI
117 73,9•G5$Sf 7t 541N�1
SURVEY&PLANNING 515 N.likumt st(m.1talcigil,Nc 4617 klail scrsict(:rarer,lWrW,i N6:2769'-46{7 C }

r purposes of compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act,we concur that-the
following properti es and the remaining properties noted in the report are not eligible for the National Register
of Historic Places.
• Samuel Deal House,SR 1221 (Old Beatty Road),North Kannapolis vicinity,is not eligible for the
National Register because it has lost architectural integrity and integrity of setting.
• Shinn House, 1410 N.Main St.,China Grove,is not eligible for the National Register because it has
lost iinmediate setting integrity,thus compromising the house's ability to convey its architectural
significance.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory.Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR
Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator,at 919/733-4763. In all future
communication concerning this project,please cite the above-referenced tracking number.
cc: Mary Pope Furr,NCDOT
Debbie Nevin, Circa, Inc.

AXE
&I
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Peter 13.Stridbeck,Administrator
Michael K Emley,crovmf Office o -FECIN
'
Lisbeth C.EN-Aw,Stxwtary Divi' o
jeffrqj.Craw,Depury.Socreraty D Dirccwr
April 12,2005 U
MEMORANDUM
1k
TO: Gregory J.Thorpe,Ph.D.,Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch CT
NCDOT Division of Highways INTAL
FROM: Peter Sandbeck PA 9 65
SUBJECT: Environmental Assessment,Proposed Widening and Interchange Improvements
Of 1-85 from NC 73 to US 29/601 Connector(TIP Project No. 1-3802),and
NC-152 Interchange Improvements at US 29/601 and 1-85 (TIP Project Nos.
1-3610&B-3039),Rowan and Cabarrus Counties,ER 05-0376
We have received notification from the State Clearinghouse and your memorandum of February 16,2005,
concerning die above project.
We have conducted a search of our maps and files and located the following structure of historical or
architectural importance within the general area of this project:
+ (RO 317) Samuel Deal House,south side SR 1221,0.05 miles west of junction with SR 1440
We recommend that a Department.of Transportation architectural historian identify and evaluate any
structures over fifty years of age within the project area,and report the findings to US.
Your memorandum noted that archaeological site 31CA1 82 is located within the project area. The staff of
the NC Department of Transportation recorded this site in 1989 in connection with the 1-2303 project.
Although no site form was submitted for the site,it has been evaluated as not eligible,for the National
Register of Historic Places and no additional investigation of this site is recommended.
If the proposed improvements to 1-85 are to be confined to the existing right-of-way,no archaeological
investigation is recommended. If new right-of-way is to be acquired,please forward the location to us for
additional evaluation.
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.
Location Malting Address TelephanclFax
AnMINISTRATION 507 N.Blount street,Raleigh NC 4617 Ma Smice Ccntet,Raleigh NC 27699-4617 (9M733.4763/735-8653
RESTORATION 315 N.Blount Street Raleigh NC 4617 klaO Scnicc Center,Raleigh NC 27699.4617 (+19)733.6547/713-4801
SURVEY&PLANNING 515 N.Blount Street,Rticip)%NC 4617 Mad Smice Center,Raleigh NC 27699.4617 (919)733-65451715-4001

Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator,at 919/733-4763. In all future
communication concerning this project,please cite the above-referenced tracking number.
cc: State Clearinghouse
Mary Pope Furr,NCDOT
Matt Wilkerson,NCDOT

MAR 10 2 79
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND Project Number
NATURAL RESOURCES 05.0254
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH unty
Cabn asiRowan
Inter-Agency Project Review Response
NC DOT Proposed project is to widen
Project Name Type of Project
- arm 4 191TUTUT-111Mn
Comments provided by: NC 73 to US29-601 Connector.
❑ Regional Program Person TIP#3802 and NC 152 interchange
Improvements at US291601&
Regional Supervisor for Public Water Supply Section 1-85. TIP#1-3610&B-3039.
❑ Central Office program person
Britt Seger-Mooresville RO 3-8-05
Name, Date:
qjTelephone number: 7654
Program within Division of Environmental Health: MAR 19 zom
❑ Public Water Supply
❑ Other, Name of Program.
r,5 6 '7."q
Response (check all applicable): 19
❑ No objection to project as proposed
APR 2005
❑ No comment
RECEjft
&RaWy';
❑ Insufficient information to complete review
❑ Comments attached ~ Ir
See comments below
ooe_�
Return to:
Public Water Supply Section
Environmental Review Coordinator
for the
Division of Environmental Health

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND Project Number
NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH County
CabarrWRowan
Proposed project is to widen
Inter-Agency Project Review Response 1-85 from 4 lanes to 8 from
NC 73 to US29-601 Connector.
Project Name NC DOT Type of Project
❑ The applicant should be advised that plans and specifications for all water system
improvements must be approved by the Division of Environmental Health prior to the
award of a contract or the initiation of construction (as required by 15A NCAC 18C
.0300et. seq.). For information,contact the Public Water Supply Section, (919)
733-2321.
❑ This project will be classified as a non-community public water supply and must comply
with state and federal drinking water monitoring requirements. For more information the
applicant should contact the Public Water Supply Section, [phone].
C) If this project is constructed as proposed, we will recommend closure of — feet of
adjacent waters to the harvest of shellfish. For information regarding the shellfish
sanitation program, the applicant should contact the Shellfish Sanitation Section at (252)
726-6827.
❑ The soil disposal area(s) proposed for this project may produce a mosquito breeding
problem. For information concerning appropriate mosquito control measures, the
applicant should contact the Public Health Pest Management Section at [phone].
❑ The applicant should be advised that prior to the removal or demolition of dilapidated
structures, a extensive rodent control program may be necessary in order to prevent the
migration of the rodents to adjacent areas. For information concerning rodent control,
contact the local health department or the Public Health Pest Management Section at
[phone].
—1 The applicant should be advised to contact the local health department regarding their
requirements for septic 'tank installations (as required under 15A NCAC 18A. 1900 et.
sep.). For information concerning septic tank and other on-site waste disposal methods,
contact the On-Site Wastewater Section at(919) 733-2895.
0 The applicant should be advised to contact the local health department regarding the
sanitary facilities required for this project.
If existing water lines will be relocated during the construction, plans for the water line
relocation must be submitted to the Division of Environmental Health, Public Water
Supply Section, Technical Services Branch, 1634 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North
Carolina 27699-1634, [phone],
El For Regional and Central Office comments, see the reverse side of this form.
Jim MeRight PWS 03-08-05.
Reviewer Section/Branch Date
S:\Pw"ngela W\Clearinghouse\Review Response Pgs 1 and 2 for input.doc

us
William G.Ross Jr':Secratsry
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W.Klimek,P.E.Director
> Division of Water Quality
Coleen H.Sullins
Division of Water Quality
March 22,2005
MEMORANDUM
To: lyfelba McGee
From: Brian Wrenn ?0
Subject: Comments on proposed project to widen 1-85 from 4 lanes to 8 from INC 7') to US 29/601 Connector and
14C 152 Interchange Improvements at US29160I and 1-85 in Rowan and Cabarrus Counties,TIP's 1-3802.
1-3610,B-3039,15ENR No.05-0254.
Reference your correspondence dated February 16.2005 in which you requested comments for the referenced
project. Preliminary analysis of the project reveals the potential for multiple impacts to perennial streams and
jurisdictional wetlands in the project area. More specifically,impacts to:
[7_ Stream Name I River Basin Stream Classification(s) I Stream Index Number
Town Creek Yadkin C 12-I15-3
Cold Water Creek.source to 0.5 mi. Yadkin WS-1V 13-17-9-4-(0.5)
downstream of Rowan Co.SR 1221
Cold Water Creek(Lake Fisher),O.j raiie Yadkin WS-]V;CA
downstream of Rowan Co.SR 1221 to
Dam at Lake Fisher
Cold Water Creek.dam at Lake Fisher to Yadkin C
Irish Buffalo Creek I
Threemile Branch I Yadkin I C 13-17-9-4-5 --7.
LIrish Buffalo Creek I Yadkin I C 13-17-9-(2-) J
Further investietitions;at a hip-her resolution should be undertaken to verify the presence of other streams and/or
jurisdictional wetlands in the area. In the event that any jurisdictional areas are identified.the Division of Water
Quality requests that NCDOT consider the following environmental issues for the proposed project-
A. One of the surface water impacts sites for project is the Cold Water Creek. In the project area,this surface
water has a Water Quality Classification of WS-IV Critical Area. Therefore,the potential for impacts to
waters that are used for municipal drinking water is possible. Please locate and identify ail water intakes in
the projects study area. In addition,please include their locations in all future documentation. In addition, it
should be noted that alternatives to avoid impacts upstream of any water supply intakes will need to be
considered during the development of the environmental documents.
B The document should provide a detailed and itemized presentation of the proposed impacts to wetlands and
streams with corresponding mapping.
C. There should be a discussion on mitigation plans for unavoidable impacts. If mitigation is required, it is
preferable to present a conceptual(if not finalized) mitigation plan with the environmental documentation.
While the NCDWQ realizes that thit may not always be practical, it should be noted that for projects
VXT
14CDONR
N.C. Division of Water Quality 1650 Me#Service Center Raleigh,NC 27699-1650 [phone]
Customer Service: 1800 623-7748

Michael F.Easley,Governor
William G.Ross Jr.,Secretary
Q\ North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
A 0
7 Alan W.Klimek,P.E.Director
>
requiring mitigation,appropriate mitigation plans will be required prior to issuance of a 401 Water Quality
Certification.
D. Review of the project reveals the presence of surface waters classified as Water Supply Critical Area in the
project study area. Given the potent for impacts to these resources during the project implementation, the
DWQ requests that DOT strictly adhere to North Carolina regulations entitled"Design Standards in Sensitive
Watersheds" (15A NCAC 04B .0024)throughout design and construction of the project. This would apply
for any area that drains to streams having WS CA(Water Supply Critical Area)classifications.
E. Review of the project reveals that Water Supply Critical Area Waters will potentially be impacted by the
project. If an alternative located upstream of the drinking water supply intake is selected as the preferred
alternative,the NCDOT will be required to design,construct,and maintain hazardous spill catch basins in the
project area. The number of catch basins installed should be determined by the design of the bridge,so that
runoff would enter said basin(s)rather than flowing directly into the stream,and in consultation with the
DWQ.
F Welland and stream impacts should be avoided(including sediment and erosion control structures/measures)
to the maximum extent practical. If this is not possible,alternatives that minimize wetland impacts should be
chosen. Mitigation for unavoidable impacts will be required by DWQ for impacts to wetlands in excess of
one acre and/or to streams in excess of 150 linear feet.
G. Borrow/waste areas should not be located in wetlands. It is likely that compensatory mitigation will be
required if wetlands are impacted by waste or borrow.
H. If foundation test borings are necessary; it should be noted in the document. Geotechnical work is approved
under General 401 Certification Number 3027/Nationwide Permit No. 6 for Survey Activities.
1. In accordance with the Environmental Management Commission's Wetlands Rules (15A NCAC
2H.0506(b)(6)),mitigation will be required for impacts of greater than 150 linear feet to any single perennial
stream.In the event that mitigation becomes required,the mitigation plan should be designed to replace
appropriate lost functions and values. In accordance with the NCDWQ Wetlands Rules (15A NCAC
2H.0506(h)(3)1, the Wetland Restoration Program may be available for use as stream mitigation.
I. Sediment and erosion control measures should not be placed in wetlands.
K. While the use of National Weiland Inventory(NWI)maps and soil surveys is a useful office tool, their
inherent inaccuracies require that qualified personnel perform onsite wetland delineations prior to permit
approval.
L. An analysis of cumulative and secondary impacts anticipated as a result of this project is required.
M. Environmental assessment alternatives should consider design criteria that reduce the impacts to streams and
wetlands from storm water runoff. These alternatives should include road designs that allow for treatment of
the storm water runoff through best management practices as detailed in Best Management Pracricesfor the
Prolection of Surface Waters,such as grassed swales,buffer areas,preformed scour holes,retention basins,
etc.
N. When practical,the DWQ requests that bridges be replaced on the existing location with road closure. If a
detour proves necessary,remediation measures in accordance with the NCDWQ requirements for General
401 Certification No.3366/Nationwide Permit No.33 (Temporary Construction,Access and Dewatering)
must be followed.
N.C.Division of Water Quality 1650 Mail Service Center Raleigh,NC 27699-1650 [phone]
Customer Service: 1 800 623-7748

\\.NN A Michael F.Easley,Governor
I William G.Ross Jr.,Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W-Klimek,P.E.Director
O. Where streams must be crossed,the DWQ prefers bridges be used in lieu of culverts. However,we realize
that economic considerations often require the use of culverts. Please be advised that culverts should be
countersunk to allow unimpeded passage by fish and other aquatic organisms. Moreover,in areas where high
quality wetlands or streams are impacted,a bridge may prove preferable. When applicable,DOT should not
install the bridge bents in the creek,to the maximum extent practicable.
P. Based on the information presented in the document,the magnitude of impacts to wetlands and streams may
require an Individual Permit application to the Corps of Engineers and corresponding 401 Water Quality
Certification. Please be advised that a 401 Water Quality Certification requires satisfactory protection of
water quality to ensure that water quality standards are met and no wetland or stream uses are lost. Final
permit authorization will require the submittal of a formal application by the NCDOT and written
concurrence from the NCDWQ. Please be aware that any approval will be contingent on appropriate
avoidance and minimization of wetland and stream impacts to the maximum extent practical,the
development of an acceptable stormwater management plan,and the inclusion of appropriate mitigation plans
where appropriate.
Thank you for requesting our input at this time. The DOT is reminded that issuance of a 401 Water Quality
Certification requires that appropriate measures be instituted to ensure that water quality standards are met and
designated uses are not degraded or lost. If you have any questions or require additional information,please contact
Brian L.Wrenn at 919-733-5715,
M. Eric Alsineyer,Corps of Engineers Raleigh Field Office
Steve Lund,Corps of Engineers Asheville Field Office
Gary Jordan,USFWS
Travis Wilson,NCWRC
Chris Militcher,USEPA
Central Res
File Copy
CACorrespondence\2005 EA,EIS,FONSIV-3802 1-36 10 13-303%scoping cominentsdoc
N.C.Division of Water Quality 1650 Mail Service Center Raleigh,NC 27699-1650 [phone]
Customer Service: 1800 623-7748

4g.
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Air Quality
Pat McCrory Sheila C, Holman John E. Skvarla, III
Governor Director Secretary
July 3,2013
Phil Conrad
Cabarrus-Rowan Metropolitan Planning Organization
135 Cabarrus Avenue East, Suite 101
Concord,NC 28025
Dear Mr. Conrad:
Thank you for forwarding the draft of the Conformity Analysis and Determination Report for the
Metrolina Area Cabarrus-Rowan MPO dated June 14,2013. The amendments to the Long Range
Transportation Plan(LRTP) and Transportation Improvement Program(TIP)are to accommodate the
changes to projects I-3802A, I-380213, and I-3803A on Interstate 85 by the Cabarrus-Rowan Metropolitan
Planning Organization. The North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division
of Air Quality(DAQ)has completed its review of the report and analysis.
The analysis that is provided in this report demonstrates that the projected emissions from the
amended projects do not exceed the emission limits established by the SIP(or base year emissions, in
areas where no SIP has been approved or found adequate by EPA). The comparisons were completed for
each of the analysis years for the affected counties. The amendment report is very comprehensive and
adequately addresses the details of the analysis. As all comments were adequately addressed,the
Division of Air Quality believes this amendment report contains the appropriate air quality information to
support a conformity determination on the amended LRTPs and TIPs for the Metrolina Maintenance
Area.
Thank you again for the opportunity to review this amendment and analysis. If you have any
questions,you may contact Heather Hildebrandt of my staff at(919)707-8424.
Sincerely,
Sheila C. Holman
SCH: lhjh
Cc: Terry Arellano,DOT Heather Hildebrandt,DAQ Myra Immings,FTA
Dianna Smith,EPA Eddie Dancausse,FHWA
1641 Mail Service Center,Raleigh,North Carolina 27699-1641
217 West Jones Street, Raleigh,North Carolina 27603
Phone:[phone]/Fax:[phone]
Internet:www,ncair.org
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer—Made in part by Recycled Paper

UK* North Carolina I I I . ]
Department of Environment and Noah Carolina
Natural Resources FOREST Division of Forest Resources
SERVICE
NCDENR Michael F. Easley, Governor N- Stanford M.Adams, Director
C
William G. Ross Jr.,Secretary 2411 Old US 70 West
Clayton,NC 27520
March 11,2005
6
&
'P
AAR
MENU17,AND-10
TO: Melba McGee,Office of Legislative Affairs
FROM: Bill Pickens,NC Division Forest Resources
SUBJECT: DOT Scoping for Widening 1-85 from NC 73 to US 291601 Connector in Cabarrus and
11� Z2
Rowan Counties
PROJECT r1r: 05-0254 and TIP 71-3610&B-3039
The North Carolina Division of Forest Resources has reviewed the referenced scoping document and
offers the following comments that should be addressed in the EA concerning impacts to woodlands.
1. The widening of an existing roadway usually has fewer impacts to forest resources than a new
location project.So that we can evaluate construction impact, list, by timber type, the total forest land
acreage that is removed or taken out of forest production as a result of the project. If no impacts will
occur please state so in the document.
2. Additionally,efforts should be made to align corridors to minimize impacts to woodlands in the
following order of priority:
• Managed, high site index woodland
• Productive forested woodlands
• Managed, lower site index woodlands
• Unique forest ecosystems
• Unmanaged, fully stocked woodlands
• Unmanaged,cutover woodlands
• Urban woodlands
3. The EA should include a summary of the potential productivity of the forest stands affected by the
proposed project. Potential productivity is quantified by the soil series, and is found in the USDA Soil
Survey for the county involved.
4. The provisions the contractor will take to utilize the merchantable timber removed during
construction. Emphasis should be on selling all wood products. However, if the wood products
cannot be sold then efforts should be made to haul off the material or turn it into mulch with a tub
grinder. This practice will minimize the need for debris burning, and the risk of escaped fires and
smoke management problems to residences,highways, schools,and towns.
1616 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1601
Phone: [phone] \ FAX: [phone] \ Internet: w";vw.dfr.statc.nc.us
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY 1 AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER-50% RECYCLED 110% POST

1
5. If woodland burning is needed,the contractor must comply with the laws and regulations of open
burning as covered under G.S. 113-60.21 through G.S. 113-60.31. Cabarrus and Rowan County are
classified as non-high hazard counties,and GS, 113-60.24 requiring a regular burning permit would
apply.
6. The provisions that the contractor will take to prevent erosion and damage to foresdand outside the
right-of-way. Trees,particularly the root system,can be permanently damaged by heavy equipment.
Efforts should be to avoid skinning of the tree trunk,compacting the soil, adding layers of fill,
exposing the root system,or spilling petroleum or other substances.
7. The impact upon any existing greenways in the proposed project area should be addressed.
We appreciate the opportunity to comment on the proposed project,and encourage the impact on our
forestland be considered during the planning process.
cc: Barr,,y New

tJ
AN 2005
RECEIVED
4000W.8 O
Oft
A �^
c"f �
� J t
9 North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission 92
Richard B. Hamilton,Executive Director
TO: .Melba McGee, Environmental Coordinator
Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs, DENR.
FROM: Marla Chambers, Western NCDOT Permit Coordinator � � . eLIX&I,
Habitat Conservation Program,NC'WR.0
DATE: March 21,2005
SUBJECT: Scoping review of NCDOT's proposed projects to widen I-85 from NC 73 to US
29-601 Connector and NC 152 interchange improvements at US 29-601 and 1-85.
Cabarrus and Rowan Counties, TIP No's. 1-3802,1-3610 and B-3039.
North Carolina Department of Transportation(NCDOT) is requesting comments from the
Forth Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission(NCWRC)regarding impacts to fish and
wildlife resources resulting from the subject project. Staff biologists have reviewed the
information provided and have the following preliminary comments. These comments are
provided in accordance with the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act(42 U.S.C.
4332(2)(c)) and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act(48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C.
661-667d),
The NCDOT is initiating an environmental study of the proposed projects to widen 1-85
from 4 lanes to 8 lanes from NC 73 to the US 29-601 Connector, a distance of 13.6 miles, and
NC 152 interchange improvements at US 29-601 and 1-85. Cabarrus County is one of the fastest
growing counties in the state. Commercial and industrial development is intense in portions of
the project area. It appears over half of the project lies within a Water Supply Protected Area
and a portion is within the Critical Area. More than 30 streams are located in the project area.
The eastern creeksheil(Villosa delumbis), a state Significantly Rare mussel species, has been
observed in Cold Water Creek. In addition, the Carolina creekshell(V. vaughaniana), Federal
Species of Concern (FSC) and state Endangered,and the Carolina darter(Etheostoma collis),
FSC and state Special Concern,are found in adjacent watersheds. Stormwater management is
important both within the project corridor and the surrounding developing areas. We strongly
encourage NCDOT and local officials to use low impact development techniques (see
www.lowimpactdevelopment.ore for information) to manage stormwater quantity and quality
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries - 1721 Mail Service Center - Raleigh,NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]

1-85 widening&US 152 interchange improvements
Cabarrus and Rowan Counties 2 March 21,2005
and there should be no net gain in flood stage. Sediment and erosion control measures for
sensitive watersheds will likely be needed for portions of the project.
In addition, to help facilitate document preparation and the review process,our general
information needs are outlined below:
1. Description of fishery and wildlife resources within the project area, including a listing of
federally or state designated threatened, endangered, or special concern species. Potential
borrow areas to be used for project construction should be included in the inventories. A
listing of designated plant species can be developed through consultation with the
following programs:
The Natural Heritage Program
htip://www.ncsl2arks.net/nhp
1601 Mail Service Center
Raleigh,N. C. 27699-1601
and,,
NCDA Plant Conservation Program
P. 0. Box 27647
Raleigh, N. C. 27611
[phone]
2. Description of any streams or wetlands affected by the project. If applicable, include the
linear feet of stream that will be channelized or relocated.
3. Cover type maps showing wetland acreage impacted by the project. Wetland acreage
should include all project-related areas that may undergo hydrologic change as a result of
ditching, other drainage,or filling for project construction. Wetland identification may
be accomplished through coordination with the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE). If the USACE is not consulted,the person delineating wetlands should be
identified and criteria listed.
4. Cover type maps showing acreage of upland wildlife habitat impacted by the proposed
project. Potential borrow sites and waste areas should be included.
5. Show the extent to which the project will result in loss, degradation, or fragmentation of
wildlife habitat(wetlands or uplands).
6. Include the mitigation plan for avoiding,minimizing or compensating for direct and
indirect degradation in habitat quality as well as quantitative losses.
7. Address the overall environmental effects of the project construction and quantify the
contribution of this individual project to environmental degradation.

4-85 widening&US 152 interchange improvements
Cabarrus and Rowan Counties 3 March 21,2005
8. Provide a discussion of the probable impacts on natural resources, which will result from
secondary development, facilitated by the improved road access.
9. if construction of this facility is to be coordinated with other state, municipal,or private
development projects, a description of these projects should be included in the
environmental document, and all project sponsors should be identified.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide input in the early planning stages of this project.
If you have any questions regarding these comments,please contact me at(704)485-2384.
cc: Brian Wrenn,NCDWQ
Marella Buncick, USFWS
Sarah McRae,NCNBP

Nicole Bennett
From: Carl Pless <[e-mail]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 13,20113:25 PM
To: Nicole Bennett
Cc: Debbie Bost; Christine Barrier
Subject: RE:1-3802 Voluntary Agricultural Districts
Ms. Bennett,
Debbie Bost, CED and I have looked at the map that you sent. As far as we can determine,we do not have any Voluntary
Agricultural Districts next to 1-85 in the Cabarrus County portion of the map that you sent.
Thanks,
Carl
From: Nicole Bennett rmailto:n ben nett@)mulkeyinc.coml
Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 20112:49 PM
To: Carl Pless;
Subject: 1-3802 Voluntary Agricultural Districts
Mr. Pless:
Per our conversation, I'm sending a map of the study area for the 1-85 widening project I'm working on. I need to know if
there are any Voluntary Agricultural Districts in the Cabarrus County portion of the study area and,if so,the details of
each.
Let me know if this map is sufficient or if you need something at a larger scale.
Thanks so much for your help.
Nicole
Nicole H.Bennett,AICP
Project Manager
Mulkey Engineers&Consultants
6750 Tryon Road
Cary,North Carolina 27518
Direct:919-958-1921
Mobile:[phone]
Fax:[phone]
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties,

u>� EI V `
CABARRUS — ROWAN URBAN AREA
METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION
MAI fn'
SUR
CHINA GROVE * CLEVELAND * CONCORD * GRANITE QUARRY �� MA" N �Q
CAaARRUS COUNTY • « �,is�'il�1 �
LANDIS * MOUNT PLEASANT * ROCKWELL « ROWAN COUNTY * SALISBURY
March 18,2005
Mr. Greg Thorpe
NCDOT-Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh,NC 27699-1548
SUBJECT: Proposed Widening oft-85 TIP Project No. I-3802
Dear Mr. Thorpe:
I am providing a written response to the letter dated February 16,2005 regarding the
widening of I-85. Our comments are as follows: The MPO would anticipate further
discussions regarding these details upon completion of the Federal Environmental
Assessment. This important highway corridor involves several pedestrian and
greenway plans from our local Parrs and Recreation Departments. We will provide
further information on these plans and projects at the time of project design.
Furthermore,the Cabarrus-Rowan MPO requested comments from the Technical
Coordinating Committee and Transportation Advisory Committee of the Cabarrus-
Rowan Urban Area on this project.
The Cabarrus-Rowan MPO appreciates the opportunity to comment on this state TIP
project. If you should have any questions regarding these comments,please contact
our staff at(704)795-7528.
Sincerely,
4� aAie�
Carolyn Carpenter,TAC Chair
Cabarrus-Rowan MPO
cc: Mr.Mike Nunn, MPO Executive Director
Mr. Rodger Lentz,TCC Chair
Ms. Linda Dose,NCDOT
Mr. Benton Payne,NCDOT
135 CABARRu5 AVENUE EAST « SUITE 101 6 CONCORD,NC * 28025 * PHONE [phone] * FAX [phone]

A N N A P 0 L I S
March 11, 2005
Ms. Gail Grimes,P.E.
Assistant Branch Manager, Project Development&Environmental Analysis Branch
NCDOT
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh,NC 27699-1548
Subject: Environmental Assessment,Proposed Widening and Interchange
Improvements of 1-85 in Rowan and Cabarrus Counties(TIP Project No.
1-3802P 1-3610, and B-3039)
Dear Ms. Grimes:
The City of Kannapolis is in receipt of your letter dated February 16, 2005 requesting
comments related to the environmental study of the above referenced NCDOT project.
We have reviewed the details of this project and offer no specific comments other than
that we are in full support and are available to provide any assistance needed for your
work in and around the City of Kannapolis.
Please feel free to contact me at 704-920-4333 should you have any needs that our City
can help you with.
Sincerely,
Mike gg
City Manager
CC: Mayor and City Council
C I T Y 0 F X A N N A P 0 L 1 5
PO.Box 1199 Kannapolis,NC 28082-1199 T 704.920.4300 F 704.938.5919
246 Oak Avenue Kannapolis,NC 28081 %Yw%vdtyofkannapo1iscorn

APPENDIX C - NCDOT RELOCATION ASSISTANCE

EIS RELOCATION REPORT
North Carolina Department of Transportation
RELOCATION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
® E.I.S. ❑ CORRIDOR ❑ DESIGN
WBS ELEMENT: 36780.1.1 1 COUNTY Rowan/Cabarrus Alternate 1 of 1 Alternate
T.I.P. NO.: 1-3802/1-3610
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: 1-85 Widening and Interchange Improvements from North of NC 73 to
US-29-601 Connector
ESTIMATED DISPLACEES INCOME LEVEL
Type of
Displacees Owners Tenants Total Minorities 0-15M 15-25M 25-35M 35-50M 50 UP
Residential 22 12 34 8 9 8 6 5 6
Businesses 7 7 14 5 VALUE OF DWELLING DSS DWELLING AVAILABLE
Farms 0 0 0 0 Owners Tenants For Sale For Rent
Non-Profit 0 1 1 0 0-20M 0 $0-150 2 0-20M 27 $0-150 1
ANSWER ALL QUESTIONS 20-40M 2 150-250 2 20-40M 92 150-250 1
Yes No Explain all"YES"answers. 40-70M 1 250-400 7 40-70M 223 250-400 3
X 1. Will special relocation services be necessary? 70-100M 5 400-600 1 70-100M 271 400-600 11
X 2. Will schools or churches be affected by 100 up 14 600 up 0 100 UP 1291 600 up 108
displacement? TOTAL 22 12 1904 124
X 3. Will business services still be available REMARKS(Respond by Number)
after project?
X 4. Will any business be displaced? If so,
indicate size,type, estimated number of
employees, minorities, etc. Note: Explanations to"Yes"responses are attached.
X 5. Will relocation cause a housing shortage? All residential properties are assumed to meet DSS standards.
6. Source for available housing(list). Number of displacees are due to plans and/or septic/well issues.
X 7. Will additional housing programs be Multiple tenant displacees exist on several parcels.
needed?
X 8. Should Last Resort Housing be
considered?
X 9. Are there large, disabled, elderly, etc.
families?
X 10. Will public housing be needed for project? This report contains additional data for sign relocations and other
X 11. Is public housing available? miscellaneous moves.
X 12. Is it felt there will be adequate DSS housing
housing available during relocation period?
X 13. Will there be a problem of housing within
financial means?
X 14. Are suitable business sites available(list
source).
15. Number months estimated to complete
RELOCATION? 4-8 Months
12/14/12 1/2/13
Carol P. Greene Date Relocation Coordinator Date
Right of Way Agent II
FRM 15-E

Page 2 of 3
EIS Relocation Report
1-3802/1-3610
Explanations to all "yes" responses are as follows:
2. Will schools or churches be affected by displacement?
Yes, the following church will be impacted:
DISPLACED CHURCH DISPLACED ADDREvS NOTATI0N
CABARRUS FELLOWSHIP 3591 SOUTH RIDGE AVE, Plans indicate impact and tenant should be eligible to
CONCORD, NC 28025 receive full relocation benefits.
3. Will business services still be available after project?
Business services will be available after project for those businesses undiscovered during the study.
4. Will any business be displaced?
Yes, fourteen businesses will be displaced during the project.
Estimated ESTIMATED#
BUSINESS'NAME Annual TYPE OF MINORITIES '
Revenue* EMPLOYEES'
Flowers Bakery Thrift Store $ 100,000 Bakery Thrift Store 4 No
Choice One Insurance Services $ 170,000 Insurance Agency 5 No
The Mane Attraction $ 500,000 Hair Styling Salon 1-4 No
Cauble Auto Sales $ 1,000,000 Motor Vehicle Sales 1-4 No
America's Best Value Inn $ 1,000,000 Hotel 5-9 Yes
Shell Gas Station/United Oil of The Carolinas $ 35,000,000 Fuel Sales 20+ Yes
High Life Enterprises Inc. No 4 $ 46,000 Smoke Shop 1 Yes
PDQ Services $ 500,000 Mechanics/Brake Service 4 No
Widenhouse Motors, Inc. $ 1,500,000 Motor Vehicle Sales 1-4 No
Pegram Insurance Agency $ 500,000 Insurance Agency 2-4 No
Howard Johnson $ 1,500,000 Hotel 1-5 Yes
Chick Filet $ 1,500,000 Restaurant 20-49 Yes
Jeffrey D. Fink, DDS $ 1,000,000 Dental Office 1-4 No
Redus-NC ALL LLC(Troutman Living Trust) N/A** Research Commerce 1-4 No
*Estimated annual revenue and number of employees obtained via Manta.
**Redus-NC ALL LLC is"coming soon" as a research commerce park; therefore, revenue data is not available.
6. Source for available housing:
SOURCE ADDRESS
Century 21 —Towne &Country Attn: Diane, 474 Jake Alexander Boulevard W, Salisbury NC 28147-1365
Allen Tate-Team Honeycutt Attn: Jennie, 1339 Concord Parkway N, Concord, NC 28025-2930
Exit Elite Realty Attn: Crystal, 6043 Gateway Center Dr., Kannapolis, NC 28081
8. Should Last Resort Housing be considered?
Last Resort Housing should be considered based on Federal Requirements.

Page 3of3
EIS Relocation Report
1-3802/1-3610
9. Are there large, disabled, elderly, etc. families?
(1) Large Family, (1) Disabled Displacee and (12) Elderly Displacees were observed in the field.
Optional housing for the disabled and elderly displacees include the following:
FACILITY FACILITY ADDRESS'
Concord Place 2452 Rock Hill Church Road, Concord, NC 28027
Best of Care Assisted Living 234 Northdale Avenue, Kannapolis, NC 28081
Morning Star of Concord 500 Penny Lane NE, Concord,NC 28025
Crescent Heights 240 Branchview Dr NE, Concord, NC 28025
10. Will public housing be needed for Project?
Yes, public housing will be necessary for Project.
11. Is public housing available?
Yes, currently(3) HUD approved houses are available in Rowan and (7)available in Cabarrus. Alternatively, the
following HUD approved apartments are available:
COUNTY APARTMENT COMPLEX ADDRESS
Cabarrus Fairington West Apartments 3140 Chapwin NW Cir, Concord, NC 28027
Concord Housing Department 283 Harold Goodman Circle Southeast, Concord, NC 28027
Rowan Runningbrook Apartments 2200 Runningbrook, Kannapolis, NC 28081
Locust Housing Complex 600 Locust Street, Kannapolis, NC 28081
12, Is it felt there will be adequate DSS housing available during relocation period?
Yes, the above number of DSS houses and apartments are available according to sources listed in (6):
14. Are suitable business sites available (list source):
Yes, the following number of business sites are currently available according to the sources previously listed in (6):.
COUNTY AVAILABLE BUSINE S'SITES
Cabarrus 99
Rowan 86
Additionally, the plan indicates impact to (52) business signs and (35) miscellaneous moves.
Atkins North America, Inc.
Prepared By: Carol P. Greene and Jackie G. Kinker
Approved By: Kevin M. Hennessey

REQUEST FOR R/W COST ESTIMATE
DATE RECEIVED: 12/02/13 DISTRIBUTED: 12/04/13 REVISION/ Update
UPDATE :
I.D.NO./ DESCRIPTION SCHEDULE
BREAK
I-3802 Widen I-85 and Interchange Improvements R/W FY UNFUND ❑ POST YRS ❑
ACCESS: FULL C/A ❑ PARTIAL C/A ❑NO CONTROL ❑
WBS ELEMENT NUMBER: 36780.1.1 COUNTY: Cabarrus&Rowan
ENGINEER: Leza Mundt DEPT.: PDEA DIV.: 10 APPRAISAL OFFICE.: 4
TYPE OF PLANS FURNISHED FOR ESTIMATE:Preliminary&Vicinity
DATE DUE: 01/02/2014
PRIOR ESTIMATES OF LAND AND DAMAGES(WITH DATES):
12/21/12 K.Hennessev Atkins:428 Parcels,$30.825.000 L&D;$34.020.000 Total
BASED ON PAST PROJECT HISTORICAL DATA,THE LAND AND DAMAGE FIGURES HAVE BEEN ADJUSTED BY A
FACTOR OF 50%TO INCLUDE CONDEMNATION AND ADMINISTRATIVE INCREASES THAT OCCUR DURING
SETTLEMENT OF ALL PARCELS. THESE FIGURES PROJECT THE MOST ACCURATE ACQUISITION ESTIMATES FOR 2
(TWO)YEARS FROM THE DATE OF THIS ESTIMATE.
ESTIMATED BY:G.Lee TIME SPENT:40 Hrs COMPLETED DATE: 12/31/13 EXTENSION REQ.:
ALTERNATES
A
ESTIMATED NO.OF PARCELS: 25
RESIDENTIAL RELOCATIONS: 2/$40,000
BUSINESS RELOCATIONS: 6/$150,000
GRAVES 0
LAND AND DAMAGE: $3,442,500
ACQUISTION: $125,000
TOTAL ESTIMATED RIW
COST. 53,757,5 00
** TOTALS/VALUES **
PLEASE PROVIDE ONLY BASE NUMBERS.ALL TOTALING CALCULATIONS WILL BE
COMPLETED BY THE ESTIMATE COORDINATOR, SARAH D.WHITE.
THERE ARE NO FIGURES FOR UTILITY INVOLVEMENT ON THIS ESTIMATE AND NO PUE's.
NOTES:

APPENDIX D - PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT MATERIALS

NOTICE OF A CITIZENS INFORMATIONAL WORKSHOP
FOR THE PROPOSED TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS OF 1-85
FROM NC 73 TO US 29/601 WITH PROPOSED INTERCHANGE
CONSTRUCTION OR IMPROVEMENTS
TIP Project Nos. 1-3802/1-3804/1-3610 Cabarrus & Rowan Counties
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) will hold the
above Citizens Informational Workshop on January 29, 2008 between the hours
of 4:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. at the Kannapolis Railroad Station, 201 South Main
Street, Kannapolis, 27598. Interested individuals may attend this workshop at
their convenience during the above stated hours. Please note there will be no
formal presentation.
The purpose of this workshop is for NCDOT representatives to provide
information, answer questions, and accept written comments regarding this
project. NCDOT proposes to widen 1-85 from NC 73 to the US 29/601 Connector
near Kannapolis and Concord and proposes interchange construction or
improvements at NC 152 & US 29/601, 1-85 & NC 152 and 1-85 & SR 1221 (Old
Beatty Ford Road). The project will widen 1-85 in each direction. The project will
improve traffic flow and upgrade the interstate to meet current standards.
Anyone desiring additional information may contact Ms. Beverly Robinson,
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch at 1548 Mail Service
Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1548, phone [phone], fax [phone] or
email: brobinson(ab-dot.state.nc.us.
NCDOT will provide auxiliary aids and services under the Americans with
Disabilities Act for disabled persons who wish to participate in this workshop.
Anyone requiring special services should contact Ms. Robinson as early as
possible so that arrangements can be made.

Transportation Improvement Program Projects 1-3802, 1-3804, and 1-3610
q 1-85 Widening and Interchange Imp►rouements
from NC 73 to the U5 291601 Conner Or 1
Cabarrus and Rowan C n Jes
......... . ..... ,,,,,„ a iiiiia///
Worhshop Handout
NCDOT Citizens Informational Worhshop
January 29, 2008
Welcome! Purpose of the Workshop
Welcome to the Citizens The purpose of the workshop is to:
Informational Workshop for * Present information on the proposed transportation im-
the proposed widening of 1-85
in Cabarrus and Rowan provements.
Counties. The North Carolina O Discuss concerns, address issues, and answer ques-
Department of Transportation tions on the proposed project.
appreciates your attendance
tonight! See Exhibits
Ash Questions
Project Information Provide Comments
The North Carolina Department of Transportation is preparing an environmental study of improve-
ments to 1-85 between NC 73 and US 29-601 in Cabarrus and Rowan Counties. The proposed
project includes widening and interchange improvements. The proposed project is included in the
NCDOT Draft 2009-2015 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) under three different project
numbers:
O 1-3802: Addition of lanes to 1-85 from north of NC 73 to the US 29/601 Connector.
O 1-3804: Construction of an interchange at 1-85 and SR 1221 (Old Beatty Ford Road).
O 1-3610: Reconstruction of the existing cloverleaf interchange at NC 152 and US 29/601 and reconstruc-
tion of the existing 1-85/ NC 152 interchange. This project also includes improvements to NC 152 be-
tween US 29/601 and 1-85.
Additional Information
If you need additional information or would like to discuss the project further, please contact:
Ms. Beverly Robinson, PE Ms. Colista Freeman, PE
NCDOT Project Development and or Mulkey Engineers and Consultants
Environmental Analysis Branch 6750 Tryon Road
1548 Mail Service Center Cary, NC 27518
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548 Phone: [phone]
Phone: [phone] Email: cfreeman @mulkeyinc.com
Email: brobinson @dot.state.nc.us

Project Benefits
• Improves traffic flow on 1-85 and its interchanges in the project area. Traffic volumes for 1-85
in the project area ranged from 68,800 to 83,400 vehicles per day (vpd) in 2005. By 2030, the projected
traffic for 1-85 increases to between 122,300 vpd and 161,600 vpd.
• Upgrades 1-85 to meet standards established by the Strategic Highway Corridor Vision
(SHC) Plan. The NCDOT SHC Plan has designated the 1-85 facility as vital to the efficient and
high-speed movement of people and goods to destinations within and just outside of North Caro-
lina.
• Provides direct access from 1-85 to the southeastern portion of Rowan County. The closest
interchanges north and south of Old Beatty Ford Road are approximately five miles apart. According to
local officials, plans for industrial land uses are underway for southeastern Rowan County, which is ex-
pected to increase the amount of truck and other vehicle traffic in the project area.
� Additional opportunities for
� public involvement will be
1-85 in the provided during the
project
„ project development process.
area
Project Schedule
Environmental Study Process The Categorical Exclusion is expected to be
completed in 2009. Right of way acquisition
The proposed project will involve state and for 1-3802 is scheduled to begin in 2012, while
federal funds. Any agency that proposes a construction is currently unfunded. Right of
project involving federal funds must comply way and construction are currently unfunded,
with the National Environmental Policy Act as well, for 1-3804 and 1-3610.
(NEPA). Under NEPA, an agency must
study the beneficial and adverse environ-
mental impacts of alternatives that meet the
project's purpose and need, and identify the
least environmentally damaging practicable
alternative (LEDPA). This planning process
can be divided into the steps described be-
low. This project is currently in the early
stages of Step 3.
v
• Step 1 : Initiate project and collect data.
• Step 2: Identify alternatives.
• Step 3: Conduct alternatives study.
• Step 4: Categorical Exclusion. Irish Buffalo Creek

1 �
r � 1
r
9x
r
r
r
x
pnilect vici�aty map.,
CHI
LA b
Tj
ij
jJ
r C
1
s,
g¢
o �
i
wmxrc v
� 3
I ✓ k � [� � �Q�' 1 x lx' �d � m�r,Y � � f
71
SX
1 � 1
AI
f J �
II' NAPOLJ�
I J
d e
rLilec,
" Y, � WY�� h<W1} ;`
�'
� �e�sab �r u�mw� hi r
TI
r
� b
u

TIP Projects 1-3802, 1-3804, and 1-3610
� . 1-85 Widening and Interchange Improvements from,,
NC 73 to the US 29/601 Connector
Cabarrus and Rowan oun i+ s
Comment Sheet
NCDOT Citizens Informational Worhshop
January 29, 2008
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) invites your comments on the proposed project.
Please provide your comments below and include your contact information. Your written comments may be
left in one of the comment boxes at the meeting or mailed to NCDOT by February 29, 2008.
Ms. Beverly Robinson, PE
Mail Comments To: NCDOT Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
Name:
(Please Print)
Address:
Comments:
Please continue on the back or on a separate sheet of paper, if necessary.

Comment Sheet (Continued)
NCDOT Citizens Informational Worhshop
1-3802, 1-3804, 1-3610
Was the project adequately explained to you? Yes ❑ No ❑
Were NCDOT representatives understandable and clear in their explanations?
Yes ❑ No ❑ Further comments:
Were NCDOT representatives courteous and helpful? Yes 0 No ❑
Further comments:
Were display maps and handouts easy to read and understand? Yes EJ No ❑
How might we better present proposed projects and address citizens' concerns in future in-
formational workshops?
How did you hear about this meeting today?
Based on the information available, were all substantial questions answered?
Yes ❑ No ❑ Further comments:
What was the most helpful aspect about the workshop today? What was the least helpful?
THANK YOU FOR ATTENDING THE WORKSHOP.
YOUR COMMENTS ARE VERY IMPORTANT IN THE PLANNING PROCESS.

NOTICE OF PRE-MEETING OPEN HOUSES AND DESIGN PUBLIC MEETINGS FOR THE PROPOSED 1-85
WIDENING AND INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENTS FROM NORTH OF N.C. 73 TO U.S. 29/601
CONNECTOR
TIP Project Nos. 1-3802/1-3610/13-5365 Cabarrus & Rowan Counties
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to widen and improve 1-85 from
N.C. 73 in Cabarrus County to the U.S. 29/601 Connector in Rowan County and proposes interchange
improvements at U.S. 29/601, Dale Earnhardt Boulevard, Lane Street, N.C. 152. Improvements are also
proposed at the U.S. 29/601 Connector and N.C. 152 interchange.
The purpose of the project is to provide relief from present and future congestion and provide a higher
level of efficiency on 1-85. Additional right-of-way acquisition and the relocation of homes and businesses will
be required for this project.
NCDOT will hold two (2) Open Houses and Design Public Meetings for the above mentioned highway
projects at the following times and locations:
• Tuesday, November 27, 2012: Kannapolis Train Station, 201 S. Main Street, Kannapolis
Open House: 4— 6:30 p.m.
Formal Presentation: 7 p.m.
• Thursday, November 29, 2012: J.C. Carson High School, 290 Kress Venture Rd., China Grove
Open House: 4— 6:30 p.m.
Formal Presentation: 7 p.m.
NCDOT representatives will be available at the Open Houses to answer questions and receive
comments regarding the proposed projects. The opportunity to submit written comments and questions will be
provided. Interested citizens may attend at any time during the above hours.
The formal presentations will consist of an explanation of the proposed location, design, right of way
and relocation requirements and procedures. Citizens will have the opportunity to comment or ask questions.
The presentation and comments will be recorded and a transcript will be prepared.
Maps displaying the design of the project are available for public review at the Cabarrus-Rowan
Metropolitan Planning Organization, 135 Cabarrus Ave. East - Suite 101, Concord; City of Concord —Alfred M.
Brown Operations Center, 850 Warren C Coleman Blvd.; City of Kannapolis, 246 Oak Ave.; Town of China
Grove, 402 N. Main St. — Suite 204, Salisbury; Town of Landis, 312 S. Main St., Landis; Rowan County
Planning & Development, 402 N. Main St. —Suite 204, Salisbury; Cabarrus County Governmental Center, 65
Church St. S., Concord; and the NCDOT District Office, 4770 S. Main St., Salisbury. Copies of the maps are
also available on the project website at: .http://www.ncdot.,qov/promects/publicmeetings .
Anyone desiring additional information may contact Jamille Robbins, NCDOT-Human Environment
Section at 1598 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1598, by phone at [phone], or via email at
iarobbinsa-ncdot.gov. Additional material may be submitted until December 14, 2012.
NCDOT will provide auxiliary aids and services under the Americans with Disabilities Act for disabled
persons who want to participate in these meetings. Anyone requiring special services should contact Robbins
as early as possible so that arrangements can be made.
Persons who speak Spanish and do not speak English, or have a limited ability to read, speak or
understand English, may receive interpretive services upon request prior to the meeting by calling 1-800-481-
6494.

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
z
%T
_"Or Is:,a>>c
1-85 Widening and Interchange Improvements
from NC 73 to the US 29-601 Connector
TIP PROJECT NOS. 1-3802/1-3610/13-5365
WBS Number 36780.1 .2
Cabarrus and Rowan Counties
Design Public Meetings
Informal Open House 4:00 p.m. — 6:30 p.m.
Formal Presentation 7:00 p.m.
November 27, 2012
Kannapolis Train Station
201 S. Main Street
Kannapolis, NC 28081
November 29, 2012
J.C. Carson High School
290 Kress Venture Road
China Grove, NC 28023
500 copies of this handout were reproduced at a cost of$0.85 per copy

PURPOSE OF PUBLIC MEETING
Today's meeting is another important step in the North Carolina Department of
Transportation's (NCDOT) procedure for making you, the public, a part of the project
development process. The purpose of the meeting is to obtain public input on the
design being considered for the project.
Today's meeting maps are available for public review at the following locations:
• Cabarrus-Rowan Metropolitan Planning Organization, 135 Cabarrus Avenue
East - Suite 101, Concord;
• City of Concord —Alfred M. Brown Operations Center, 850 Warren C Coleman
Boulevard;
• City of Kannapolis, 246 Oak Avenue;
• Town of China Grove, 402 N. Main Street— Suite 204, Salisbury;
• Town of Landis, 312 S. Main Street, Landis;
• Rowan County Planning & Development, 402 N. Main Street— Suite 204,
Salisbury;
• Cabarrus County Governmental Center, 65 Church Street S., Concord; and
• NCDOT District Office, 4770 S. Main Street, Salisbury.
Copies of the maps are also available on the project website at:
http://www.ncdot.gov/prowects/publicmeetings .
YOUR PARTICIPATION
Now that the opportunity is here, you are encouraged to participate by making your
comments and/or questions a part of the public record. This may be done by having
them recorded at the formal Public Meeting or by writing them on the attached comment
sheet. Several representatives of the North Carolina Department of Transportation are
present. They will be happy to talk with you, explain the project to you and answer your
questions. You may write your comments or questions on the comment sheet and leave
it with one of the representatives or mail them by December 14, 2012 to the following
address:
Mr. Jamille A. Robbins
NCDOT - Human Environment Section
1598 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1598
Phone: [phone]
Email: iarobbins(c�ncdot.gov
Everyone present is urged to participate in the proceedings. It is important, however,
that THE OPINIONS OF ALL INDIVIDUALS BE RESPECTED REGARDLESS OF
HOW DIVERGENT THEY MAY BE FROM YOUR OWN. Accordingly, debates, as such,
are out of place at public meetings. Also, the public meeting is not to be used as a
POPULAR REFERENDUM to determine the location and/or design by a majority vote of
those present.

WHAT IS DONE WITH THE INPUT?
Apost-hearing meeting will be conducted after the comment period has
ended. NCDOT staff representing Planning, Design, Traffic Operations,
Division, Right of Way, Public Involvement & Community Studies and
s Y others who play a role in the development of a project will attend this
meeting. The project will also be reviewed with federal agencies such as
the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), as well as state agencies
such as the NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources. When appropriate,
local government staff will attend.
All spoken and written issues are discussed at the post-hearing meeting. Most issues
are resolved at the post-hearing meeting. The NCDOT considers safety, costs, traffic
service, social impacts and public comments in making decisions. Complex issues may
require additional study and may be reviewed by higher management, Board of
Transportation Members and/or the Secretary of Transportation.
Minutes of the post-hearing meeting will be summarized and are available to the public
by noting your request on the attached comment sheet.
WHAT HAPPENS NEXT
Comments received from the public meeting about the design of the 1-85 Widening and
Interchange Improvements project will be reviewed at the post-hearing meeting and
incorporated, where feasible, into the development of final design plans for the project.
Further studies and surveys will be conducted on the preliminary findings collected from
initial studies, such as hazardous materials, historic and archaeological sites, noise
impacts and abatement, and access to residences and businesses.
An environmental document — Categorical Exclusion (CE) - will be completed based on
the results of the items above. The CE will be circulated for public and agency review.
THIS PORTION OF THE PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK

PURPOSE AND NEED OF PROJECT
The purpose of the project is to improve the level of service on 1-85 and its interchanges
in the study area (see Figure 1). Another desirable outcome is to improve the vertical
clearance under structures over 1-85 within the study area in order to meet current
design standards. An additional purpose is to correct operational deficiencies at the
interchange of US 29-601 Connector and NC 152. The project is expected to address
the following needs and provide the following benefits:
• Improve traffic flow and level of service (LOS) on 1-85 and its interchanges
in the study area.
The level of service (LOS) of a roadway is the measure of its traffic carrying ability.
Levels of service range from A to F, "A" being the best scenario with unrestricted
maneuverability and operating speeds, and "F" being the worst scenario where
travel on a roadway is characterized by "stop and go" conditions.
Traffic volumes on 1-85 are projected to increase substantially and exceed the
roadway capacity by 2035, the project's design year. Nearly the entire length of 1-85
in the study area would operate at LOS F conditions during one or both peak hours
of the day. In fact, many segments of 1-85 would reach these conditions prior to
2035, some as early as 2015.
The proposed improvements will improve level of service on 1-85 and its
interchanges in the project area, benefiting both local and through traffic.
• Eliminate vertical clearance deficiencies for structures over 1-85 within the
study area.
Many of the existing bridges carrying roadways over 1-85 were constructed in the
1960s and have substandard clearances between 1-85 and the bottom of the
bridges. The proposed improvements include replacing or reconstructing the
substandard structures so they will meet current design standards.
• Reduce operational deficiencies at the interchange of US 29-601 Connector
and NC 152.
The interchange at NC 152 and 1-85 allows for only two movements: 1-85 northbound
to NC 152 and NC 152 to 1-85 southbound. The other two movements to and from
1-85 north of NC 152 are facilitated through the US 29-601 Connector.
The interchange bridge at US 29-601 Connector and NC 152 does not meet current
design standards for vertical clearance. In addition, three of the seven ramps at this
interchange intersect with local roads and/or driveways, creating a number of conflict
points for drivers.
The proposed improvements are consistent with the Long Range Transportation Plans
for the local municipalities within the study area. Local governments within the
Cabarrus-Rowan Urban Metropolitan Planning Organization (CRUMPO), as well as
NCDOT, have included this project in their adopted plans.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
NCDOT has combined TIP Project Numbers 1-3802, 1-3610, and B-5365 into a single
work effort because of the proximity and interrelationship between the projects.
For Project 1-3802, NCDOT proposes to add four additional travel lanes to 1-85 from
north of NC 73 in Cabarrus County to US 29-601 Connector in Rowan County. The
project involves widening the existing four-lane freeway to eight lanes, matching TIP
projects 1-3803 at NC 73 to the south, and 1-2511 at US 29-601 to the north.
Interchange improvements, including reconstruction of existing structures to meet
current design standards for vertical clearance, are proposed at US 29-601, SR 2126
(Dale Earnhardt Boulevard) and SR 2180 (Lane Street). The project is divided into two
sections for construction phasing — Section A extends from NC 73 to Lane Street and
Section B extends from Lane Street to US 29-601 Connector.
For Project 1-3610, NCDOT proposes to reconstruct the existing cloverleaf interchange
at NC 152 and US 29-601, reconstruct the interchange at NC 152 and 1-85, and improve
existing NC 152, which provides access to 1-85 between the two interchanges.
For Project B-5365, NCDOT proposes to replace Bridge No. 21 and Bridge No. 34 over
the Norfolk Southern Railroad and US 29 in China Grove.
DESIGN-BUILD PROJECTS
A portion of the 1-85 Widening an Interchange Improvement project (Section A) will be
built as a Design-Build project. This is a different process than most typical roadway
projects. A typical roadway project follows four basic steps:
1. Planning, environmental document, and preliminary designs are completed.
2. Final designs are completed.
3. Right of way acquisition is completed.
4. Construction begins.
The Design-Build Process allows NCDOT to contract with a team of designers and
contractors that is responsible for the design, right of way acquisition, and construction
of a project. The team may begin construction of one portion of the project while they
finish the design and right of way acquisition for others, usually resulting in faster project
completion.
The Design-Build process has several potential benefits in addition to faster project
completion. The Design-Build team looks for innovative designs that meet the project
specifications but reduces costs and impacts. By working together, the designer and
contractor may also quickly resolve issues that arise during construction, potentially
resulting in creative and flexible solutions.

TRAFFIC NOISE SUMMARY
The NCDOT Traffic Abatement Policy contains provisions that limit state and federal
responsibilities for traffic noise reduction to locations where development existed, or for
which building permits were issued, at the "Date of Public Knowledge".
The "Date of Public Knowledge" of the location and potential noise impacts of a
proposed highway project will be the approval date of the final environmental document.
1. After this date, the federal and state governments are no longer responsible for
providing noise abatement measures for new development within the noise impact area
of the proposed highway project.
2. The criteria (i.e., trigger date) for determining when undeveloped land is "planned,
designed and programmed" for development will be the approval date of a building
permit for an individual lot or site.
3. It is the responsibility of local governments and private landowners to ensure that
noise-compatible designs are used for development permitted after the Date of Public
Knowledge.
The "Date of Public Knowledge"for this project will be the date of the approved
Categorical Exclusion (CE). The CE is expected to be completed and signed in the
Spring of 2013.
Eighteen noise study areas have been identified on this project. Of these eighteen
areas, twelve meet preliminary justification criteria for noise barriers and will be further
studied during final project design. The noise study areas are shown in red hatching on
the maps displayed at tonight's meeting.
Once a determination is made on the location of the noise barriers during final design,
NCDOT will contact all property owners and tenants who are predicted to receive at
least 5 decibels noise reduction due to the proposed barriers. Each owner and/or
tenant will be provided a ballot so they can vote their preference for or against the noise
wall. The noise barriers will be constructed unless a simple majority vote by these
property owners/tenants indicates they do not prefer noise wall construction.

PROJECT INFORMATION
Length: See Table 1
Typical Section: See Figure 2
Right of Way: Variable width
Access Control: Full Control of Access:
Access only provided via ramps at interchanges. No private
driveway connections will be allowed.
Full control of access will be maintained along 1-85. Along
intersecting streets, controlled access will be utilized at various
locations, primarily near interchange ramps.
Relocatees: See Table 1
Project Costs: See Table 1
Current
Schedule: The tentative schedule is shown below. A number of factors can
affect a project schedule, so schedules are subject to change.
The project is divided into two sections for construction phasing — Section
A extends from NC 73 to Lane Street and Section B extends from Lane
Street to the US 29-601 Connector.
Right of Way Acquisition
1-3802: *Section A — Fiscal Year 2013; Section B — Fiscal Year 2018
1-3610: included in 1-3802 B
B-5365: Fiscal Year 2017
Construction
1-3802: *Section A — Fiscal Year 2013; Section B — Fiscal Year 2020
1-3610: included in 1-3802 B
13-5365: Fiscal Year 2019
*Design-Build

Tablet. Summary of 1-85 Widening and Interchange Improvements Impacts'
Feature Impact
Length (miles) 13.5
Delineated Wetland Impacts (acres) 1.62
Delineated Stream Impacts linear feet 8,645
Displacements Residential 24
Business 16
Surveyed Federal /State Threatened and Endangered Species Yes
Habitat Present No Effect
100 Year Floodplain and Floodway Impacts (acres) 21.09
Water Supply Watershed Critical Area (acres) 132.19
Historic Properties (no.) 2
No Effect
Noise Impacted Rece tors2 455
Recorded Archaeological Sites (no.) 0
Recreational Areas/Parks (no.) 1
No Effect
Cemeteries (no.) 1
0.05 acres
Potential UST/ Hazmat Sites (no.) 17
Low Impact
Total Cost (in millions) Section A $204,000,000
Section B $124,000,000
Impacts are preliminary and are subject to change during final design.
2Impacted noise receptors will be updated in a Design Noise Report and recommended noise barrier locations
will be reviewed.

RIGHT-OF-WAY PROCEDURES
After decisions are made regarding the final design, the proposed right-of-way limits will
be staked in the ground. If you are an affected property owner, a Right-of-Way Agent
will contact you and arrange a meeting. The agent will explain the plans and advise you
as to how the project will affect you. The agent will inform you of your rights as a
property owner. If permanent right-of-way is required, professionals who are familiar
with real estate values will evaluate or appraise your property. The evaluations or
appraisals will be reviewed for completeness and accuracy, and then the Right-of-Way
Agent will make a written offer to you. The current market value of the property at its
highest and best use when appraised will be offered as compensation. The Department
of Transportation must:
1. Treat all owners and tenants equally.
2. Fully explain the owner's rights.
3. Pay just compensation in exchange for property rights.
4. Furnish relocation advisory assistance.
RELOCATION ASSISTANCE
If you are a relocatee, that is, if your residence or business is to be acquired as part of
the project, additional assistance in the form of advice and compensation is available.
You will also be provided with assistance on locations of comparable housing and/or
commercial establishments, moving procedures, and moving aid. Moving expenses
may be paid for you. Additional monetary compensation is available to help
homeowners cope with mortgage increases, increased value of comparable homes,
closing costs, etc. A similar program is available to assist business owners. The Right-
of-Way Agent can explain this assistance in greater detail.
NOTE: PAMPHLETS SUMMARIZING RIGHT OF WAY AND
RELOCATION PROCEDURES ARE AVAILABLE AT THE
SIGN-IN TABLE.

Project Vicinity
_.._. 1-86 Widening and Interchange Improvements From North of NC 7 to
ProjectArea US 29-601 Connector(1-3802/1-3610/83-5366)
Rowan and Cabarrus Counties, North Carolina
, �i�G pGt ��M"� �tWt,�a,igr,rya � �r,aatirxr�r
rNt, P',y,A �t �
�*p a �Y North Carolina
�'a�N$b�I�������'�� mom w�yr ���
Department of Transportation
v
� y
WC�1
Kpm 1 11
Project Vicinity
^� r
,� 4 p✓ '�*r7. A' �r �° d, PYltl�4l�ll ,• kq G
IR R U .,
w�
i
u
t
a ,
M
Q card
Alf
lw� x 14 r wcn�'rp
...........................�_.
r
"a9
End Project
er 0 C7wWG'O Grove
� w
i
All a
fa: if 52
rJ
.� �
op
,
N Beatty Ford
k i
rbr " u
r
! 49999 f ,Mr y
u'
a
i
r
f
nnntsouRe Legend
Study Area-Section A
j 29 9° Stu dy Area-Section B
tA�
Begin Irotect t County Boundary
u.. .,.. .. ° U 9)lIN1N Waterbodies
VUinecoff School Rd
q
�t Major Roads
p
o `
Roads
Streams
Interchanges
1
J �.5 t 2
601 � ' �� �, 1 miles

_
21 12'FDPS 12'FDPS
POINT GRADE CROWN ORIGINAL GROUND
GRADE POW INT
4 JA
ORIGINAL GROUND 61 8"V ORIGINAL GROUND
YARMLE
SLOPE TYPICAL SECTION
ORIGINAL GROUND
12' FOPS 12' ID
GROUND GROUND
YARMJU
- TYPICAL SECTION
GROUND
rk -RR-
FUTURE 3RD LINE
ORIGINAL
ORIGINAL ORIGINAL
TYPICAL, SECTION GROUND GROUND
-RR- RAILROAD
Proposed Typical Sections
Figure
Prepared
For 1-85 Widening and Interchange Improvements From North, of NC 73 to
US 29-601 Connector (1-3802/1-3610/B-5365)
Not to Scale
Map Date�91412012

_
FOPS
i GROUND
GROUND SLOPE GROUND
POINT
TYPICAL SECTION
OIUVW
GROUND
241 6'
GROUND
OREMMM
G GROUND
TYPICAL SECTION
-Y6- RIDGE AVE.
30' .112' 05' WWI VAR,12145' VAR.W-15' VAX 12'.-15' , 5S VAA-:17', 55' VA&12'-15' VAR.12'-15' VAR.12'-15' 12' (015' W�G is, 6' 10,
FDP
rFDP­S
JP0'NT Ffl.Ps ONGMA GROUND
AM
SLOPE
TYPICAL SECTION
MU1LK1E1Y Proposed Typical Sections
Prepared
For. Figure
1-85 Widening and Interchange Improvements From North of NC 73 to
US 29-601 Connector (1-3802/1-3610/13-5365)
Rowan and Cabarrus Counties, North Carolina 2B
Not to Scale
Map Date!9M)2012

.....................
30" 12' 61 10,
01' W/GR) -i�GM
4' 12' 12' 61 61 12' 12' A'
2g roff— "50
O"MAL
GAOUND
0.02 t 0,02 .02 Q-08
_R�0,18��.02,
-G-
61 OfUGMAI
61
GROUND G VARMLE 0AWND
SLOPE
VAftud
SLOPE TYPICAL SECTION
-Y8- LAKE CONCORD RD.
OWNA
GROUND
12' 12' 12 12' 101-#1
ONCANAL 0W--W/GR) (14' WGP4
GROUND .02 t GROUND
VARMif t 0,02
JR, L02 �.02 - VARMU
�INT
SLOPE 4A --------------- 4:1 SLOPE
0 Pi CA K.4
GROUND CkOUND
TYPICAL SECTION
-Y10- DALE, EARNHARDT BLVD.
8 12' 81 81
(11' W/GR) (11, W/GR)
4' 12' 12' 4'
DP FDP9
OWINAL
GROUND
z ae
12 OM 0.02
.So,$L02 q,02 q,()8
01MONAL
GROUND
: "=. I
VAk"L9
$Lon TYPICAL SECTION
OWC4"
GROUND -Y11- CENTER GROVE RD.
........................... .........
4,!--MULKEY
Proposed Typical Sections
Prepared
Fou Figure
1-85 Widening and Interchange Improvements From North of NIC 73 to
US 29-601 Connector (1-3802/1-3610/13-5365)
Rowan and Cabarrus Counties, North Carolina 2C
Not to Scale
Ma�p Nw 9MO,012

_
J144' ;W�ALVGR) 0'-0'TO 17'-6' t —04' VGIQ 01UVNAL
IND
'0.02 t GROUND
02 VARIAIL�
GRADE
GROUND TYPICAL SECTION GROUND
ONGINAL GROUND
ORIGIN
�®RIGINAL GROUND
SLOPE VA�RIABL'E
StOPE
TYPICAL SECTION
-Y17- PINE RIDGE RD.
-Y22- MADISON RD.
-Y24- MYRTLE GOODNIGHT
-Y25- POWER ST.
-Y26- YOST HILL RD.
-Y27- KETCHIE ESTATES
Proposed Typical Sections
Prepared Figure
7' For� 1-85 Widening and Interchange Improvements From North of NC 73 to
U -601 Connector (1-3802/1-3610/13-5365)
S 29
Rowan and Cabarrus Counties, North Carolina 2D
Not to Scale
Map Date:91Q2012

_
2 2 2' t 2'
GROUND
rc
GRADE I VAR Olf
ORIGINAL GROUND SLOPE
VARIABLE
SLOPE
-TYPICAL SECTION
ORIGINAL GROUND —Y18— LENZT RD.
"D ORJ INAL GROUND
6-1 GRADE ZGKMokQ VAR 01
ORIGINAL GROUND I FOiNT SLOPE
VARIABLE %
SLOPE TYPICAL SECTION
—Y19— NC 152
ORIGINAL GROUND
Prepared rv-At�-
t �? ", Figure
rF"o,.
For 1,-85 Widening and Interchange Improvements From North o,f NC 73 to
US 29-601 Connector (1-3802/1-3610/B-5365)
L 17e
Rowan and Cabarrus Counties, North CaroHna 2E
Not to Scale
Map Dake,W412012

TITLE VI PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT FORM
Completing this form is completely voluntary. You are not required to provide the information requested in order to
participate in this meeting.
Meeting Type: Design Public Meetings Date: Nov.27&29,2012
Location: Kannapolis Train Station/JC Carson High School
TIP No.: I-3802/I-3610B-5365
Project Description: I-85 Widening and Interchange Improvements
In accordance with Title A of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and related authorities,the North Carolina Department of
Transportation (NCDOT)assures that no person(s)shall be excluded from participation in,denied the benefits of,or
subjected to discrimination under any of the Department's programs, policies, or activities, based on their race,color,
national origin, disability, age, income, or gender.
Completing this form helps meet our data collection and public involvement obligations under Title VI and
NEPA, and will improve how we serve the public. Please place the completed form in the designated box on the
sign-in table, hand it to an NCDOT official or mail it to the PDEA-Human Environment Section, 1598 Mail Service
Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1598.
All forms will remain on file at the NCDOT as part of the public record.
Zip Code: Gender: ❑ Male ❑ Female
Street Name: Age:
(i.e.Main Street)
❑ Less than 18 ❑45-64
Total Household Income:
❑ 18-29 ❑ 65 and older
❑ Less than$12,000 ❑ $47,000—$69,999 ❑ 30-44
❑ $12,000—$19,999 ❑ $70,000—$93,999
❑ $20,000—$30,999 ❑ $94,000—$117,999 Have a Disability: ❑Yes ❑No
❑ $31,000—$46,999 ❑$118,000 or greater
Race/Ethnicity: National Origin: (if born outside the U.S.)
❑ White ❑ Mexican
❑Black/African American ❑ Central American:
❑Asian ❑ South American:
❑American Indian/Alaskan Native ❑ Puerto Rican
❑Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander ❑ Chinese
❑ Hispanic/Latino ❑ Vietnamese
❑ Other(please specify): ❑ Korean
❑ Other(please specify):
How did you hear about this meeting? (newspaper advertisement,flyer, and/or mailing)
For more information regarding Title VI or this request, please contact the NCDOT Title VI Section at
[phone] or toll free at 1-800-522-0453, or by email at slipscomb .ncdot.gov.
Thank you for your participation!

8691.-669LZ ON `45IalT32:1
.Ae4uaC) eOItiaS I1eW 8691.
u0140eS 4uauuuo.AInua ueuunH
Va(3d - 10a0N

COMMENT SHEET
1-85 Widening and Interchange Improvements
Design Public Meeting
TIP Project Nos. 1-3802/1-3610/6-5365 Cabarrus and Rowan Counties
NAME:
ADDRESS:
EMAIL ADDRESS:
COMMENTS AND/OR QUESTIONS:
Comments may be mailed by December 14, 2012 to:
Mr. Jamille A. Robbins
NCDOT - Human Environment Section
1598 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1598
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone]
Email: jarobbinsP—ncdot.gov

UO `E I LZ JgqwmON-Ou4oW qIqnd AWO 99E5-910MIIZ08£-I'sON Oad d1l
969 L-669LZ ON '4B1918M
Je;ueO GOInJeS IIeW 969 L
u01408S ;uewuoJInu3 uewnH -JLOa0N
su!ggoM *v emwef

NOTICE OF A PUBLIC MEETING FOR THE PROPOSED 1-85 WIDENING AND INTERCHANGE
IMPROVEMENTS FROM NORTH OF N.C. 73 TO U.S. 29/601 CONNECTOR
TIP Project Nos. 1-3802/1-3610/B-5365 Cabarrus & Rowan Counties
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to widen and improve 1-85 from
N.C. 73 in Cabarrus County to the U.S. 29/601 Connector in Rowan County and proposes interchange
improvements at U.S. 29/601, Dale Earnhardt Boulevard, Lane Street, N.C. 152. Improvements are also
proposed at the U.S. 29/601 Connector and N.C. 152 interchange.
The purpose of the project is to provide relief from present and future congestion and provide a higher
level of efficiency on 1-85. Additional right-of-way acquisition and the relocation of homes and businesses will
be required for this project.
NCDOT will hold an informal Public Meeting for the above mentioned highway projects on Tuesday,
February 26, 2013 from 4 p.m. until 7 p.m. at the Kannapolis Train Station, located at 201 S. Main Street in
Kannapolis.
The purpose of the meeting is to present the design revisions that were developed since the November
2012 Public Hearings. NCDOT representatives will be available at the meeting to answer questions and
receive comments regarding the proposed projects. The opportunity to submit written comments and questions
will be provided. Interested citizens may attend at any time during the above hours. Comments and information
received will be taken into consideration as work on the project develops.
For additional information contact Leza Wright Mundt, NCDOT-Project Development & Environmental
Analysis Unit at 1548 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1548, by phone at [phone], or via email
at Iwmundta-ncdot.gov. Additional material may be submitted until March 12, 2013.
NCDOT will provide auxiliary aids and services under the Americans with Disabilities Act for disabled
persons who want to participate in these meetings. Anyone requiring special services should contact Jamille
Robbins at [phone] as early as possible so that arrangements can be made.
Persons who speak Spanish and do not speak English, or have a limited ability to read, speak or
understand English, may receive interpretive services upon request prior to the meeting by calling 1-800-481-
6494.

NOTIFICACION DE REUNION PUBLICA PARA EL PROPUESTO ENSANCHAMIENTO DEL 1-85 Y
MEJORAMIENTOS AL INTERCAMBIO QUE SE ENCUENTRA EN EL NORTE DEL N.C. 73 HASTA EL
CONECTOR U.S. 29/601
TIP Proyecto Numeros 1-3802/1-3610/B-5365 Condados de Cabarrus & Rowan
El NCDOT (Departamento de Transportacion de Carolina del Norte)propone ensanchar y mejora la
carretera del 1-85 desde el N.C. 73 en el Condado de Cabarrus hasta el U.S. 29/601 conector en el Condado
de Rowan County y propone un mejoramiento del intercambio en el U.S. 29/601, Dale Earnhardt Boulevard,
Lane Street, N.C. 152. Mejoramientos tambien se proponen en el U.S. 29/601 conector y el intercambio que
se encuentra en el N.C. 152.
El proposito de este proyecto es para proporcionar alivio del congestionamiento presente y futuro y
tambien proporcionar un mas alto nivel de eficiencia en el 1-85. Adquisiciones de derecho a via y el traslado de
casas y negocios seran requerido para este proyecto.
El Departamento de Transportacion de Carolina del Norte (NCDOT) tendra una Junta Publica informal
que tratara con el proyecto mencionado de Ios proyectos de carreteras mencionados el Martes, 26 de Febrero,
2013 de 4 p.m. hasta Ias 7 p.m. en la Estacion de Tren Kannapolis, Iocalizada en el 201 S. Main Street en
Kannapolis.
El proposito de esta reunion es para presentar Ias revisiones de Ios disenos que se han desarrollado
desde Ias audiencias que se efectuaron en Noviembre 2012. Representantes del Departamento de
Transportacion de Carolina del Norte estaran disponibles para responder a preguntas y recibir comentarios
que se refieran a Ios proyectos propuestos. La oportunidad para entregar comentarios y preguntas por escrito
estaran disponibles. Ciudadanos interesados podran asistir a cualquier hora durante Ias horas mencionadas
arriba. Comentarios a informacion recibidas se tomaran en cuenta durante el tiempo en que el proyecto se
desarrolle.
Para informacion adicional comuniquese con Leza Wright Mundt, en la Unidad de Desarrollo de
Proyectos Y Analisis Ambientales del Departamento de Transportacion de Carolina del Norte al 1548 Mail
Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1548, por telefono al [phone], o via correo electronico al
Iwmundta-ncdot.gov. Material adicional puede ser sometida hasta el 12 de Marzo, 2013.
El Departamento de Transportacion de Carolina del Norte (NCDOT) proveera ayuda auxiliary servicios
necesarios bajo la Ley sobre Estadounidenses con Discapacidades (ADA) pars personas
discapacitadas que quieran participar en estas reuniones. Cualquier persona que requiera servicios
especiales debera contactar a Jamille Robbins al [phone] lo mas antes posible para hacer arreglos
necesarios para acomodarles.
Personas que hablan Espanol y que no hablen Ingles, o estan Iimitados en la Iectura, habla, o
entendimiento del Ingles, pueden recibir servicios de interpretacion al pedirlo antes de la reunion Ilamando al
1-800-481-6494.
Translation by: MM/I and Associates, LLC; 11220 Paddy Hollow Lane, Raleigh, NC 27614

1-85 IMPROVEMENTS FACT SHEET
Project Description
The 1-85 Widening Project is actually three combined TIP projects:
1-3802 proposes to add four additional travel lanes to 1-85 from north of NC 73 in Cabarrus County to US
29-601 Connector in Rowan County. Interchange improvements, including reconstruction of existing structures
to meet current design standards for vertical clearance, are proposed at US 29-601, Dale Earnhardt Boulevard
and Lane Street. The project is divided into two sections for construction phasing —Section A extends from NC
73 to Lane Street and Section B extends from Lane Street to US 29-601 Connector.
1-3610 proposes to reconstruct the existing cloverleaf interchange at NC 152 and US 29-601, reconstruct the
interchange at NC 152 and 1-85, and improve existing NC 152, which provides access to 1-85 between the two
interchanges.
B-5365 proposes to replace Bridge No. 21 and Bridge No. 34 over the Norfolk Southern Railroad and US 29 in
China Grove.
Project Schedule
Right of Way Acquisition
1-3802: Section A— Fiscal Year 2013; Section B — Fiscal Year 2018
1-3610: included in 1-3802 B
B-5365: Fiscal Year 2017
Construction
1-3802: Section A— Fiscal Year 2013; Section B — Fiscal Year 2020
1-3610: included in 1-3802 B
B-5365: Fiscal Year 2019
Project Cost
Section A: $204,000,000
Section B: $124,000,000
Design-Build
Design-Build is a construction process that allows a project to be completed more quickly. Under the traditional
model, contracts are awarded separately for design and construction, and those steps occur sequentially. With
Design-Build, one contract is awarded for right-of-way acquisition, design and construction. This allows teams
of designers and contractors to simultaneously design and build to complete the project sooner.
Project Contact
Jamille Robbins Leza Wright Mundt
NCDOT Human Environment Section NCDOT PDEA
1598 Mail Service Center 1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1598 Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
[phone] [phone]
jarobbins @ncdot.gov Iwmundt @ncdot.gov

US 29-601 INTERCHANGE AREA (EXIT 58) FACT SHEET
• Current interchange configuration: Cloverleaf
• Proposed interchange configuration: Diverging Diamond
• Existing loops and ramps will be removed
• Collector-distributor lanes removed along 1-85
• Existing dual three-lane bridges over 1-85 replaced with a single six-lane bridge
• New ramps from 1-85 to US 29-601
• Proposed Improvements to roads in the interchange area:
• S. Main Street is proposed to be realigned. A new four-lane bridge with sidewalks over 1-85 is
proposed.
• The bridge on S. Ridge Avenue over 1-85 is proposed to be replaced. The south end of S. Ridge
Avenue will be tied into realigned Main Street. Right in/right out access will be provided at the
intersection of S. Ridge Avenue and Main Street.
• Country Club Drive is proposed to be widened at its intersection with US 29-601.
• Sidewalks and bus stops will be addressed with local officials on a case-by-case basis.
• Recommended design modifications:
• Connect S. Ridge Avenue to US 29-601 (Cannon Boulevard) with right Wright out access.
• Provide a leftover from northbound US 29-601 (Cannon Boulevard) to Ridge Avenue, and provide
access from Ridge Avenue to the Rider Transit Center.
• Eliminate the roundabout on S. Main Street as shown on the Design Public Meeting map presented
in November, 2012.
• Attempt to minimize impacts to adjacent properties during final design.
�;•i�0'I� ia��'�U!w4�lle'I�i�iu�t��li�ph���q�p� � o
0
ea as

DALE EARNHARDT BOULEVARD INTERCHANGE (EXIT 60) AREA FACT SHEET
• Current interchange configuration: Folded Diamond
• Proposed configuration: Improved Diamond with Relocated, Elongated Loop
• Ramp in southeast quadrant will be modified.
• A new loop will be constructed and the ramp modified in the northeast quadrant.
• Existing loop and ramp in the northwest quadrant will be removed.
• Northwest ramp and loop will be relocated to Jaycee Road right-of-way.
• Bridge on Dale Earnhardt Boulevard over 1-85 will be retained.
• Proposed improvements to roads in the interchange area:
• Dale Earnhardt Boulevard will be widened from north of Old Earnhardt Road to south of Vinehaven
Drive.
• A median will be constructed along the widened section of Dale Earnhardt Boulevard.
• Roxie Street will be widened to allow turn lanes at Dale Earnhardt Boulevard.
• Old ramp in the northwest quadrant will be modified to serve as the main access for Lowe's.
• Recommended design modifications:
• Provide all movement intersection at Old Earnhardt Road and Dale Earnhardt Boulevard.
• Study a roundabout at Copperfield Parkway and Vinehaven Drive during final design.
• Evaluate a reconfiguration of the proposed service road to provide improved access to Lowe's, F&M
Bank, Chamber of Commerce building, and gas station.
• Minimize, to the extent practicable, impacts to F&M Bank, the Chamber of Commerce Building, and
Lowe's.
• Further investigate access at Coldwater Ridge Drive during final design. However, NCDOT will not
align Coldwater Ridge Drive with the 1-85 ramp terminals to provide an all movement intersection at
Coldwater Ridge Drive.
• Provide vegetative screening along Jaycee Road. Privacy walls are an enhancement and would have
to be funded by the municipality.
• Attempt to minimize impacts to adjacent properties during final design.
f.
i
ea as

LANE STREET INTERCHANGE (EXIT 63) AREA FACT SHEET
• Current interchange configuration: Diamond
• Proposed interchange configuration: Diamond with Roundabouts
• Ramps in all four quadrants will be reconstructed.
• Roundabouts will be constructed at ramp terminals with Lane Street.
• Existing three-lane bridge on Lane Street over 1-85 will be replaced with a four-lane, median-divided
bridge.
• Proposed improvements to roads in the interchange area:
• Lane Street will be widened to accommodate a concrete median and turn lanes through the
interchange area.
• A roundabout will be constructed at Lane Street and Royce Street/Turkey Road.
• Recommended design modifications:
• Provide right in/right out access to existing service road for Waffle House and motel.
• Provide right in/right out access to Brantley property.
• Provide leftover into Pilot Truck Stop.
• Remove service road shown on the Design Public Meeting map presented in November, 2012.
• Attempt to minimize impacts to adjacent properties during final design.
f
�n
m�
�r
,I
i
���r � t��,— � ii uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu i
i
a '
f lJ I�y�ir� r �y� v r ✓�' ,,, // ///iii%%%%�%/ i////� „ii//�D����/i
��� ,:. //' � ///aa,�, aiic�`� � r u�r,� ,r ,...111G✓li , .�,. Ur �;,,,i i
ea ea

NC 152 (1-85) INTERCHANGE (EXIT 68) AREA FACT SHEET
• Current interchange configuration: Partial Diamond
• Proposed interchange configuration: Diamond with Roundabouts
• New ramps will be constructed in each of the four quadrants.
• Roundabouts will be constructed at ramp terminals.
• The bridge on NC 152 over 1-85 will be retained.
• Proposed improvements to roads in the interchange area:
o NC 152 will be widened to accommodate a concrete median and turn lanes
• Recommended design modifications:
• None at this time.
• Attempt to minimize impacts to adjacent properties during final design.
I „
i
ea ea

I N i all
NC 152 (US 29-601 CONNECTOR) INTERCHANGE AREA
• Current interchange configuration: Cloverleaf
• Proposed interchange configuration: Half-diamond
• All three loops and both ramps will be removed.
• A five-lane bridge with a concrete median is proposed over US 29.
• Proposed improvements to roads in the interchange area:
• Yost Hill Road will be realigned to intersect with NC 152 across from the US 29 eastbound exit ramp.
• Madison Road will be realigned to intersect with NC 152 across from the US 29 westbound entrance
ramp.
• The three-lane bridge on US 29/NC 152 over US 29 will be replaced with a five-lane bridge.
• The four-lane bridge on US 29/NC 152 over the railroad will be replaced with a four-lane, divided
bridge.
• Recommended design modifications:
• None at this time.
• Attempt to minimize impacts to adjacent properties during final design.
liq
rrrr///
r'
7 i y �G/ � Jllr lii Y!
^
/i r lf�i/ liro�r Jr j o f
ea as

TITLE VI PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT FORM
Completing this form is completely voluntary. You are not required to provide the information requested in order to
participate in this meeting.
Meeting Type:Public Meeting Date:November 4,2013
Location:Winecoff Elementary School t
TIP No.:I-3802/1-3610/B-5365
Project Description: 1-85 Widening and Interchange Improvements
In accordance with Title A of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and related authorities,the North Carolina Department of
Transportation(NCDOT)assures that no person(s)shall be excluded from participation in,denied the benefits of,or
subjected to discrimination under any of the Department's programs,policies,or activities,based on their race,color,
national origin,disability,age, income,or gender.
Completing this form helps meet our data collection and public involvement obligations under Title VI and
NEPA,and will improve how we serve the public. Please place the completed form in the designated box on the
sign-in table,hand it to an NCDOT official or mail it to the PDEA-Human Environment Section,1598 Mail Service
Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1598,
All forms will remain on file at the NCDOT as part of the public record.
Zip Code: Q-9)DII Gender: 1771 male [Female
Street Name:
(i.e.Main Street) ► e:
Ag
❑Less than 18 ❑45-64
Total Household Income: F-1 18-29 ❑ 65 and older
171 Less than$12,000 E647,000—$69,999 Y30-44
E1$12,000—$19,999 ❑$70,000—$93,999
❑$20,000—$30,999 1771 $94,000—$117,999 Have a Disability: ❑Yes ❑No
❑ $31,000—$46,999 ❑ $118,000 or greater
Race/]Ethnicity: National Origin: (if born outside the U.S.)
5 White ❑Mexican
171 Black/African American 171 Central American:
❑Asian ❑ South American:
❑American Indian/Alaskan Native ❑Puerto Rican
I
❑Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander ❑Chinese
❑Hispanic/Latino ❑Vietnamese
❑ Other(please specify): ❑Korean
❑Other(please specify):
How did you hear about this meeting? (newspaper advertisement,flyer,and/or mailing)
........... .....
For more information regarding Title VI or this request, please contact the NCDOT Tile VI Section at
[phone] or toll free at 1-800-522-0453,or by email at,gip
_Lcgir Lib&nWaLgov,
Thank you for your parffcipationl

9691+-669ZGn ON '9I15101mrM
U0j:t0 q :juauuuoJjnua usuAnH
'" aC1d - 1C: C30N

NCDOT TO HOLD PUBLIC MEETING NOV. 4 IN CONCORD REGARDING PROPOSED WIDENING
OF 1-85 FROM N.C. 73 IN CABARRUS COUNTY (EXIT 55)TO U.S. 29/601 CONNECTOR (EXIT 68)
IN ROWAN COUNTY
TIP Project 1-3802
The N.C. Department of Transportation will hold a public meeting in November
regarding the Winecoff School Road grade separation, a recent addition to the above project.
This design would eliminate the existing Winecoff School Road railroad crossing and construct a
new bridge carrying Winecoff School Road over the tracks, S. Main Street and S. Ridge Avenue.
Two design alternatives are being studied and will be shown at the meeting.
The meeting will take place on Monday, Nov. 4th at Winecoff Elementary School,
located at 375 Winecoff School Road, in Concord from 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. Interested citizens may
attend at any time during the meeting hours, as there will be no formal presentation. NCDOT
representatives will be available to answer questions and listen to comments regarding the
project. Citizens will also have the opportunity to submit comments and questions in writing.
The purpose of the project is to provide relief from present and future congestion and
provide a higher level of efficiency on 1-85 in this corridor.
For more information, contact Leza Mundt, Project Development Engineer, NCDOT—
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Unit at 1548 Mail Service Center, Raleigh
27699, by phone at: [phone] or by e-mail at Iwmundt @ncdot.gov.
NCDOT will provide auxiliary aids and services under the Americans with Disabilities Act
for disabled persons who want to participate in these meetings. Anyone requiring special
services should contact Jamille Robbins, NCDOT— Human Environment Section at 1598 Mail
Service Center, Raleigh 27699; by phone at: [phone] or by e-mail at:
jarobbins @ncdot.gov as early as possible so that arrangements can be made.
Persons who speak Spanish and do not speak English or have a limited ability to read,
speak, or understand English, may receive interpretive services upon request prior to the
meeting by calling 1-800-481-6494.

Public Meeting to l
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (
(NCDOT)
invites you to a public meeting to discuss a recent addition to
the 1-85 project: a bridge carrying Winecoff School Road over ®® ®®
the railroad.
NCDOT representatives will be available to discuss design modifications for the Winecoff School Road rail crossing, a
recent addition to the above project. This design would eliminate the existing Winecoff School Road railroad crossing and
construct a new bridge carrying Winecoff School Road over the tracks, S. Main Street and S. Ridge Avenue. Two design
alternatives are being studied and will be shown at the meeting. Project staff will answer questions and receive your feedback.
This postcard is being sent to citizens and property owners in the area most likely to be affected by these changes. Interested
citizens can drop in at any time during the above hours. No formal presentation will be made. Attendees will be able to
submit written comments and questions during and after the meeting. Comments can be submitted until November 25,2013.
NCDOT will provide auxiliary aids and services under the Americans with Disabilities Act for disabled persons who
want to participate in this workshop. Anyone requiring special services should contact Mr.Jamille Robbins at 919-707-6085 as
early as possible so that arrangements can be made.
Persons who speak Spanish and do not speak English,or have a limited ability to read,speak or understand English,
may receive interpretive services upon request prior to the meeting by calling 1-800-481-6494.
FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION CONTACT:Leza Wright Mundt NCDOT-PDEA
1548 Mail Service Center,Raleigh,NC 27699-1548(919)707-6032
Iwmundt @ncdot.gov
i

COMMENT SHEET
-PLEASE PRINT-
Name:
Address:
E-mail:
1) Do you represent a particular organization or group? Yes ❑ No ❑
If yes, what is the name of the organization/group?
2) Would you like to be included on our mailing list for this project? Yes ❑ No ❑
3) Which alternative do you prefer? Please circle your preference:
ALTERNATIVE 2A ALTERNATIVE 2B ALTERNATIVE 4A
4) Do you have comments, concerns and/or questions regarding this project?
Comments can be mailed by November 25, 2013 to:
Mr. Jamille A. Robbins
NCDOT- Human Environment Section
1598 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1598
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone]
Email: iarobbins(a)ncdot.gov

1-85 IMPROVEMENTS FACT SHEET
Project Description
The 1-85 Widening Project is actually three combined TIP projects:
1-3802 proposes to add four additional travel lanes to 1-85 from north of NC 73 in Cabarrus County to US
29-601 Connector in Rowan County. Interchange improvements, including reconstruction of existing structures
to meet current design standards for vertical clearance, are proposed at US 29-601, Dale Earnhardt Boulevard
and Lane Street. The current Winecoff School Road railroad crossing will be removed; and a new bridge
carrying Winecoff School Road over the railroad, S. Ridge Avenue, and S. Main Street will be constructed. The
project is divided into two sections for construction phasing —Section A extends from NC 73 to Lane Street and
Section B extends from Lane Street to US 29-601 Connector.
1-3610 proposes to reconstruct the existing cloverleaf interchange at NC 152 and US 29-601, reconstruct the
interchange at NC 152 and 1-85, and improve existing NC 152, which provides access to 1-85 between the two
interchanges.
B-5365 proposes to replace Bridge No. 21 and Bridge No. 34 over the Norfolk Southern Railroad and US 29 in
China Grove.
Project Schedule
Right of Way Acquisition
1-3802: Section A— Fiscal Year 2014; Section B — Fiscal Year 2018
1-3610: included in 1-3802 B
B-5365: Fiscal Year 2017
Construction
1-3802: Section A— Fiscal Year 2014; Section B — Fiscal Year 2019
1-3610: included in 1-3802 B
B-5365: Fiscal Year 2019
Project Cost
Section A: $204,000,000
Section B: $124,000,000
*The proposed improvements at Winecoff School Road will add approximately$5.5 - 7 million
to Section A.
Design-Build
Design-Build is a construction process that allows a project to be completed more quickly. Under the traditional
model, contracts are awarded separately for design and construction, and those steps occur sequentially. With
Design-Build, one contract is awarded for right-of-way acquisition, design and construction. This allows teams
of designers and contractors to simultaneously design and build to complete the project sooner.
Project Contact
Jamille Robbins Leza Wright Mundt
NCDOT Human Environment Section NCDOT PDEA
1598 Mail Service Center 1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1598 Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
[phone] [phone]
jarobbins @ncdot.gov Iwmundt @ncdot.gov

w
WINECOFF SCHOOL ROAD RAILROAD CROSSING
Current condition: The 1-85 widening project will necessitate replacement of the existing
railroad bridge over 1-85 between the Ridge Avenue and Main Street bridges. The new
railroad bridge over 1-85 will be located next to the existing bridge so that train traffic is not
disrupted by construction. The new bridge location affects the railroad tracks through the
Winecoff School Road crossing. The existing crossing is badly humped, with little distance
between Ridge Avenue and Main Street. This makes it impossible to raise the railroad grade
and keep the crossing in operation.
Proposed improvement: A new bridge carrying Winecoff School Road over the railroad,
S. Ridge Avenue, and S. Main Street will be constructed with a higher clearance to meet
current standards. The existing at-grade crossing will be closed. The proposed bridge will
maintain the connection the existing crossing now provides. In addition, the proposed
bridge will allow for the removal of the existing Ridge Avenue bridge over 1-85, creating a
cost-saving opportunity without substantially affecting local travel patterns.
Three design options are being studied (2A, 213, and 4A). With all three options, Winecoff
School Road will be realigned south of the existing road to avoid a property recommended
as eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. All three include a roundabout that
provides a free flow connection from Winecoff School Road to S. Main Street. Options 2B
and 4A provide a second roundabout that connects the new roadway to Mt. Olivet Road.
Option 2A ties into S. Ridge Avenue instead of Mt. Olivet Road. It minimizes impacts to
another property that is recommended as eligible for the National Register. All three
designs will be shown at the public meeting.
M
Ih lip
r *µM
v.,
i
A

I, C� � � %% (IIIIIIII p 0 IIN II I
CAROLINA
1
A—�� CEMETERY
L I
/ ( `' PARK
° 1 Uu�yl ; S ocr
�N
I ,
q
r
I iI
V
END '
�I, t
l W,
I r
I
WINECOFF
ELEMENTAR
P
o
SCHOOL
r
, r
-
r,III rl I III
r �
u
w
I
I
,
II
— - —_._.
—.
�- I-85
, f �
Mills Ave, � ��
� �I III Illljll';1111 u I` Mlw�
r
II „
I
r
MIIIS AV @. C!A .,' ,,END
III
PROPERTY OWNERS LEGEND
D6 ROGERS JOHN KEITH rl}Q> UNIVERSAL AUTOMOTIVE SHVCE INC, BUILDINGS
;]7 MILLS HAROLD L& WIFE AUDINEY S ORIGINAL GROUND 10'-0" 4' 12' 'I 72' 4' 10'-0" ORIGINAL GROUND ® EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY
C[jj) INTERCHANGE X LLC NC LTD LLC --- \.r- n4 VI/GPJ ME (14'WWGIQ ,-�./'�---
® PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY
IS$� KANWAY PROPERTIES LLC IB2.� BARNHARDT A Y&WIFE CARLENE F �.A IIII` 'IIIIII ,�\ ® PROPOSED EASEMENTS(DRAINAGE,CONSTRUCTION,
(Tj CITY OF KANNAPOLIS Ijjq LENZER EDWARD A VARIABLE 0.02 002 I 002 �. VARIABLE AND UTILITY)
0 EXISTING ROADWAY
MILLS ROY D SR&WIFE ANNIE D SLOPE _ SLOPE ® EXISTING ROADWAY TO BE REMOVED
STATE HIGHWAY PATROL _
LACKEY LYNDON R& WF KELLY B { ?"A EXISTING ROADWAY TO BE RESURFACED
�I;S C,ABLE BINNIS K&TAMMY D GRADE 0 PROPOSED ROADWAY
ORIGINAL GROUND � POINT ORIGINAL GROUND E:= PROPOSED I-38038
AUSTIN DAVID B )l ) HAYNES DOROTHY H TYPICAL PICAL SECTION ® PROPOSED GRASS MEDIAN
SEHORN CHRISTINE N !fl„$J WINOLER JACK J L7 TEMPORARY ROADWAY/DETOURS
At fi0GER5 JOHN KEITH WINECOFF SCHOOL RD. PRGPOSED STRUCTURES,ISLAND,SIDEWALK,
CU AND GUTTER
® EXISTING STRUCTURES TO BE RETAINED
STIREWALT STELLA A NI EXISTING STRUCTURES TO BE REMOVED
I( METCALF TERRY H& WIFE MAVIS J WI ECOFI" SCHOOL ROAD � HISTORIC PROPERTY
RIVER,STREAMS
CREAMER LESLEY D RAILROADRIGHTOOF AND PONDS
AY
GOODMAN CAROLYN M GRADE SEPARATION 0 EXISTING UTILITY EASEMENT
OS� FISHER JAMES A ALTERNATE 2A CEMETERIES
PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY
17b) GOODNIGHT MARIE G
PROPOSED FULL CONTROL OF ACCESS
n� FORD WILLIAM MARTIN $ EXISTING FULL CONTROL OF ACCESS
ODOO PRESENT ADT
RIZNYK KAZMIR&MAURITA RIZNYK 0000 FUTURE ADT
C7-7 MAULDEN DAVID PAUL PUBLIC MEETING MAP �R PROPERTY LINES
17v� CLINE EUWAItD L PUBLIC (V- EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNAL
FAGEN CORPORATION LLC , » „mom PROJECT 36780.1.1 (I-3802/(-361aB-5365)
yA'WryrN PROPOSED TRAFFIC SIGNAL
sz LAWS KEVIN T - , �„ F.A.PROJECT FANHIMF-085-2(61)55
CABARRUS AND ROWAN COUNTIES CITY LID L BOUNDARY
ryry @W WETLAND LIMITS BOUNDARY
V HuWUl m'PnW'. WATERSXED AREA
100, ' m I-85 WIDENING AND INTERCHANGE BA NOISE STUDY AREA
” IMPROVEMENTS FROM NORTH OF " "'"" �
ENGUSN SCAIE '��� ooT
II�RELlln.l . j Yll.DNS NC 73 TO US 29-601 CONNECTOR OVER I_BB WILL BE CRITERIA"��T MET,oA.«OMMDDAT PROPOSED ALL L.

r,J y III
I
//0//
//%r
N IIUU
C
�
I,
s
� I. v� fin{ �N.,.
Il� �m�l�IR,III .Jlll��l�� CAROLINA
1 o fin, III,.; CEMETERY
4
PARK
�I
r
o ,
f�
N.
I
JyA
t
/
l N ii r
I I IIII I IIII(IIII I `�0M /
{
If { Iolll
WINECOFF
ELEMENTAR
HOOL
ems
SC M / r alllp 19,
r
f
,
I
Stewart St. /
w
f
f
_
_ -N _L_...
s' I
W
Mills t "
END r r
PROPERTY OWNERS IE-Y2 2BI LEGEND
D6 ROGERS JOHN KEITH r[DO UNIVERSAL AUTOMOTIVE SRVCE INC, EMM BUILDINGS
;]7 MILL$HAROLD L& WIFE AUDREY S ORIGINAL GROUND 10'-0" 4' 12' 'I 72' 4' 10'-0" ORIGINAL GROUND ® EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY
(7$ INTERCHANGE X LLC NC LTD LLC --- \.r- n4 W/GPJ Rrs 114'W/GIQ ,-�./'�---
® PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY
KANWAY PROPERTIES LLC IB2.� BARNHARDT A Y&WIFE CARLENE F �.Y ,�\ ® PROPOSED EASEMENTS(DRAINAGE,CONSTRUCTION,
(Tj CITY OF KANNAPOLIS Ijjq LENZER EDWARD A VARIABLE 0.02 002 1 002 0,02 ygplAglp AND UTILITY)
D EXISTING ROADWAY
MILLS ROY D SH&WIFE ANNIE D SLOPE _ - �.._- SLOPE ® E%(STING ROADWAY TO BE REMOVED
9Cil� STATE Hlcnwnr PATROL —� _ `1'J
LACKEY LYNDON R& WE KELLY B { ?A EXISTING ROADWAY TO BE RESURFACED
P=S� f,A13LE 13ENN15 K&TAMMY U GRADE 0 PROPOSED ROADWAY
ORIGINAL GROUND �/ /POINT ORIGINAL GROUND E:= PROPOSED I-38038
AUSTIN DAVID B 3q HAYNES DOROTHY H TYPICAL PICAL SECTION ® PROPOSED GRASS MEDIAN
SEHORN CHRISTINE N !fl„$J WINOLER JACK �S �Sp J L7 a TEMPORARY ROADWAY/DETOURS
At fi0GER5 JOHN KEITH —YL_LO— WINECOFF SCHOOL RD. PROPOSED STRUCTURES,ISLAND,SIDEWALK,
CU 0.8 AND GUTTER
® EXISTING STRUCTURES TO BE RETAINED
STIREWALT STELLA A EXISTING STRUCTURES TO BE REMOVED
Fr METCALF TERRY H& WIFE MAVIS J WIECOFI" SCHOOL ROAD E=EMM LA ES,HISTORIC PROPERTY
CREAMER LESLEY D RAILROAD RIGHT STREAMS W AND PONDS
A
GOODMAN CAROLYN M GRADE SEPARATION 0 EXISTING UTILITY EASEMENT
OS� FISHER JAMES A ALTERNATE ZB CEMETERIES
PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY
17b) GOODNIGHT MARIE G
PROPOSED FULL CONTROL OF ACCESS
n� FORD WILLIAM MARTIN $ EXISTING FULL CONTROL OF ACCESS
0000 PRESENT ADT
f,. RIZNYK KAZMIR&MAURITA RIZNYK 0000 FUTURE ADT
C7-7 MAULDEN DAVID PAUL PUBLIC MEETING MAP �R PROPERTY LINES
7v) CLINE EDWARD L /V' MEETING EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNAL
FADEN CORPORATION LLC , „mom PROJECT 36780.1.1 (I-38028-361aB-5365)
yA'WryrN PROPOSED TRAFFIC SIGNAL
sz LAWS KEVIN T a- , �„ F.A.PROJECT FANHIMF-085-2(61)55
CABARRUS AND ROWAN COUNTIES CITY LID L BOUNDARY
YH4,W WETLAND LIMITS BOUNDARY
V HuRUl m'PnW'. WATERSXED AREA
100 1. m I-85 WIDENING AND INTERCHANGE Or NOISE STUDY AREA
IMPROVEMENTS FROM NORTH OF ” "'"" �
ENGUSN SCALE IMPROVEMENTS DoT ESE PO DURING FINAL PROIECT DESIGN TO DETERMINE WHETHER T H
ors Li�aiN�rB� �RL�NS NC 73 TO US 29-601 CONNECTOR OVER._R,WILL IS CONIS"UCT MET,.A.«ON—AT DIED ALL NOYMOT

Afit"1
I
III� ..III III �IIJIIII
�, IIIIII I
II II
,�/
i
I � I�,;�, AI`I n ,�� °�, sl �� oa �,� � , � ;; � �CAROLINA
� �.I II� � �III N III..Jll I��I�I, ,�,, � v,
N III.' CEMETERY
f
/ ( PARK
�,
A.
J
l
� t v
,
�J n
V;
e
I I l 1
ELEMENTAR
SCHOOL
1
y''• � r H END � ii p�'J1 _
_
' tt�
t .
k
Nri
11 /
Its I
t
;
'l is Ave. aA
� �,.,
I ,
I
wm
III
d WM I�
PROPERTY OWNERS 19—Y2 LEGEND
5�}i ROGERS JOHN KEITH rljQ% UNIVERSAL AUTOMOTIVE SRVCE INC BUILDINGS
;]7 MILLS HAROLD L& WIFE AUDREY S ORIGINAL GROUND 10'-0" 4' 12' 'I 72' 4' 10'-0" ORIGINAL GROUND ® EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY
(7$ INTERCHANGE X LLC NC LTD LLC --- \.r- n4•VI/GPJ ME (14'W/GIQ ,-�./'�---
® PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY
KANWAY PROPERTIES LLC IB2.� BARNHARDT A Y&WIFE CARLENE F �.A III` 'IIIIII ,�\ ® PROPOSED EASEMENTS(DRAINAGE,CONSTRUCTION,
CITY OF KANNAPOLIS Ijjq LENZER EDWARD A VARIABLE 0.02 002 T 002 �"� ygplAg(p AND UTILITY)
D EXISTING ROADWAY
MILLS ROY D SH&WIFE ANNIE D SLOPE _ - �.._- SLOPE ® EXISTING ROADWAY TO BE REMOVED
I' � STATE HIGHWAY PATROL � _
LACKEY LYNDON R& WE KELLY B EXISTING ROADWAY TO BE RESURFACED
�I;S f,A13LE 13ENN15 K&TAMMY U GRADE 0 PROPOSED ROADWAY
ORIGINAL GROUND � POINT ORIGINAL GROUND E:= PROPOSED I-38038
AUSTIN DAVID B HAYNES DOROTHY H TYPICAL PICAL SECTION ® PROPOSED GRASS MEDIAN
SEHORN CHRISTINE N !fI„$J WINGLER JACK rS ♦ J /+LL,I7 TEMPORARY ROADWAY/DETOURS
At ROGERS JOHN KEITH —Y`_4~— WINECOFF SCHOOL RD. PROPOSED STRUCTURES,ISLAND,SIDEWALK,EI CU 0.8 AND GUTTER
® EXISTING STRUCTURES TO BE RETAINED
STIREWALT STELLA A EXISTING STRUCTURES TO BE REMOVED
Fr METCALF TERRY H& WIFE MAVIS J WI ECOFR SCHOOL ROAD E=EMM LA ES,HISTORIC PROPERTY
CREAMER LESLEY D RAILROAD RIGHT STREAMS W AND PONDS
A
GOODMAN CAROLYN M GRADE SEPARATION 0 EXISTING UTILITY EASEMENT
OS� FISHER JAMES A ALTERNATE 4A CEMETERIES
PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY
17b) GOODNIGHT MARIE G
PROPOSED FULL CONTROL OF ACCESS
FORD WILLIAM MARTIN EXISTING FULL CONTROL OF ACCESS
0000 PRESENT ADT
RIZNYK KAZMIR&MAURITA RIZNYK D�T PUBLIC /��/ /}■/'�� MAP 0000 FUTURE ADT
C7-7 MAULDEN DAVID PAUL 1-(,/BLIV tIJLEETIN •IJtL ll �R PROPERTY LINES
19) CLINE EDWAR
D L EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNAL
FAGEN ORRD CATION LLC w,RPM PROJECT 36780.1.1 (I-380211-361&B-5365) Ire,
PROPOSED TRAFFIC SIGNAL
sz
LAWS KEVIN T R '° FA.PROJECT FANHIMF-085-2(61)55
µ CABARRUS ARID ROWAN COUNTIES a Wi CITY LIMITS L BOUNDARY
w B WETLAND LIMITS BOUNDARY
J�, UI:m'P,aN". WATERSHED AREA
oD aN I-85 WIDENING AND INTERCHANGE �' 4 w emu: NOISE STUDY AREA
ENGDSN SCALE IMPROVEMENTS FROM NORTH OF TwNV DOT
II�RELlln.l . j �DL.�NS NC 73 TO US 29-601 CONNECTOR OVER I—B,WILL BE CINST ARE MET,OA BARRIER JA
L.

APPENDIX E - NEPA/SiECTION 404 MERGER TEAM
CONCURRENCE FORMS

S ECTION 4.rJ4/NEPA IN-rr-_RAr_-jL'Nry AsREEME�NT
CONCURRENCE POIN'r No. 1
PURPOSE ANIL) NEED AND STUDY AREA DEFINED,
13 RU J ECT QTLE: V85 Vhdunkg and I W archange I nilnuvenums hvni N onh of P41 73 to
US 216UI Connectoq Rowan mid (Abunla Gmintics;Tl 1) 1'roj(xt Nuinbcrs D-3802/1-361(); Fcdcral
I)roject N uniber Fi\N I I I MF-085­2(61)55; NX/IiS N urnber 3(x7 0.1.1
P U R PCJ S E AN o N EE 0 0 F P RO PO 8E P ROW ECT: I be puToscs of the Inoposud propw are
as GAWS:
0 14) addwss congmt-ion and capacityproblons alorig the 1-85 cor6dor in the prokTt area by
i I Till)rovi lig the level of scrAce (11A) on 115 and its interchanges by 2035. i\nother
desiralitc outcoille is to chniinate vcriicol clearance deficiencies forstructurcs over D-85
within the projc�(,',:t suidy aws A onkr v) nicet (mrwnt Wyn swnduds.
0 To rc�ducc operathmal de6dwiths at the tracwhmWe of US 29-601 NC, 152.
STU MY ARCA"I'lle project study arca begins appyAnately I JHM let novh of 15: 73 and ends at
opproxitnatc.1y QXX) feet me rdi of US 2%101 (Innea(m It condsts ofa 600--foot wide. (..orrkhw
ctenuied on 181 At interwcAms and buct0miges, corridors atc 400 feet
2100 Ext Wig. At the US 29-601 interclunige, Tc snOy own cownds 21M) ker noqh along
Kaunapohs HigInvay aiml dw railroad corridor and approxinawly 5,()()() f'Cet t,(,) t1j(, Sontrij (jo\Vn
1-85�. Along SlC 1221 (Old 15catry Ford Road), the corridor cxt,cnds appnminiady 1100 Ixt wee of
1­85 and approxintatc.1y, 2,000 fect to the cast of 1-85, At NC 152, the corridorflong 1-85 is widened
u) appmmixt-cly 2,000 feet U) We crest (hotri the 145 cenirrUnc) to include title (IS 29-601/N(: 152
interchangc, Main Street and the I`QC 152 humduixige with AN It extends all)nwirnareb, 1,5(X) f0t
akmT NC 152 on bob Aks of 105,
The pnomt warii, 11'4 concurrcd on this date of janum; 19, 2011, with be ymqxmc and neml Gw the
' 1�'
poposed PITIect 'e��'/dcscxibc�l above.
U SAC T', I"1-1 W 121
A
1JSF',I1A
//o (AWL,
Ust"WS jQCDCR CLAM
GR A4 PO

Section 404/NEPA Interagency Agreement
Concurrence Point No. 2
Design tions for Detailed Study
Ptoject,ritie: 1-85 Widetrilig and Ititcrchangc Iniprovemoits from Nord'i of NC 73 to US
29-6MI Comiector; Rowan aInd abarti.rs O'n'tilties, `1".11' ,I'roject N U111I)CPS 1.3802/1-361Om
Feder.al P:roject Number FAN1JIMF'--085-2(6J)59; WBS NUmber 36780.1.1
Design Option to Study in Detail:
1, No Btdld
2. Widen to th,e Inside of 1-85
1 1-85/LJS 29-(r01: Divergirig Di�amond Into-cliangc (MA)
4. 1-85/1)ale Flarnhardt,Blvd: Diai).iotid with Slip R-arnp
5. 1-85/1 ane Street: Diatnorid with ROLM(labouts
6. 1-85/NCI 152: Dian-iond with RomidabOLIts'
7. UJS 29--601 Connector/NC 152: Half dianiond
The proicct team I,IaS C011COrml on this (lay, Decembet- 16, 2010,with the desigri options to
StL'Idy in ck"�t-ail ft "/thc proposed project as indicated abovc.
USIM."'A",
USF11A Ncl.)o'l,
Ust"WS NCDCR AA
N(A)WQ_ r
J

SECTION 404/NEPA INTERAGENCY AGREEMENT
UPDATED CONCURRENCE POINT NO. 2
DESIGN OPTIONS FOR DETAILED STUDY
Project Title: I-85 Widening and Interchange Improvements from North of NC 73 to US
29-601 Connector;Rowan and Cabartus Counties;TIP Project Numbers 1-3802/1-3610;
Federal Project Number FANHIMF-085-2(61)55;WBS Number 36780.1.1
Design Option for the Detailed Study:
1. No Build
2. Widen to the Inside of I-85
3. I-85/US 29-601:Diverging Diamond Interchange(DDI)
4. I-85/Dale Earnhardt Blvd: Diamond with Slip Ramp
5. I-85/Lane Street: Diamond with Roundabouts
6. I-85/NC 152: Diamond with Roundabouts
7. US 29-601 Connector/NC 152: Half diamond
8. 1-85/Dale Earnhardt Blvd: Diamond with Elongated Loop
The project team has concurred on this day,January 16,2013,with the design options to
study in detail fo /the proposed project as indicated above.
USACC FHWA f AL Itld J NCDOT
USEP,USFWS t yiFx NCDCR ��
NCDWQ—�. NCWRC --
CRMPO

SECTION 404/NEPA INTERAGENCY AGREEMENT
CONCURRENCE POINT NO. ZA REVISED
BRIDGING DECISIONS AND ALIGNMENT REVIEW
PROJECT TITLE: I-85 Widening and Interchange Improvements from North of NC 73 to
US 29-601 Connector; Rowan and Cabarrus Counties;TIP Project Numbers I-3802/I-3610/
B-5365; Federal Project Number FANHIMF-085-2(61)55;WBS Number 36780.1.1
BRIDGING DECISIONS AND ALIGNMENT REVIEW: NCDOT identified jurisdictional areas
and preliminary structures at major stream crossings. These are shown in the following table:
Stream Stream Existing Recommended Structure
Site (Road) ID Structure (length)
(length)
Irish Buffalo BC- Replace both bridges with a
4,5 Creek Buffalo 2 @ 160-foot single bridge, approximately
(I-85) Creek bridges 145 feet wide and 175 feet
long
Threemile Branch SC-1 2 @ 10'x 7' Retain and extend; Consider
8 (I-85) RCBC supplementation
220 feet 290 feet
UT to Cold Supplement with 2 (a) 72-
11,12 Water Creek SD-1 7'x 7' R et) inch RCP
I-85 (305 feet) 385 feet
UT to Cold 2 (a 9'x 7' Retain and extend; Consider
17 Water Creek SEB RCBC supplementation
I-85 300 feet 390 feet
Cold Water Creek SE 2 (cry 242-foot Replace with single bridge,
18 approximately 215 feet wide
(I-85) bridges
and 240 feet long
21 UT to Lake SFC 54-inch CMP Replace with 72-inch RCP
Fisher -85
UT to Lake SFE 72-inch Retain and extend
23 Fisher Concrete Pipe (295 feet)
I-85 250 feet
UT to Lake SG-1 2 @ 7'x 7' Extend with bevel edge in
25 Fisher RCBC headwall
I-85 225 feet 270 feet
UT to Lake SH Tx T RCBC Extend with bevel edge in
26 Fisher (235 feet) headwall
I-85 280 feet
UT to Cold SIE/SBF 8'x 8' RCBC Retain and extend
28 Water Creek (160 feet) (200 feet)
I-85

litatt4itt � lafaataln � _ � � �ttrk,si�taacthr{€�rlcaYma�c:jaaae,
4iiRt � ��Cta1t`.QtkVa
(htaa<wc3) .; `11? (tr aaj�Cla�
hS°N toCold 6' 6' tC C R,t ts'and t ttrat
;; 11.t.a {,dc ,t
[NO WO O P90
t:! C.It�Sa.1 Vlata c C.;aM taK C)vea.jataaztt Replace vAth i,)vtejatts,
_ .1`.. " .�.A _.........
t r Cta C Ad )oak aac c t6;
,12 �X/ tsa.(,x-e :c xti A 7'x 7'R 0 IC eaTlt of whh 2
70
yta(3 1c t.t
Re't amai and s a&a srt1,;
g �;utci t 7 tit r C::at°.t,ta �;}jy. >((+),T a 1' ito�al,�le stmt whh 2(t7�'70
PR 13P)
.7r4tr (r„<t
11.1,to C old / is ch
S1t:'yc R,e,tatim,dtirack c,.d�o�sdatJ
j<1 \V,,ttc,a(.',r.ta�t', <.oncc:e.P.a 1�Yt C � IN) thet)
ac �tt a
15
�l�t 1 ,1� �l,aaVrct) CrA aicrY�.
The,projo't d:catat has<;i:amaca:rmd cm IS stacs aafDecen'Ibcr 10,2013 with d.ltc,jtzatsdt(AmI al imptst.t.,as
sMc."n 5 dta t,aWa I>mt8a&A 5 Ow 2A jsstc:kt mnd yudNmicany a arz'ca[:Caatc,s„gat tcaajoi:.a(.ae aorta i:a,ca s[sxjs
an j)R'C'.Gra7K 2t17cke, �.
r
C.1rt4f..P; ,t' 1_-: '1rtYp 2 jtt:.l`t A
L)S I.",
NCDCR

1
f
1
777777777 Fxttlri;
treat tro,aI>x WCOAMCII, c d tructaxe
Struetuxc
( rr) D (Icrtlx)
ur to Cold SJ 13 6'x 6,
RC3C� Retain and c extend
33 Water Creek
1 � (240 feet) (290 feet:}
41 Cold Water Creek SK Overpass Replace with Overpass
SR 1232 Bridge Birk Ye uY
UT to Cold Retain and extend;
42 Water Creek SKA Tx T RCBC Supplccnctxt with 2 @ 72-
(I 85) (185 feet) inch.RCP
(250 feet)
Retain and extend;
Cold Wager Creek SK 2 @ 7'x 7' Supplement with 2 ,, 72-
43 (SR 1337) RCBC inch RCP and 1 @ 48-inch
(155 feet) RCP
_ 246 fcgt .
1J'I" to Cc71d S1P 72-inch Retain and extend
44 Water Creek Concrete Pipe (240 feet)
1-85 (235 feet)
45 Cold Water Creek SIB Tx 7'RCBC Retain and extend
NC 152 195 feet 245 feet
The project team has concurred on this (late of December 10,2013. with the jurisdictional impacts as
shown in the tables provided in the 211 packet and preliminary structures at major stream crossings
as presented above.
USACI FIIWA �,�,.� �,t.., l �t e
USITWS NCDCR
}
CRMPC)

.-._...........
�trearn `Stream ea ed S
@tsti�ag
Site.. tructire tructue
Rexnend
(�aad) ! TD m. ieri th
UT to Cold -
33 Water Creek SJB 6'x 6'RCBC Retain and extend
1-85 (240 feet) (290 feet)
41 Cold Water Creek SK Overpass Replace with Overpass
SR 1232 Bridge
Bride _
UT to Cold Retain and extend;
42 Water Creek SIB 7'x 7'RCBC Supplement with 2 ca 72-
(1_85) (185 feet) inch RCP
250 feet
Retain and extend;
43 Cold Water Creek SK 2 @ 7'x 7' Supplement with 2 @ 72-
(SR 1337) RCBC inch RCP and 1 @ 48-inch
(155 feet) RCP
UT to Cold S1�F 72-inch 246 feet
44 Water Creek Concrete Pipe Retain and extend
1-85 235 feet (240 feet)
45 Cold Water Creek SK T x T RCBC
NC 152 Retain and extend
195 feet 245 feet
The project team has concurred on this date of December 10,2013 with the jurisdictional impacts as
shown in the tables provided in the 2A packet and preliminary structures at major stream crossings
as presented above.
1
SACL FH'\,VA .
USE PA �J
NCDOT
USFWS NCDCR
NCDWQ
NCWR
CRMPO ' - ,,A