20210444 Ver 1_B-5372 PCN Attachment Package_20240429

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Roy COOPER
GOVERNOR
April 29, 2024
J.R. "JOEY" HOPKfNs
SECRETARY
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers NC Division of Water Resources
Charlotte Regulatory Field Office Transportation Permitting Branch
8430 University Executive Park Dr, Suite 615 610 East Center Avenue, Suite 301
Charlotte, NC 28262 Mooresville, NC 28115
ATTN: Mr. Steve Brumagin, Ms. Beth Plummer,
NCDOT Coordinator NCDOT Coordinator
Subject: Application for Section 404 Nationwide Permit 14, and Section 401 Water Quality
Certification for the Proposed Replacement of Bridge No. 109 on SR 1706 (Martin
Luther King Jr. Avenue) over US 29 (N. Cannon Blvd.) in Cabarrus County, Division
10, TIP No. B-5372, Debit $323 from WBS 46087.1.1.
Dear Sir and Madam:
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace bridge no. 109 on SR
1706 (Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue) over US 29 (N. Cannon Blvd.) in Cabarrus County. The new bridge
will include two 12-foot travel lanes and 7-foot paved offsets, or "shoulders", on each side to accommodate
bicycles. The roadway grade of the new structure will be approximately two feet higher than the existing
structure to allow for the proper vertical roadway clearance over U.S. 29. The new bridge will be
constructed on existing location, with traffic being detoured off -site during construction. The existing
entrance and exit ramps will remain open to local business traffic during construction.
The Federal Highway Administration is the lead federal agency for this project.
Impact Summary
As a result of the proposed project, there will be a total of 235 linear feet of permanent stream impacts due
to culvert replacement and stream channel relocation, and 24 linear feet (0.003 ac) of temporary stream
impacts due to construction access for stream channel relocation efforts. There are no wetland impacts
associated with this project.
In addition to the below -referenced documents, please find enclosed Pre -Construction Notification (PCN),
Stormwater Management Plan, and Permit Drawings.
A copy of this permit application will be posted on the NCDOT Website at:
http://connect.ncdot.gov/resources/Environmental.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Rob Crowther at
recrowther(ancdot.gov or [phone].
Mailing Address: Location:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Telephone: [phone] BIRCH RIDGE DRIVE
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS UNIT Customer Service: 1-877-368-4968 RAEEiGH NC 27610
1598 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RAEEiGHNC 27699-1598 Website: www.ncdot.gov

Attachments:
• NCDMS Mitigation Acceptance Letter
• USFWS ESA Section 7 Informal Concurrence Letter
• No Archaeological Survey Required Form
• Historic Architecture and Landscapes No Survey Required Form
• Tribal Coordination Correspondence (Catawba Nation)
• Type II(A) Categorical Exclusion Action Classification Form (Signed 10/05/2022)
Sincerely,
L a-u-�
oti Michael A. Turchy
Environmental Coordination and Permitting Group Leader
cc: NCDOT Permit Application Standard Distribution List

Mitigation

ROY COOPER
Governor
ELIZABETH S. BiSER
Secretary
MARC RECKTENWALD
Director
Mr. Jamie Lancaster, P.E.
Environmental Analysis Unit
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Mail Service Center 1598
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1598
Dear Mr. Lancaster:
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
February 16, 2024
Subject: Mitigation Acceptance Letter: TIP B-5372, Replace Bridge 120109 over US 29 (North
Cannon Boulevard) on SR 1706 (Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue), Cabarrus County
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) will provide the
mitigation for the subject project. Based on the information supplied by you on February 15 2024 the impacts are
located in CU 03040105 of the Yadkin River basin as follows:
Stream
and
Wetlands
River
Basin
Cu
Location
Eco-
Region
g
Stream
Wetlands
Cold
Cool
Warm
Riparian
Non-
Coastal
Riparian
Marsh
Impacts
Yadkin
03040105
SP
0
0
235.000
0
0
0
*Some of the impacts may be proposed to be mitigated at various ratios. See permit application for details. DMS
will provide the amount of stream and wetland mitigation included in the environmental permits.
DMS commits to implementing sufficient mitigation credits to offset the impacts associated with this project
as determined by the regulatory agencies in accordance with the In -Lieu Fee Instrument dated July 28, 2010. If the
above referenced impact amounts are revised, then this mitigation acceptance letter will no longer be valid and a new
mitigation acceptance letter will be required from NCDEQ-DMS.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Beth Harmon at 919-707-8420.
Sincerely,
ElizablA. Harmon
DMS NCDOT ILF Coordinator
cc: Mr. Monte Matthews, USACE — Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
Ms. Amy Chapman, NCDWR
Mr. Brad Chilton, NCDOT
File: B-5372
D �7. North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Mitigation Services
t �:e,- ,'®}Jl[ 217 West Jones Street 1 1652 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1652
NORTH CAFiouNn
�&Enl­. /� 919.707.8976

Permit
Drawings

I Iighway
(Version 3.00; Released August 2021)
North Carolina Department of Transportation r�
Highway Stormwater Program \=
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN =,
FOR NCDOT PROJECTS
WBS Element: 46087.1.1
TIPIProj No: B-5372 County(ies): Cabarrus Page 1 of 3
General Project Information
WBS Element:
46087.1.1 ITIP Number: B-5372 I Project Type: Bridge Replacement I Date: 2/9/2024
NCDOT Contact:
David Stutts, PE
Contractor Designer:
Jon Ford, PE
Address:
1000 Birch Ridge Drive
Raleigh, NC 27610
Address:
2550 West Tyvola Road Suite 120
Charlotte, NC 28217
Phone:
919-707-6442
Phone:
704-357-0488
Email:
dstutts(cbMcdot.goy
Email:
icford(cD. mt.com
City/Town:
Kannapolis
County(ies):
Cabarrus
River Basin(s):
Yadkin -Pee Dee I
ICAMACounty?
No
Wetlands within Project Limits?
No
Project Description
Project Length (lin. miles or feet):
885 feet Surrounding Land Use: ISuburban
Proposed Project
Project Built -Upon Area (ac.)
0.2 lac.
1.7 lac.
Typical Cross Section Description:
2-lane road to bridge with sidewalks over 4-lane divided highway
2-lane road with 5' bike lanes and curb and gutter to bridge over 4-lane divided highway
Annual Avg Daily Traffic (veh/hrlday):
t Design/Future: 5600 1 Year: 12040
Existing:1 3,520 1 Year: 1 2020
General Project Narrative:
(Description of Minimization of Water
Quality Impacts)
B-5372 involves replacing bridge number 109 on SR-1706 (Martin Luther King Jr Ave) in Kannapolis, NC. The existing road and bridge is a 2-lane road without curb and gutter. The
proposed typical section is a 2-lane road with curb and gutter and sidewalks before and after the bridge. The improvements will include the installation of a surface drainage network
that will outfall into the jursidictional stream on site. Rip rad pads will be installed at pipe outlets across the project to reduce flow velocities and erosivity. The existing 66" RCP
culvert for the unamed tributary to Cold Water Creek will be removed and replaced with a 72" welded steel culvert, the channel will be shifted to align with the new culvert.

i s North Carolina Department of Transportation
Hi�,hway p p
Storniwater
Highway Stormwater Program
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN T
(Version 3.00; Released August 2021) FOR NCDOT PROJECTS
WBS Element: 46087.1.1 TIP/Pro' No.: B-5372 Count ies : Cabarrus Page 2 of 3
General Project Information
Waterbody Information
Surface Water Body (1): UT to Cold Water Creek
NCDWR Stream Index No.:
13-17-9-4-2-(1)
NCDWR Surface Water Classification for Water Body
Primary Classification:
Water Supply IV S-I
Supplemental Classification:
None
Other Stream Classification:
Impairments:
Aquatic T&E Species?
Comments:
NRTR Stream ID:
SA
Buffer Rules in Effect: N/A
Project Includes Bridge Spanning Water Body?
INo
I Deck Drains Discharge Over Buffer? N/A
Dissipator Pads Provided in Buffer? INo
Deck Drains Discharge Over Water Body?
N/A
(If yes, provide justification in the General Project Narrative)
(If yes, describe in the General Project Narrative; if no, justify in the
General Project Narrative)
(If yes, provide justification in the General Project Narrative) I
Surface Water Body (2): 1 UT to Cold Water Creek
NCDWR Stream Index No.:
13-17-9-4-2-(1)
NCDWR Surface Water Classification for Water Body
Primary Classification:
Water Supply IV S-I
Supplemental Classification:
None
Other Stream Classification:
Impairments:
Aquatic T&E Species?
Comments:
NRTR Stream ID:
SB
Buffer Rules in Effect: N/A
Project Includes Bridge Spanning Water Body?
INo
IDeck Drains Discharge Over Buffer? I N/A
Dissipator Pads Provided in Buffer? I N/A
Deck Drains Discharge Over Water Body?
N/A
(If yes, provide justification in the General Project Narrative)
(If yes, describe in the General Project Narrative; if no, justify in the
General Project Narrative)
(If yes, provide justification in the General Project Narrative) I
Surface Water Body (3): 1 UT to Cold Water Creek
NCDWR Stream Index No.:
13-17-9-4-2-(1)
NCDWR Surface Water Classification for Water Body
Primary Classification:
Water Supply IV S-I
Supplemental Classification:
None
Other Stream Classification:
Impairments:
Aquatic T&E Species?
Comments:
NRTR Stream ID:
SC
Buffer Rules in Effect: N/A
Project Includes Bridge Spanning Water Body?
INo
I Deck Drains Discharge Over Buffer? N/A
Dissipator Pads Provided in Buffer? I N/A
Deck Drains Discharge Over Water Body?
N/A
(If yes, provide justification in the General Project Narrative)
(If yes, describe in the General Project Narrative; if no, justify in the
General Project Narrative)
(If yes, provide justification in the General Project Narrative)

ls
Hi�,hway
Storniwate r
,
(Version 3.00; Released August 2021)
North Carolina Department of Transportation
p p
Highway Stormwater Program
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
FOR NCDOT PROJECTS
T
WBS Element: 46087.1.1 TIP No.: B-5372
Count ies : Cabarrus
Page 3 of 3
Additional Waterbody Information
Surface Water Body 4 : UT to Cold Water Creek
NCDWR Stream Index No.:
13-17-9-4-2- 1
NCDWR Surface Water Classification for Water Body
Primary Classification:
Water Supply IV (WS-IV)
Supplemental Classification:
None
Other Stream Classification:
Impairments:
Aquatic T&E Species?
Comments:
NRTR Stream ID:
SD
Buffer Rules in Effect: N/A
Project Includes Bridge Spanning Water Body?
No
IDeck Drains Discharge Over Buffer? I N/A
Dissi ator Pads Provided in Buffer? I N/A
Deck Drains Discharge Over Water Body?
I N/A
(If yes, provide justification in the General Project Narrative)
(If yes, describe in the General Project Narrative; if no, justify in the
General Project Narrative)
(If yes, provide justification in the General Project Narrative) I

n
T
W
O
U
O
U
200
1008 I
2oa
215
Icanno 1 io —
High, ch of
yBr c ch of
1706
END PROTECT
i kE 2154
�ock Scho
BEGIN PROTECT 'P 4 Ba
KAXN P "Ll
• 4 4 K imapo s
mmuru 194
�h
of aPh
VICINITY MAP (N.T.S.)
OFF —SITE DETOUR
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
(J'ABARRUS COUNTY
LOCATION: BRIDGE NO. 109 ON SR 1706 (MLK JR. AVE) OVER US 29
TYPE OF WORK: GRADING, DRAINAGE, PAVING AND STRUCTURE
WETLAND AND SURFACE WATER IMPACTS PERMIT
THIS PROJECT IS WITHIN THE MUNICIPAL BOUNDARY OF KANNAPOLIS
THIS PROJECT IS PARTIAL ACCESS CONTROL.
CLEARING ON THIS PROJECT SHALL BE PERFORMED TO THE LIMITS ESTABLISHED BY METHOD III
GRAPHIC SCALES
50 25 0 50 100
PLANS
50 25 0 50
100
PROFILE (HORIZONTAL)
10 5 0 10 20
PROFILE (VERTICAL)
DESIGN
DATA
ADT 2020 =
3,520
ADT 2040 =
5,600
K =
11%
D =
55%
T =
5%
V =
40 MPH
* TTST =1%
DUAL =4%
FUNC CLASS =
MINOR COLLECTOR
SUB —REGIONAL
TIER
PROJECT LENGTH
LENGTH ROADWAY TIP PROJECT B-5372 = 0.133 MILES
LENGTH STRUCTURE TIP PROJECT B-5372 = 0.035 MILES
TOTAL LENGTH TIP PROJECT B-5372 = 0.168 MILES
.�� Johnson, Mirmiran, fH Thompson Inc.
—� �,'�,� ,o Charlotte,
hriot N N C-28217Road, Suite 120,
3097
2024 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS
REECE M. SCHULER, P.E, P.L.S
RIGHT OF WAY DATE: PROJECT ENGINEER
APRIL 26, 2024 JON FORD, P.E.
PROJECT DESIGN ENGINEER
LETTING DATE: DAVID STUTTS, P.E.
NOVEMBER 29, 2024 NCDOT CONTACT
81'ATe
HTATB PR018GT N0.N.
FryRHPRR8NC8
B-53dq/2
�
8PA18 PRRJ.N0.
P.A.PR0.1.N0.
889L1l"m
46087.1.1
P. E.
46087.2.1
ROW
HYDRAULICS ENGINEER
ROADWAY DESIGN
ENGINEER
P.E.
PERMIT DRAWING
SHEET 1 OF 7

6 PROJECT REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO.
B-5372 4A
DENOTES IMPACTS IN ��
SURFACE WATER 1 1 N\ 1 \ RW SHEET NO.
ROADWAY DESIGN HYDRAULICS
® DENOTES TEMPORARY § q0 a ` f ENGINEER ENGINEER
' CIDIMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
� \ \ <\ ` � CASTLE AND COOKE CHIPOLA O
�POND
A605
4 RISE
'/+ \ � \\\ b \ \\ \ Q �" •/ � � <- E%,a11M4 ale _
WETLAND & STREAM IMPACTS xA SD
E,P WD° PERMIT D RAWI N G
2 OF 7
NTL S II I� / ST
DETAIL 1 DETAIL 6 / woaos / lid\\\ \� y.FCP�R-TAIN // _—\\ GRASS
SPECIAL CUT DITCH STANDARD 'V' DITT - CORNERSTONE CABARRUS. LLC
fG Q \
Norm stole] F—I _RETAIN / r
Nmerol A`�ec SEP. N.—IRETAIN
Gr D .N 2./ ti, Gron j �\a� �\ \ \ /�3C3 �� 3 F
D J,
Min, D= 1.0 Ff. q �2
Min. D= 1.0 Fr. O\ TEMPORARY Iyy44tt@@ACTS
FROg1 STA. 1 + O STA. 18 -Y- LT FROM STA. 16+67 TO STA. 17+04 -L- LT WOOD] / /� 4'p$ IN SURFACEhVATER F
FROM STA. 20 12D TO STA. 20+50 -Y- RT Ny a•
DETAIL 2 E / //`�/ Z\ \ \ \\\ I / IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER \ IF
` IP _9 G 55 _ \n \ \ I `u� ANN SFRFAW'GECHANNEL RELOCATION(
LATERAL BASE DITCH SAS �� �ff_8' \\ \ \ \ \ F SEE ETAIL 4 \
y1C IN°, ro s,olcl WOODS / 1
,� i F \ m\ \ \ \ \ ' SITE 1 5,
o,�c\� SDZ II 1 I
si°ve - M L S h ro
Min. D= 1.0 R.
U B- 2.8 R. ` \ sS - - �� �8' TC 1 �\'� �/ IMPACT N SURFACE WAT4 I I I
B= 2.0 FL (MIN.) \ ` ` _ _ _ / /� / z\ \ \ (72" WELDED STEEL CULVE
Z _ /
OFROM STA. 20L 98 TO STA. 21-67 -L- LT ` /,T1 \ 1 \ \ CL B RIP RAP LATgSE DIT H
FRO�vI, STA. 21 96 TO S 2+70 -L- LT / / 1 1 z\ EST 2 TONS I
7 H E DETAI 2 CL g RIP RAP w A•� 72\ 4r>- SA 1S� .. ✓S // / RETAIN \ m\ \ \` F E$T 7 SYGF RAP /
N \„\✓S 55 // / F \ \2 \ \ Rp,Q-N SPECIAL CUT DITCH AN ENT EST 2 EST 7 SOYGF / /I z DAVID H. MURDOCK
SEE DETAIL 1 D AIL 3 „ D/B/A
_ EE DETAIL 6 \ P' F m J OHM HOLDING COMPANY
J5 J' _ = 18 R[ql \ / R
n C �/1- /,
T�wSA CLEAN W/ SCOUR ISSUES � \ +— —� —/� / G 51 D � \
STONEWALL F _ — — — — \� 2GI \\\ \ \ \ \ '� .. 0 DS .
S s CL B R RAP-- PE D \
fS Exisnnc Rix / ESl\2 $ NS O �F
C pp p/
REMOVE HW �. 30'C&G \� \N, wp / / GRASS \ \ GREU T - wo \ „ ce- L \ \ Ekm �"P Rom.
///
ss — G--------- --- —s \\\
" .
----�-rsrsr=�sesr= �=�P-------------N-��_ -- --- 16320'98.6"E '
s
— '=�------------art— `— -- -- —
k Ly' • 2 m Gs Iz vc GREU TL- llI \�
o YPE
EXISTING F/W
woaos \\\�\\\ — — — — — --jw- N \ \ \ \� $ F�r� P\' IMPACTS IN SURFA AT 1
�� I7�'`7.VELDED STEEL CU \ 1I
`v' R 1
\� IMPACTS IN SURP62P WATER
WOODS •�+^"" \.\
�SS WATER CXJNIF'ILNY AOUI$ITION CORP, WOODS \ `` \\ \ \ `1 F CNNEL CHANG (STREAM CHANNEL REL41CATI0
N \ \ \ �\ EE DETAIL --CITY OF KANNAPOLIS �ks''c\\\'V'DITCHn �3 ��tEU TL-2
JS-'-�✓/� - \ \\ \ SEE DETAIL 6 \ \
/ DAVID H. URDOCK �^ \\ \ F \ A- \ \ x \ TEM RARY IMPACTS /
\\\\\ \pn „\ C NW IN SURFACE WATER
a \ R J
v' OHM HOLDI COMPANY / f"'wv. I S \ \ \ \ CDN 4Av I
SrJ ` ` \ W09oS 2� woaos
✓S
1 LEAN W/ \ \ \ A, \ \ ��PIPFnc —�/� O I I
DETAIL 3 I c No SCOUR ISSUES= \ esr e l — Ras
_ $tOtlRi551dE� — — — WOODS / RIP RAP AT EMBANKMENTBST
(N°tm ESTB3 TO
lo'min. EST 10 S F
/ \
w000$ Ditch Tomin. t.s / _��� S \\ \ \ \ \ \N 0 RETAI� \\ \ SAC
Grode GEOTEXTaE I EST 3RTON5
I -�T_LO SYGF
Type of liner= 10 TONS'CL I Rip -Rap I ` `�
Gea ease= 14:y F AVID H. MURDOCK
SOEEADETPILS DO NOT INCLUDE MATERIAL ALONG SLOPE 1
FROM STA. 21-46 TO STA. 21-67 -L- LT .QL DING CDMPAN
FROM STA. 21+96 TO STA. 22+30 -L- LT\
Q YATES INVESTMENT PROPERTIES. LLC i `�// y� - S `�� m Mir .w ,a s
S
DETAIL 4 DETAIL 5 ,2.vc `
INLET CHANNEL CHANGE OUTLET CH
Nof to ELANNEL CHANGE 6
( Not fo 5rolel (
d LY
wo1 _---- '-�o'na%9' a '10' c �� \ ��`�\s SA f
N °
r Meb°nnelrBed B ointoin NofurPl -Min. D= 3.0 Ff. \ 1
�- \
Min. D= 3.0 Ff. M V \ \ S
O[h 10 cAeerpassi�le g_ Cl.anneIB.d B \\\ �Sr sr�
tc extent possible 8= 4.0 R.=; \\(p y►�
N
Type of Liner- fib TONS,CL I Rlp-Rop Length BO Ft. T Len fh = 44 Ft. \ W
NIT] G--fll— 115 W DDE = 14 YPe of Liner= 30G__le- R511 , DDE = 120 c.d. '� \\\\�X / WOODS \ psi\
HDELL PROPERTIES,
STA. 21+84 -L- LT STA. 22+70 -L- RT
50' 0' S0' 100, ISO, LLC4474
s
�A GRAPHIC SCALETL
s
N/ I'7 1 t �a Hy. CAN

PROJECT REFERENCE NO. SHEET N0.
DENOTES IMPACTS IN BRW SHE 5A
SURFACE WATER DES SHEET No.
WETLAND & STREAM IMPACTS ROADWAY DESIGN HYDRAULICS
DENOTES TEMPORARY ENGINEER ENGINEER
IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER �`p
O�
2
o \ TEMPORARY IMPACTS
" IN SURFACE WATER
F \ I II
k s IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER \ ► PERMIT D RAWI N G
E ANN S��ECHANNEL RELOCATION) \ IF
SEE ETAIL 4 \\ \ ` SHEET 4 OF 7
SITE 1 25`)
SD
IMPACT.%4N SURFACE WATE� I I
(72" WELDED STEEL CULVER1)
`\ CL B RIP RAP LATASEL DIT H I I I
\ \ EST 2 TONS E DETAI 2
\\ \ EST 7 SYGF CL B RIP RAPct
RAP T
J EST 2 TONS I DAVID H.
\ SPECIAL CUT DITCH BAN ENT / I z D/E
SEE DETAIL 1 D AIL 3 EST 7 SYGF �� \ / I N
DHM HOLDIN
\ ` ---- IS E \ L 2 \ \
i�FbDS
`� �y� \ i F
REMOVEiW
�\
\
\ \ \
YPE
WOODS v� `!� WOODS \
IMPACTS IN SURFACE W ,
�' P (72" WELDED STEEL CULVERT \
SITE � 4 ) \
IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
F CHANNEL CHANGE (STREAM CHANNEL RELOCATION)
SEE DETAIL 5 \ F
�REU T L -2
F �\ N� \ , \ \ `\ TEM ORARY IMPACTS
IN SURFACE WATER
-�Rcp
\\
25' 0' 25' S0' 75'
GRAPHIC SCALE

SHEET NO.
DENOTES IMPACTS IN
SURFACE WATER
DENOTES TEMPORARY
IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
25' 0' 25' S0' 75'
GRAPHIC SCALE
WETLAND & STREAM IMPACTS
B-5372
— SHEET NO,
ROADWAY DESIGN
ENGINEER
CnCID
O,
2
ENGINEER
PERMIT DRAWINGI
SHEET 5 OF 7

..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
.......E...NEM .........................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................................M.N.M M.N.M M.N.M M.N.M M.N.M M.N.M
.......................................................................................................................................................................................................................
-..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
-..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................MOON
......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................moon
..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................... ............
.............®.............................................,,.............. ...........
........................................................................... ..........
.............................................................................. ......
...........ru000. oouoo oouoo oouoo oouoo o.0000 oou. ■oo.
.........1.........................................................►........... OMEN
oouon oouoo oouoo oouoo oouoo oouoo oouo,v oouoo ■ o.
.........1...........................................................\............ M..
........r........................................................................ M.N
..ouon oouoo oouoo oouoo oouoo oouoo oouoo.�.ouoo 0 0.
....■...r.................................................■MENN......r...............r..0
oouon •�ouoo oouoo oouoo oouoo oouoo oouoo.��.000. oouoo
-.I...r�:.................N.M.M.M.M.M.M.M......................A..................
�.....�-_'-.
..
......���...................................................1I..................
--..�-_...............................................1I..................
m..mm
uu0
mmmmm
uu0
momom
uu0
mmmmm
oo.
oo.
oo.
oo.
oo.
oo.
oo.
oo.
oo.
oo.
oo.

WETLAND AND SURFACE WATER IMPACTS SUMMARY
WETLAND IMPACTS SURFACE WATER IMPACTS
Site
No.
Stream Name
Stream ID
Station
(From/To)
Structure
Size / Type
Permanent
Fill In
Wetlands
(ac)
Temp.
Fill In
Wetlands
(ac)
Excavation
in
Wetlands
(ac)
Mechanized
Clearing
in Wetlands
(ac)
Hand
Clearing
in
Wetlands
(ac)
Permanent
SW
impacts
(ac)
Temp.
SW
impacts
(ac)
Existing
Channel
Impacts
Permanent
(ft)
Existing
Channel
Impacts
Temp.
(ft)
Natural
Stream
Design
(ft)
1
UT to Cold Water Creek
-Y- 18+73 to 19+17 LT
Replacement 72" Welded Steel Culvert, New Headwall 45 ft Upstream
0.009
45
1
UT to Cold Water Creek
-Y- 17+76 to 18+73 LT
Stream Channel Relocation, Inlet Channel Change
0.017
0.002
85
12
2
UT to Cold Water Creek
-Y- 20+77 to 21+22 LT
Replacement 72" Welded Steel Culvert, New Outlet 53 ft Downstream
0.009
50
2
UT to Cold Water Creek
-Y- 21+22 to 21+71 LT
Stream Channel Relocation, Outlet Channel Change
0.014
0.001
55
12
TOTALS*:
0.05
< 0.01
235
24
*Rounded totals are sum of actual impacts
NOTES:
*1: Emedding Riprap
*2: No Riprap in Channel
2018 Feb

Protected Species/
Section 7

QPQ��EtdT OF Tye' FISH W LDU E
SERVICE
q`` tim United States Department of the Interior
' FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
H 3 8� Asheville Field Office���
160 Zillicoa Street Suite B
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
April 11, 2024
Robert Crowther
Environmental and Permitting Group, Environmental Analysis Unit
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1598 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699
Subject: Informal Conference for Replacement of Bridge 109 over US 29 on SR 1706 in Cabarrus County
(TIP No. B-5372, Service Log 924-198)
Dear Robert Crowther:
On February 14, 2024, we received your request to initiate informal conference procedures for effects the
subject project may have on federally proposed species. We have reviewed the information you
submitted, and the following is provided in accordance with the provisions of the National Environmental
Policy Act (42 U.S.C.§ 4321 et seq.); the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 661
- 6670; and section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 - 1543) (Act).
Proiect Description
According to the information provided, the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
proposes to replace Bridge 109 over US 29 on SR 1706 in Cabarrus County. The existing bridge is a
four -span structure with concrete deck, end walls, and guard rails. The overall length of the existing
bridge is approximately 190 feet. One culvert meeting NCDOT's Standard Operating Procedures for
Preliminary Bat Habitat Assessments was identified meeting the criteria of greater than 3 feet wide and 60
feet in length during this site visit. This culvert is a 66-inch reinforced concrete pipe that currently carries
an unnamed tributary to Cold Water Creek. Percussive activities could include but are not limited to; pile
driving, guardrail installation, pneumatic chipping, hydromulching, pavers, drill rigs, cranes, pumps,
generators, compressors, concrete trucks, ground compactors, rollers, and concrete vibrators. Tree
clearing surrounding the bridge location is expected. The project is scheduled to Let in October of 2024.
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is the federal lead for this project for section 7 purposes,
with authority delegated to NCDOT.
NCDOT has agreed to implement the following conservation measures for the project:
1. Tree clearing will take place from October 16 to March 31.
2. Bridge demolition will occur outside of the bat active season.
3. Should night work occur during the bat active season (April 1-October 15), temporary lighting
will only be used to illuminate work areas and will avoid lighting the surrounding landscape.
4. No additional permanent lighting will be added to the roadway.
5. No blasting will occur.
Federally Listed Species
The information provided indicates that a "No Effect" (NE) determination has been made for
Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii) and that a determination for Michaux sumac (Rhus

michauxii) is "unresolved". In instances of suitable habitat being absent from the action area, we would
agree that NE determinations are appropriate. In instances where suitable habitat is present and botanical
surveys conducted during the optimal survey window and within the past 1 or 2 years (depending on the
species) have negative results, we would concur with a biological determination of "may affect, not likely
to adversely affect" (NLAA). This information is provided for the sake of the administrative record.
The correspondence received from NCDOT requests a conference for the tricolored bat (Perimyotis
subflavus) and little brown bat (Myotis lucifugus).
A suitable bridge roost, culvert, and suitable commuting and foraging habitat for tricolored bat occur
within the action area. The bridge and culvert have not been surveyed for bats. The proposed
conservation measures minimize effects to bats potentially occurring within the action area. However,
effects from construction noise to unknown tree roosts within the action area but outside the construction
limits, while minimized, are not avoided. Bats that are present in proximity to transportation corridors are
expected to be tolerant of baseline noise and vibration levels (or have already modified their behaviors to
avoid them). How temporary increases in noise and vibration from construction activities effect bats
within existing transportation corridors has not been well studied to our knowledge, though one study
found that bats habituated rapidly to traffic noise (Luo et al. 2014). Given the information available and
conservation measures above, we do not believe any response to project noise and vibration by bats that
are already tree -roosting in the area is expected to rise to the level of harm (as defined at 50 CFR 17.3).
On September 14, 2022, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) published a proposal in the Federal
Register to list the tricolored bat as endangered under the Act. As a result, NCDOT has requested a
conference for the tricolored bat as the project may be on -going after the effective date of any final listing
rule, if one is published. Little brown bat is considered an at -risk species. At -risk species are not legally
protected under the Act and are not subject to any of its provisions, including section 7, unless they are
formally proposed or listed as endangered or threatened. While lead federal agencies are not prohibited
from jeopardizing the continued existence of an at -risk species unless the species becomes listed, the
prohibition against jeopardy and taking a listed species under section 9 of the Act applies as soon as a
listing becomes effective, regardless of the stage of completion of the proposed action. USACE has
requested a conference for the little brown bat, as the project may be on -going after a potential proposal
for listing and effective date of any final listing rule, if one is published. Based on the information
provided, the noted bat inactive season during which the project will occur, the analysis above, and the
commitments to minimize project impacts, we have determined that the proposed project will not
jeopardize the continued existence of the tricolored bat or little brown bat. Additionally, we would
concur with the NCDOT's determination that the project is NLAA the tricolored bat and the little brown
bat should the species become listed.
Conservation Recommendations
Conservation recommendations are discretionary agency activities to minimize or avoid adverse effects of
a proposed action on listed species or critical habitat, to help implement recovery plans, or to develop
information. General recommendations for the benefit of fish and wildlife resources are provided here:
• Structure Surveys: Survey the bridge and culvert structures within 14 days of project work,
regardless of season, to ensure absence of roosting bats. Contact the Service immediately if bats
are observed.
• Riparian Replanting: Because the removal of forested riparian habitat can affect the quality and
suitability of foraging and commuting habitat for bats and the water quality for aquatic
organisms, we recommend replanting the riparian zone with native, fast-growing trees and shrubs
that would serve to stabilize the stream bank, filter runoff and reduce erosion and sedimentation,
block light pollution, and generally improve the quality of the habitat for bats and aquatic species.
2

Examples of potential native tree species to plant include: Sycamore, tulip poplar, black cherry
and river birch. Planting with established (e.g. containerized) young trees can increase the
survival rate of plantings and contribute to faster improvement of riparian habitat.
Noise Considerations for Bats: If suitable roost trees are present near high -decibel activity (81 —
162 dBA) and would experience noise above background levels (41 — 70 dBA), avoid conducting
those high -decibel activities during the bat maternity and pup season (May 15 — August 15). To
minimize noise levels, incorporate sound -dampening devices such as noise shrouds for pile
driving.
Reinitiation Notice
We believe the requirements under section 7 of the Act are fulfilled for the federally listed species
discussed above. However, obligations under section 7 must be reconsidered i£ (1) new information
reveals impacts of this proposed action may affect listed species or critical habitat in a manner not
previously considered, (2) this proposed action is subsequently modified in a manner that was not
considered in this review, or (3) a new species is listed, or critical habitat is determined that may be
affected by the proposed action.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide these comments. Please contact Ms. Holland Youngman of our
staff at hollandyouungman&fws.gov if you have any questions. In any future correspondence concerning
this project, please reference our Service Log 924-198.
Sincerely,
- - original signed - -
Janet Mizzi
Field Supervisor

Archaeology

Project Tracking No.:
15-02-0043
Revised
NO ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY REQUIRED FORM
This form only pertains to ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES for this project. It is not'°
valid for Historic Architecture and Landscapes. You must consult separately with the r�
Historic Architecture and Landscapes Group.
PROJECT INFORMATION
Project No: B-5372 County: Cabarrus
WBS No: 46087.1.1 Document: CE
F.A. No: na Funding: ® State ❑ Federal
Federal Permit Required? ® Yes ❑ No Permit Type: USACE
Project Description:
The project calls for the replacement of Bridge No. 109 on SR 1706 (East 1st Street) over US 29 in
Cabarrus County. The archaeological Area of Potential Effects (APE) for the project is defined as an
approximate 2,900 foot (883.92 m) long corridor running along East 1st Street. From the center of the
bridge, the corridor extends approximately 2,200 feet (670.56 m) to the northwest and 700 feet
(213.36 m) to the southeast. The corridor has a variable width of 200 feet (60.96 m) at its northwestern
end and expands to 850 feet (259.08 m) towards the southeast. The APE includes all existing ramps and
a portion of US 29 extending approximately 825 feet (251.46 m) to the north and 420 feet (128.02 m) to
the south along US 29 from the bridge. In all, the APE encompasses approximately 32 acres, which will
cover all ground disturbing activities.
It is anticipated that this project will require federal permits. Therefore, the archaeological review of
Bridge No. 109 was conducted pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance (36 CFR Part 800).
SUMMARY OF CULTURAL RESOURCES REVIEW
Brief description of review activities, results of review, and conclusions:
Bridge No. 109 is located in Kannapolis and west of I-85 at the northern boundary of Cabarrus County,
North Carolina. The project area is plotted in the northwest corner of the Concord USGS 7.5' topographic
quadrangle (Figure 1).
A map review and site file search were conducted at the Office of State Archaeology (OSA) on February
19, 2015 with a subsequent review on December 18, 2019 due to the project's resubmittal. No previously
recorded archaeological sites have been identified within the APE or a mile of the bridge. According to
the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office online data base (HPOWEB 2015), the boundary for
the Study Listed and Determined Eligible Kannapolis Mill Village (CA 264a) is just south of the
archaeological APE. However, no surveyed or contributing archaeological resource falls within the APE.
Topographic maps, USDA soil survey maps, aerial photographs (NC One Map), and historic maps (North
Carolina maps website) were examined for information on 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.
Bridge No. 106 and East 1st Street cross US 29 from the northwest to southeast. Unnamed tributaries to
Cold Water Creek run alongside East 1 st Street to the north and south crossing under the road west of the
bridge. These waterways are part of the Yadkin -Pee Dee drainage basin. The APE is situated mostly on
ridges and side slope adjacent to the drainages, but the majority of the landforms has been modified
"No ARCHAEOLOGY SURVEY REQUIRED " form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
1 of 5

Project Tracking No.:
15-02-0043
Revised
(Figure 2). It is likely that some of the area was in floodplain prior to the construction of US 29 and the
ramps. The channels for the tributaries have also been modified to improve drainage and prevent
flooding. Although the APE is forested in places, it is characterized by urban development and residential
properties. Overall, ground disturbance is very heavy.
The USDA soil survey map suggests that the APE is composed of two soil types (see Figure 2). The
Cecil -Urban land complex (CeB) covers most of the project area. These are mixed soils, where most of
the natural soils have been altered or covered as the result of grading or digging. The series also contain
households, pavement, and building complexes. It is very unlikely for intact deposits to be found in these
altered soils. The second series, Cecil sandy clay loam (CcD2), is situated along the side slopes next to
the tributaries. These are well drained but eroded soils with a slope of 8 to 15 percent. Due to soil
erosion, it is unlikely for a significant site to be present.
A review of the site files shows few archaeological surveys and no sites within a mile of the project area.
Although the current APE has not been reviewed or included in any previous studies, nearly all properties
surround the project have been reviewed and cleared by OSA as low potential due to disturbance. The
current project area shares the same characteristics as these other reviewed properties.
Lastly, a historic map review was conducted. Early and accurate historic maps of the project vicinity are
rare. The 1910 soil map of Cabarrus County is the earliest map to depict the project area with any
accuracy (Figure 3). This map shows no roads or structures in the vicinity of the current bridge.
Likewise, subsequent early 20th century maps illustrate no additional features. As a result, it seems that
no historic archaeological deposits should be affected by the proposed bridge replacement.
Brief Explanation of why the available information provides a reliable basis for reasonably predicting
that there are no unidentified historic properties in the APE:
The defined archaeological APE for the proposed replacement of Bridge No. 109 over US 29 consists of
heavily disturbed soils associated with past urban development and road construction. It is very unlikely
intact and significant archaeological deposits will be encountered within the APE. In addition, OSA has
cleared many neighboring properties with similar characteristics as low potential for significant sites.
Lastly, the historic maps suggest that no former historic structures and/or features are in the area. As long
as impacts to the subsurface occur within the defined APE, no further archaeological work is
recommended for the replacement of Bridge No. 109 in Cabarrus County. If construction should affect
subsurface areas beyond the defined APE, further archaeological consultation might be necessary.
Please note, this project falls within a North Carolina County in which the Catawba Nation have
expressed an interest. It is recommended that you contact each federal agency involved with this project
to determine their Section 106 Tribal consultation requirements.
SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION
See attached: ® Map(s) ❑ Previous Survey Info
❑ Photocopy of County Survey Notes
FINDING BY NCDOT ARCHAEOLOGIST
NO ARCHAEOLOGYSURVEYREQUIRED
c
C. Damon Jones
NCDOT ARCHAEOLOGIST II
® Photos ❑Correspondence
Other: Images from historic maps
1 /2/20
Date
"No ARCHAEOLOGY SURVEY REQUIRED" form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
2of5

Project Tracking No.:
15-02-0043
Revised
Figure 1. Topographic Setting of the Project Area, Concord (1969; photorevised), Kannapolis (1993),
Enochville (1993), and China Grove (1970; photorevised 1987), NC, USGS 7.5' Topographic
Quadrangle.
"No ARCHAEOLOGY SURVEY REQUIRED" form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
3 of 5

Project Tracking No.:
15-02-0043
Revised
Figure 2. Aerial photograph of the APE showing development, landforms, and soils within and near the
project area.
"No ARCHAEOLOGY SURVEY REQUIRED" form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
4of5

Project Tracking No.:
15-02-0043
Revised
t Project Area_ 1
Co 0G
Y {
r
zl-�z I
r � ,
D r • rs r
i10
i
co
JJ
�1
• • rJ
• 1
• �r� rl� it
•
1 y
■ f
• If
D r,
� � s
. 1 1► �
� ►r ►r
s
Figure 3. The 1910 Soil Survey Map for Cabarrus County showing the location of the project area.
`No ARCHAEOLOGY SURVEY REQUIRED"form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007Programmatic Agreement.
5 of 5

Historic
Architecture
and
Landscapes

Project Tracking No. (Internal Use)
20-01-0002
HISTORIC ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPES
)'T 1 NO SURVEY REQUIRED 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:
B-5372
County:
Cabarrus
WBS No.:
46087.1.1
Document
Type:
PCE or CE
Fed. Aid No:
NIA
Funding:
❑ State ® Federal
Federal
Permits :
❑ Yes ®No
Permit
T e s :
N/A
Project Description: Replacement of Bridge No. 109 on SR 1706 (E. I" Street) over US 29.
SUMMARY OF HISTORIC ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPES REVIEW
Description of review activities, results, and conclusions:
*Previously reviewed under 15-02-0043 * Review of HPO quad reaps, HPO GIS infor►nation, historic
designations roster, and indexes was undertaken on January 7, 2020. Based on this review, there are no
existing NR, SL, LD, DE, or SS properties in the Area of Potential Effects, which is defined on the
following maps. All properties over filly years of age within the APE were visually inspected, and no
properties warrant further evaluation. The Study Area borders the Determined Eligible/Study Listed
Kannapolis Mill Village Historic District: Black Section (CA0264A), however the district will not be
affected by this project and does not fall within the APE. Bridge No. 109 is not eligible for NR listing.
There are no National Register listed or eligible properties. if design plans change, additional review will
be required.
Why the available information provides a reliable basis for reasonably predictinz that there
are no unidentified significant historic architectural or landscape resources in the rlrok
area:
HPO quad maps and GIS information recording NR, SL, LD, DE, and SS properties for the Cabarrus
County survey and Google Maps are considered valid for the purposes of determining the likelihood of
historic resources being present. There are no National Register listed or eligible properties within the
APE and no survey is required.
SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION
❑Map(s) ❑Previous Survey Info. ❑Photos ❑Correspondence ❑Design Plans
FINDING BY NCDOT ARCHITECTURAL HISTORIAN
Historic Architecture and Landscapes --NO SURVEY REQUIRED
NCDOT Architectural Historian
Date
Nislorre Archileclnre ❑rid Lalrrfscapes NO SURVEYRF.QUIREDform for Minor T ranspvrfaliwr Yrojeos as QftaltTed in the 20071'rogramina[rc Agreement.
Pagel of 2

r �
Proposed Project
WjA �
ARR,S CConci
t',•� ` .._Concord
,. 0 5,000 10,000 20,000 !�
W
�GOt
r c
,rTH
VICINITY MAP N
lCounty: CABARRUS
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT
�P OF TRANSPORTATION
BRIDGE REPLACEMENT
Div: 1Q TIP# 8-5372
Figure
r DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
BRIDGE NO 109 OVER
PROJECT DEVELOPMENTAND
US 29 ON SR 1706
WSS: 46087.1.1
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS UNIT
CABARRUS COUNTY
TIP PROJECT 8-5372
Date: JAN 2015

1,qN
"4v W"Ad
lnmplua AO
&
6
HPO CIS. National Register LISTED properties outlined in blue.
There are no National Register listed properties within (he APE, defined in red,
Hurnfic A rchhemore md Lawk-opes NO S I IR FIT Y REQUIRLDform for Mmor Trai ispo nad on Prajas Qwrified rip the 200 7 Progrommalric Agrevoll oll.
Page 2 of 2

Tribal
Coordination

Catawba Indian Nation
Tribal Historic Preservation Office
1536 Tom Steven Road
Rock Hill, South Carolina 29730
Office 803-328-2427
Fax [phone]
January 31, 2020
Attention: David Stutts
NC Department of Transportation
1581 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699
Re. THPO # Project # Project Description
2020-193-116 B-5372 Replacement of Bridge No. 109 on SR 1706 (East First St.) over US 29 in Cabarrus County
Dear Mr. Stutts,
The Catawba have no immediate concerns with regard to traditional cultural properties,
sacred sites or Native American archaeological sites within the boundaries of the
proposed project areas. However, the Catawba are to be notified if Native American
artifacts and / or human remains are located during the ground disturbance phase
of this project.
If you have questions please contact Caitlin Rogers at 803-328-2427 ext. 226, or e-mail
[e-mail].
Sincerely,
L CCN -Aa7/L.A_1 ArZ
Wenonah G. Haire
Tribal Historic Preservation Officer

NEPA/SEPA
Document

DocuSign Envelope ID: FCA8FBAC-FAOB-4E9D-87EB-9DACDE92A739
Type I or II Categorical Exclusion Action Classification Form
TIP Project No.
WBS Element
Federal Project No.
A. Project Description:
B-5372
46087.1.1
N/A
The proposed project involves replacing Bridge No. 109 on S.R. 1706 (Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue)
over U.S. 29 (N. Cannon Blvd) in Cabarrus County. It will also add curb and gutter and sidewalks along
both sides of U.S. 29. Bridge No. 109 is 190 feet long and the replacement structure will be a bridge
approximately 175 feet long, providing a minimum 49-foot clear deck width. The new bridge will include
two 12-foot travel lanes and 7-foot paved offsets, or "shoulders", on each side to accommodate bicycles.
5-foot 6-inch sidewalks and a 54-inch two bar metal rail will be provided on both sides of the bridge. The
roadway grade of the new structure will be approximately two feet higher than the existing structure to
allow for the proper vertical roadway clearance over U.S. 29.
Along S.R. 1706, the roadway approaches will extend approximately 265 feet from the west end of the
new bridge and 433 feet from the east end of the new bridge. The approaches will be widened to provide
two 12-foot travel lanes, 7-foot bicycle lanes, 5-foot 6-inch sidewalks, and 10-foot grassed shoulders on
both sides.
Along U.S. 29 (under the bridge), improvements will extend approximately 330 feet north of S.R. 1706 and
230 feet south of S.R. 1706. Improvements include upgrading U.S. 29 to a curb and gutter section, with 5-
foot paved offsets, and 5-foot sidewalks along each side of U.S. 29.
The new bridge will be constructed on existing location, with traffic being detoured off site during
construction. However, the existing entrance and exit ramps will remain open to local and business traffic
during construction (see Figure 1).
S.R. 1706 will be designed as a Minor Collector and U.S. 29 will be designed as an Urban Collector, both
utilizing Sub -Regional Tier Guidelines with a 40 mile per hour design speed.
B. Description of Need and Purpose
The purpose of the proposed project is to replace a structurally deficient bridge. NCDOT Bridge
Management Unit records indicate Bridge No. 109 is considered structurally deficient due to a deck
condition and superstructure condition appraisal of 4 out of 9 according to Federal Highway Administration
standards.
C. Cateaorical Exclusion Action Classification:
Type I(A) - Ground Disturbing Action
D. Proposed Improvements:
28. Bridge rehabilitation, reconstruction, or replacement or the construction of grade separation to
replace existing at -grade railroad crossings if the actions meet the constraints in 23 CFR
771.117(e)(1-6).
v2019.1 B-5372 Type I(A) CE Page 1

DocuSign Envelope ID: FCA8FBAC-FAOB-4E9D-87EB-9DACDE92A739
E. Special Project Information:
Estimated Traffic:
Current Year (2020) 3,520 vpd
Future Year (2040) 5,600 vpd
TTST 1%
Dual 4%
Alternatives Evaluation:
No Build — The no build alternative would result in eventually closing the road, which is
unacceptable given the volume of traffic served by S.R. 1706.
Rehabilitation — The existing bridge was constructed in 1953 and is reaching the end of its useful
life. Rehabilitation would only provide a temporary solution to the structural deficiency of the
bridge.
Remove Bridge No. 109, Replace with At -Grade Signalized Intersection - Offsite Detour — A
Planning -Level Study was performed by NCDOT Congestion Management, in which the results of
this study showed that replacing the existing bridge with a signalized at -grade intersection would
be a viable option. A detailed traffic analysis confirmed these findings. In addition, by replacing
the bridge with an at -grade intersection, the cost of replacing and maintaining the bridge would be
saved. Bridge No. 109 would be removed, and a new at -grade signalized intersection would be
installed just north of the existing bridge. During the construction period, the existing ramps and
the existing bridge would remain open to local and business traffic. However, as a result of
comments received from the public and further coordination with the City of Kannapolis, this
alternative was not selected.
Staged Construction — Staged construction was not considered because of the availability of an
acceptable offsite detour.
Replace Bridge No. 109 In -Place with a New Bridge — Offsite Detour (Recommended) —
Bridge No. 109 will be replaced on its existing alignment. Traffic will be detoured offsite (see
Figure 1) during the construction period. NCDOT Guidelines for Evaluation of Offsite Detours for
Bridge Replacement Projects considers multiple project variables beginning with the additional
time traveled by the average road user resulting from the offsite detour. The offsite detour for this
project would include S.R. 1706, N. Main Street, Jackson Park Road, and Little Texas Road. The
majority of traffic on S.R. 1706 is through traffic. The existing ramps would remain open to local
and business traffic during construction. The detour for the average road user would result in 4
minutes of additional travel time (2 miles of additional travel). Up to a 12-month duration of
construction is expected on this project.
Based on the Offsite Detour Guidelines, the criteria above indicate that, on the basis of delay
alone, the proposed offsite detour is acceptable. Cabarrus County Emergency Services has
indicated that the detour is acceptable. NCDOT Division 10 has indicated the condition of all
roads, bridges and intersections on the offsite detour are acceptable without improvement and
concurs with the use of the detour, as identified in Figure 1.
Pedestrian and Bicycle Accommodations: The existing bridge is within an established residential area
with pedestrian and bicycle trip generators, including schools, churches and commercial establishments in
close proximity. The Kannapolis Bicycle Plan indicates that S.R. 1706 carries the Central/East Bike Route.
The current bridge includes sidewalks. The City of Kannapolis requested that striped bike lanes and
sidewalks be included on both sides of S.R. 1706 within the construction limits for this project. In addition,
the City of Kannapolis requested that curb and gutter, wide outside shoulders, and sidewalks be included
v2019.1 B-5372 Type I(A) CE Page 2

DocuSign Envelope ID: FCA8FBAC-FAOB-4E9D-87EB-9DACDE92A739
along U.S. 29. These bicycle and pedestrian accommodations have been incorporated into the designs.
Construction of sidewalks is contingent upon the completion of a cost -sharing municipal agreement
between the City of Kannapolis and NCDOT.
Estimated Costs:
The proposed project is included in the NCDOT State Bridge Program. Right of way acquisition and
construction are scheduled for Fiscal Year (FY) 2022 and FY 2023, respectively. Current cost estimates,
based on 2022 prices, are as follows:
Right of Way: $ 9,600
Utilities: $ 125,000
Construction: $ 5,324,500
Total: $ 5,459,100
Design Exceptions: There are no anticipated design exceptions
Public Involvement:
STIP Project B-5372 was originally scoped as a bridge replacement project. However, in early 2018,
NCDOT Congestion Management did a high-level traffic capacity analysis and determined that replacing
the existing bridge with an at -grade intersection was a viable, cost -saving alternative to replacing the
bridge. Based on this capacity analysis, NCDOT changed the scope of the original B-5372 project from a
bridge replacement to a conversion of the interchange to an at -grade signalized intersection.
On November 15, 2018, a Local Officials Meeting and Public Meeting was held. The meetings were held
at the Faith Baptist Church in Kannapolis, NC. The Local Officials Meeting was held from 3:OOpm until
4:OOpm, and the public meeting was held from 5:OOpm until 7:OOpm. Six local officials were in attendance
at the Local Officials Meeting. Approximately nine persons signed in to the informal "open house" public
meeting. Written comments were submitted by 11 people at the meeting and during the comment period.
The majority of the comments received were related to concerns with removing the bridge, and the
assumption that additional traffic may occur with a new signalized intersection in this area. Based on input
received during and after the public meeting, the City of Kannapolis requested that the scope return to its
original concept of replacing Bridge No. 109 with a new bridge on existing location.
To announce this change of scope back to a bridge replacement, a newsletter was developed and mailed
out to the public. This newsletter provided updated project information including updated design data,
project schedule, project decisions, and graphics. The newsletter was mailed out on July 21, 2022. No
comments have been received to date.
Threatened and Endangered Species
As of August 22, 2022, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists two federally protected
species for Cabarrus County (Northern long-eared bat [NLEB] and Schweinitz's sunflower).
Norther long-eared bat (NLEB) - Habitat for NLEB is present within the project study area. According to
the North Carolina Natural Heritage (NHP) Biotics Database, most recently updated July 2021, the nearest
NLEB hibernacula record is approximately 79 miles west of the project and no known NLEB roost trees
occur within 150 feet of the project area. NCDOT has also reviewed the Asheville Field Office website
(http://www.fws.gov/asheville/htmis/project_review/NLEB_ in_WNC.html) for consistency with NHP
records. This project is located entirely outside of the red highlighted areas (12 digit HUC) that the
USFWS Asheville Field Office has determined to be representative of an area that may require
consultation. The closest 12 digit (030501010502) red HUC is approximately 74.5 miles to the west
(Upper Wilson Creek) in Avery County.A Section 7 Survey for NLEB was conducted on August 10, 2021.
Bridge No. 109 was assessed for potential NLEB habitat. Some crevices suitable for roosting were
present on the structures, but no evidence (bats, staining, and guano) of bats was observed. Based on
the lack of evidence of bats using the bridge, and no known roost trees within 150 feet of the project area,
NCDOT recommends a Biological Conclusion of May Affect Not Likely To Adversely Affect for the
v2019.1 B-5372 Type I(A) CE Page 3

DocuSign Envelope ID: FCA8FBAC-FAOB-4E9D-87EB-9DACDE92A739
northern long-eared bat. Final design, tree clearing, and percussive activities information will be provided
in the permit application.
Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii) — Habitat for Schweinitz's sunflower is present within the
project study area. On October 18, 2021, a plant -by -plant survey for Schweinitz's sunflower was
conducted within the project site. Marginally suitable habitat for Schweinitz's sunflower was present within
the project site in areas with moderate disturbance regimes and little -to -no canopy cover. However, no
individuals were present. Additionally, no typical associate species were identified. A review of the North
Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) October 2021 dataset revealed no known Schweinitz's
sunflower occurrences within the study area or within one mile of the project site. Due to the negative
survey results of this survey and the lack of known occurrences within one mile of the project, the
Biological Conclusion rendered for the species is No Effect.
Bald Eagle 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 1.0 mile of open water. A desktop-GIS assessment of the project study area, as well as the
area within a 1.13-mile radius (1.0 mile plus 660 feet) of the project limits, was performed on March 25,
2015 using 2014 color aerials. No water bodies large enough or sufficiently open to be considered
potential feeding sources were identified. Since there was no foraging habitat within the review area, a
survey of the project study area and the area within 660 feet of the project limits was not conducted.
Additionally, a review of the NCNHP database on 25 March 2015 revealed no known occurrences of this
species within 1.0 mile of the project study area. Due to the lack of habitat, known occurrences, and
minimal impact anticipated for this project, it has been determined that this project will not affect this
species.
v2019.1 B-5372 Type I(A) CE Page 4

DocuSign Envelope ID: FCA8FBAC-FAOB-4E9D-87EB-9DACDE92A739
F. Project Impact Criteria Checklists:
F2. Ground Disturbing Actions — Type I (Appendix A) & Type II (Appendix B)
Proposed improvement(s) that fit Type I Actions (NCDOT-FHWA CE Programmatic Agreement,
Appendix A) including 2, 3, 6, 7, 9, 12, 18, 21, 22 (ground disturbing), 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, &/or 30;
&/or Type 11 Actions (NCDOT-FHWA CE Programmatic Agreement, Appendix B) answer the project
impact threshold questions (below) and questions 8 — 31.
• If any question 1-7 is checked "Yes" then NCDOT certification for FHWA approval is required.
• If any question 8-31 is checked "Yes" then additional information will be required for those questions
in Section G.
PROJECT IMPACT THRESHOLDS
Yes
No
(FHWA signature required if any of the questions 1-7 are marked "Yes".)
1
Does the project require formal consultation with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
❑
2
(USFWS) or National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)?
2
Does the project result in impacts subject to the conditions of the Bald and Golden
❑
R1
Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA)?
3
Does the project generate substantial controversy or public opposition, for any
❑
R1
reason, following appropriate public involvement?
4
Does the project cause disproportionately high and adverse impacts relative to low-
❑
R1
income and/or minority populations?
5
Does the project involve a residential or commercial displacement, or a substantial
❑
R1
amount of right of way acquisition?
6
Does the project require an Individual Section 4(f) approval?
❑
[1
Does the project include adverse effects that cannot be resolved with a
7
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) under Section 106 of the National Historic
❑
R1
Preservation Act (NHPA) or have an adverse effect on a National Historic
Landmark (NHL)?
If any question 8-31 is checked "Yes" then additional information will be required for those questions in
Section G.
Other Considerations
Yes
No
8
Is an Endangered Species Act (ESA) determination unresolved or is the project
❑
R1
covered by a Programmatic Agreement under Section 7?
9
Is the project located in anadromous fish spawning waters?
❑
[1
Does the project impact waters classified as Outstanding Resource Water (ORW),
10
High Quality Water (HQW), Water Supply Watershed Critical Areas, 303(d) listed
❑
[1
im aired water bodies, buffer rules, or Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV)?
11
Does the project impact Waters of the United States in any of the designated
❑
R1
mountain trout streams?
12
Does the project require a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Individual
❑
R1
Section 404 Permit?
13
Will the project require an easement from a Federal Energy Regulatory
❑
R1
Commission (FERC) licensed facility?
v2019.1 B-5372 Type I(A) CE Page 5

DocuSign Envelope ID: FCA8FBAC-FAOB-4E9D-87EB-9DACDE92A739
Other Considerations for Type I and II Ground Disturbing Actions (continued)
Yes
No
Does the project include a Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act
14
(NHPA) effects determination other than a No Effect, including archaeological
❑
2
remains?
15
Does the project involve GeoEnvironmental Sites of Concerns such as gas
❑
2
stations, dry cleaners, landfills, etc.?
Does the project require work encroaching and adversely affecting a regulatory
16
floodway or work affecting the base floodplain (100-year flood) elevations of a
2
❑
water course or lake, pursuant to Executive Order 11988 and 23 CFR 650 subpart
A?
17
Is the project in a Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) county and substantially
❑
2
affects the coastal zone and/or any Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
18
Does the project require a U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) permit?
❑
2
19
Does the project involve construction activities in, across, or adjacent to a
❑
2
designated Wild and Scenic River present within the project area?
20
Does the project involve Coastal Barrier Resources Act (CBRA) resources?
❑
[1
21
Does the project impact federal lands (e.g. U.S. Forest Service (USFS), USFWS,
❑
R1
etc.) or Tribal Lands?
22
Does the project involve any changes in access control or the modification or
❑
R1
construction of an interchange on an interstate?
23
Does the project have a permanent adverse effect on local traffic patterns or
❑
R1
community cohesiveness?
24
Will maintenance of traffic cause substantial disruption?
❑
[1
25
Is the project inconsistent with the STIP, and where applicable, the Metropolitan
❑
R1
Planning Organization's (MPO's) Transportation Improvement Program (TIP)?
Does the project require the acquisition of lands under the protection of Section 6(f)
of the Land and Water Conservation Act, the Federal Aid in Fish Restoration Act,
26
the Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act, Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA),
❑
R1
Tribal Lands, or other unique areas or special lands that were acquired in fee or
easement with public -use money and have deed restrictions or covenants on the
property?
27
Does the project involve Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) buyout
❑
R1
properties under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP)?
28
Does the project include a de minimis or programmatic Section 4(f)?
❑
[1
29
Is the project considered a Type I under the NCDOT Noise Policy?
❑
[1
30
Is there prime or important farmland soil impacted by this project as defined by the
❑
R1
Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA)?
31
Are there other issues that arose during the project development process that
❑
R1
affected the project decision?
v2019.1 B-5372 Type I(A) CE Page 6

DocuSign Envelope ID: FCA8FBAC-FAOB-4E9D-87EB-9DACDE92A739
G. Additional Documentation as Required from Section F (ONLY for questions marked `Yes'):
Response to Question 16 - Floodplain:
This project involves construction activities on or adjacent to FEMA-regulated stream(s). Therefore, the
Division 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.
The NCDOT Hydraulics Unit will coordinate with the NC Floodplain Mapping Program (FMP), to determine
status of the project with regard to applicability of NCDOT'S Memorandum of Agreement, or approval of a
Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) and subsequent final Letter of Map Revision (LOMR).
v2019.1 B-5372 Type I(A) CE Page 7

DocuSign Envelope ID: FCA8FBAC-FAOB-4E9D-87EB-9DACDE92A739
Project Commitments'
NCDOT PROJECT COMMITMENTS
9r TIP Project No. B-5372
Replace Bridge No. 109 in S.R. 1706 (Martin Luther King Jr. Ave.) over U.S. 29
* Cabarrus County
Federal Aid Project No. N/A
WBS Element 46087.1.1
Continued Coordination and Outreach (NCDOT Division 10, NCDOT Structures Management Unit
[SMU])
• In order to have time to adequately reroute school buses, Kannapolis City Schools will be
contacted at [phone] at least one month prior to road closure.
• Kannapolis Fire and EMS departments will be contacted at [phone] at least one month
prior to road closure to make the necessary temporary reassignments to primary response units.
• The Division will coordinate with the officials from the "Rider — Concord Kannapolis Area Transit"
[[phone]] regarding temporary impacts to the "Blue Route" bus route and associated transit
stops.
• The A.L. Brown High School athletic director [[phone]] will be notified at least one month
prior to the project construction.
Sidewalks (Financial Management Division, Division 10 Construction, NCDOT SMU)
• The City of Kannapolis has committed to cost share for the construction of sidewalks on the
project. NCDOT-SMU and Division 10 will continue to coordinate with the City in the development
of a municipal agreement.
FEMA Floodplains and Floodways (Division 10 Construction, NCDOT SMU)
• This project involves construction activities on or adjacent to FEMA-regulated stream(s).
Therefore, the Division 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.
Floodplain Mapping Coordination (NCDOT Hydraulic Design Unit)
• The Hydraulics Unit will coordinate with the NC Floodplain Mapping Program (FMP), to determine
status of project with regard to applicability of NCDOT'S Memorandum of Agreement, or approval
of a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) and subsequent final Letter of Map Revision
(LOMR).
B-5372 — Categorical Exclusion Page 1 of 1
October 2022

DocuSign Envelope ID: FCA8FBAC-FAOB-4E9D-87EB-9DACDE92A739
I. Categorical Exclusion Approval:
TIP Project No.
WBS Element
Federal Project No.
Prepared By:
B-5372
46087.1.1
N/A
DocuSigneld,��by:
10/5/2022 F ! ()
vaLc
Prepared For:
Reviewed By:
10/5/2022
Date
[1 Approved
❑ Certified
J&RF6 O'bediente, PE
Three Oaks Engineering
North Carolina Department of Transportation
—DocuSigned by:
o� �;asd-
Jo n misoh
NCDOT Environmental Policy Unit
• If NO grey boxes are checked in Section F (pages 2
and 3), NCDOT approves the Type I or Type II
Categorical Exclusion.
• If ANY grey boxes are checked in Section F (pages 2
and 3), NCDOT certifies the Type I or Type II
Categorical Exclusion for FHWA approval.
• If classified as Type III Categorical Exclusion.
DocuSigned by:
10/5/2022 F� 'ai�
Date Kevin Fischer, PE, Asst. State Structures Engineer
North Carolina Department of Transportation
FHWA Approved: For Projects Certified by NCDOT (above), FHWA signature required.
N/A
Date for John F. Sullivan, III, PE, Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Note: Prior to ROW or Construction authorization, a consultation may be required (please see
Section Vll of the NCDOT-FHWA CE Programmatic Agreement for more details).
v2019.1 B-5372 Type I(A) CE Page 9

DocuSign Envelope ID: FCA8FBAC-FAOB-4E9D-87EB-9DACDE92A739
W 19th St V1gifts r
Legend W SE[h5t
W 36th Sl
Bridge 109 E ,Ith 5t
g ,41h S1 Ar�, n-y
Offsite Detour Lays+ H Brssrv5lfafY5�
� c snype St �
C P �
/�9e park Rd P`> v� N+ dnQefa l lYri
m
fia hm 4 a Q
e H
FR.IM1
c Jf4 E
W sr a' o
�n vsr hrar L f�u,s1 A a
ns ,: m ti3'r N Fay nk7 a f-,I" st2 5 � _p
�G
'�al OY�Sr W9ry Sr € EIrib $1 E d
d Vy 11h Sf [n : 3 H E101n Sr u' J
U fJvri63! � kamhlln Sl
W aln sl - Q W rth Ss` T
.qd 2 Brvakffare St ur c' Q u h
ti C ` CIQriWoptl $F
Q.
WnoCl�y.n y. Cora Sl o
`--- —_w___
Kannapolis _- -_.r� -� `-sR--_-___ R B _WAN C O_U N T Y W
C A A R R. U S C p
U N T Y _
... ,I �y. a y2� Sr 7 Janiv 51 �Li u s �vn[ral Lr
Q' Hefrri 51 �• „ LP++Qg •q '°'
db i n Y ca Cl xy 5!
J d r a d Jae 5, c Y 4
2 r
8 e
u ttntivwood Dr ¢ i �
uniper SI .r `nv5ti l:rs F � �°ah 8[� Jmnielrrrn 5[ z �
pey��y Per• r d5r 2 v n 29 [ bran r7vy +trr x w.
❑eWCSi
Fran G AV9 Sr W111gw u, _ a'
7rLAT
Sen Av v{ Sr pyc QSi . "On Hr. C } Hv;� ° D�dlv Cr, 113 u Bfan[Ick Creah D,
t..+ 3 ylJa ncr SrV P it -CSheparef SI SAm an 7ka ❑r E➢r
7P Z o
v n'<UTSR"� eelly Six 71-5f
r r kiH �_ chlavla Sl ;
O Y 4 � C✓Re<li ■..� HFyr n �sv ; s3aE t�5w+�y� v: �9P2` 9ti °o TfF Slvepret.,
r � • � n G��� , i � rr
St w Csr F f Sr rPurR'v Cfnhrvlew ra Sr q 29
[" yr �f r ���� rn a 'dr, P �� �'rb ye`C,r C
+•, y �Pa 2C a p'r, r�i H ;
`
w, ac' Proposed Project -° sri1[ sl uwnpw�r rr p
S �' v �Brhr ❑I k�4r
P'
a 9y' vri g� i r Falry iew 51
papa 3r @ q
v�o�s Rq �; Vf�o- ;�� � 4.rys `0• � ona`�t �� vSl � v 0
k
. 70 Tn r ci 4ry e { V�r+v i``e
i • ti` w �+
,. ? ❑ ^ k C� s y c c ft PP
v ��5+ .7 a piV ty'O° �°b0 C Cva4 M1 y ¢ _
'Cl a c�
P e aM
St trincrg+ 9� N DetanrS! Mresr
Prn St a w Galdrf vllst Ley, gt S Valw� akas F]ufre 9q a
0 3 G`VA%t'a^'st e a �57 anr's a
Sl c G� Q+qt � ysars �5+gars:[4� + a
C-ylr 'kr K+iss �E m +la�'t aarnvls 5l of 1sy1rvyl
Glacs r.rR i;1 Stn r+ A09�r- � a
Cva�iW
0 1,000 2,000 41000 Ear. a e e e� C_
m gr� 1Qp
Feet
c y
of,,ORTko4tic ABVICINITY MAP N County: CARRUS
REPLACE BRIDGE NO. 109 FI UPe
DEPARTMMENTENT y 9 NORTH NA ON SR 1706 IP# B-5372 Div: 10 Tg
OF TRANSPORTATION (MARTIN LUTHER KING JR BLVD) VVBS: 46087.1.1
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS OVER US 29.
�FHTOF TR%`NSQo CITY OF KANNAPOLIS Date: JULY 2022

DocuSign Envelope ID: FCA8FBAC-FAOB-4E9D-87EB-9DACDE92A739
0 50 100 200
Feet
OF NORTIF Cq9
E tl
y i9 NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT
OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
"OF TR%`NSQO
Legend
x,
Proposed Roadway Bridge
Proposed Construction Limits
29
r,.
Proposed Edge of Travel
Proposed Sidewalk
m
=
Existing Property Line
0
Existing Right of Way Line
Z
i
Y�
Bridge
E:
PROJECT DESIGN MAP N County: CABARRUS
REPLACE BRIDGE NO. 109
ON SR 1706 Div: 10 1 TIP# B-5372 Figure
(MARTIN LUTHER KING JR BLVD) WBS: Z087.1.1
OVER US 29.
CITY OF KANNAPOLIS Date: JULY 2022

DocuSign Envelope ID: FCA8FBAC-FAOB-4E9D-87EB-9DACDE92A739
CT
CT
co
CT
iD
0
�I
L
�N
2 o
CT-) Q
Imo
0
CD
�u� o
o
� o
U
O
U
See Sheet 9 A For Index of Sheets
200
/ Lane
1008
200
2154`�
�Canno io
High, ch of
l Sr w ch of
1706 X
END PROJECT 0i
IST
,r+ STRF
ock Scho drd 2154
BEGIN PROTECT q�e Ba
K V��V P1is
j
PO 44 104 K nnapo .s
mmuni h 1947
lea apti
of C h
VICINITY MAP (N. T. S.
OFF -SITE DETOUR 0.
REVISED 25% PLANS (DECEMBER 2020)
THIS PROJECT IS WITHIN THE MUNICIPAL BOUNDARY OF KANNAPOLIS
THIS PROJECT IS PARTIAL ACCESS CONTROL.
STATE OF NORTH 1k____'.AR0LINA
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
CABARR US COUNTY
LOCATION: BRIDGE 11t0.109 011t SR 1706 (E. lst ST.) OVER US 29
TYPE OF WORK: GRADING, DRAINAGE, PAVING AND STRUCTURE
CLEARING ON THIS PROJECT SHALL BE PERFORMED TO THE LIMITS ESTABLISHED BY METHOD II.
00 \\ \\ \\ 1\\\
STATE
STATE PROJECT REFERENCE NO.
SHEET
NO.
TOTAL
SHEETS
N.C.
B-,L�P\\ 372
I
STATE PROJ. NO.
F.A. PROD. NO.
DESCRIPTION
46087.1.1
P.E.
BEGIN C O N ST.
-Y-STA16+71.30��\\\
END BRIDGE
FNn PROJECT B-5
. 25+85.00
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
GRAPHIC SCALES
50 25 0 50 100
DESIGN DATA
ADT 2020 - 3 52 0
ADT 2040 = 5,600
K = 11 %
°
D = 55 /o
= ° *
T 5 /0
V = 40 MPH
* TTST =1% DUAL =4%
F U N C CLASS =
MINOR COLLECTOR
SUB-REGIONAL TIER
PROJECT LENGTH
IVA
LENGTH ROADWAY TIP PROJECT B-5372 = 0.133 MILES
LENGTH STRUCTURE TIP PROJECT B-53 72 = 0.035 MILES
TOTAL LENGTH TIP PROJECT B-5372 = 0.168 MILES
Prepared in the Of f ice of:
UGHN & MELTON, INC.
3509 Haworth Dr. #100, Raleigh Nc, 27609 Phone [phone]
HYDRA ULICS ENGINEER
P.E.
SIGNATURE:
❑ Boone, NC
828.355-9933
467.8401
V&" ❑ Tri-Cities, TN
Knoxville, TN
Vaughn&Melton 865-546 5800
Consulting Engineers ❑ Spartanburg, SC
864.574.4775
Asheville, ❑ Charleston, SC
❑ North Carolina 843�974 �5650
828-253-2796 Middlesboro, KY
■ Raleigh, NC ❑ Charlotte, NC 606248.6600
919-977-9455 704.357-0488 ❑ Atlanta, GA
770-627-3509
, Inc. All Rights Reser
Copyright ® 2006 Vaughn & MeltonReserved
2018 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS
REECE M. SCHULER P.E P.L.S
PLANS423
50 25 0 50 100
RIGHT OF WAY DATE:
OCTOBER 25, 2022
PROJECT ENGINEER
JON FORD P.E.
ROADWAY DESIGN
ENGINEER
P.E.
SIGNATURE:
PROFILE (HORIZONTAL)
10 5 0 10 20
LETTING DATE:
U N E 2 3, 2 O2 3
PROJECT DESIGN ENGINEER
DAVID STUTTS, P.E.
NCDOT CONTACT
PROFILE
(VERTICAL)_1111

DocuSign Envelope ID: FCA8FBAC-FAOB-4E9D-87EB-9DACDE92A739

DocuSign Envelope ID: FCA8FBAC-FAOB-4E9D-87EB-9DACDE92A739
Project Tracking No. (Internal Use)
20-01-0002
HISTORIC ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPES
NO SURVEY REQUIRED FORM
4 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:
B-5372
County:
Cabarrus
WBS No.:
46087.1.1
Document
Type:
PCE or CE
Fed. Aid No:
NIA
Funding:
❑ State ® Federal
Federal
Permits :
❑ Yes ®No
Permit
T e s :
N/A
Project Description: Replacement of Bridge No. 109 on SR 1706 (E. I" Street) over US 29.
SUMMARY OF HISTORIC ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPES REVIEW
Description of review activities, results, and conclusions:
*Previously reviewed under 15-02-0043 * Review of HPO quad reaps, HPO GIS infor►nation, historic
designations roster, and indexes was undertaken on January 7, 2020. Based on this review, there are no
existing NR, SL, LD, DE, or SS properties in the Area of Potential Effects, which is defined on the
following maps. All properties over filly years of age within the APE were visually inspected, and no
properties warrant further evaluation. The Study Area borders the Determined Eligible/Study Listed
Kannapolis Mill Village Historic District: Black Section (CA0264A), however the district will not be
affected by this project and does not fall within the APE. Bridge No. 109 is not eligible for NR listing.
There are no National Register listed or eligible properties. if design plans change, additional review will
be required.
Why the available information provides a reliable basis for reasonably predictinz that there
are no unidentified significant historic architectural or landscape resources in the rlrok
area:
HPO quad maps and GIS information recording NR, SL, LD, DE, and SS properties for the Cabarrus
County survey and Google Maps are considered valid for the purposes of determining the likelihood of
historic resources being present. There are no National Register listed or eligible properties within the
APE and no survey is required.
SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION
❑Map(s) ❑Previous Survey Info. ❑Photos ❑Correspondence ❑Design Plans
FINDING BY NCDOT ARCHITECTURAL HISTORIAN
Historic Architecture and Landscapes --NO SURVEY REQUIRED
NCDOT Architectural Historian
Date
Nislorre Archileclnre ❑rid Lalrrfscapes NO SURVEYRF.QUIREDform for Minor T ranspvrfaliwr Yrojeos as QftaltTed in the 20071'rogramina[rc Agreement.
Pagel of 2

DocuSign Envelope ID: FCA8FBAC-FAOB-4E9D-87EB-9DACDE92A739
Project Tracking No.:
15-02-0043
Revised
NO ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY REQUIRED FORM
Qa
This form only pertains to ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES for this project. It is not'°
valid for Historic Architecture and Landscapes. You must consult separately with the r�
Historic Architecture and Landscapes Group.
PROJECT INFORMATION
Project No: B-5372 County: Cabarrus
WBS No: 46087.1.1 Document: CE
F.A. No: na Funding: ® State ❑ Federal
Federal Permit Required? ® Yes ❑ No Permit Type: USACE
Project Description:
The project calls for the replacement of Bridge No. 109 on SR 1706 (East 1st Street) over US 29 in
Cabarrus County. The archaeological Area of Potential Effects (APE) for the project is defined as an
approximate 2,900 foot (883.92 m) long corridor running along East 1st Street. From the center of the
bridge, the corridor extends approximately 2,200 feet (670.56 m) to the northwest and 700 feet
(213.36 m) to the southeast. The corridor has a variable width of 200 feet (60.96 m) at its northwestern
end and expands to 850 feet (259.08 m) towards the southeast. The APE includes all existing ramps and
a portion of US 29 extending approximately 825 feet (251.46 m) to the north and 420 feet (128.02 m) to
the south along US 29 from the bridge. In all, the APE encompasses approximately 32 acres, which will
cover all ground disturbing activities.
It is anticipated that this project will require federal permits. Therefore, the archaeological review of
Bridge No. 109 was conducted pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance (36 CFR Part 800).
SUMMARY OF CULTURAL RESOURCES REVIEW
Brief description of review activities, results of review, and conclusions:
Bridge No. 109 is located in Kannapolis and west of I-85 at the northern boundary of Cabarrus County,
North Carolina. The project area is plotted in the northwest corner of the Concord USGS 7.5' topographic
quadrangle (Figure 1).
A map review and site file search were conducted at the Office of State Archaeology (OSA) on February
19, 2015 with a subsequent review on December 18, 2019 due to the project's resubmittal. No previously
recorded archaeological sites have been identified within the APE or a mile of the bridge. According to
the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office online data base (HPOWEB 2015), the boundary for
the Study Listed and Determined Eligible Kannapolis Mill Village (CA 264a) is just south of the
archaeological APE. However, no surveyed or contributing archaeological resource falls within the APE.
Topographic maps, USDA soil survey maps, aerial photographs (NC One Map), and historic maps (North
Carolina maps website) were examined for information on 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.
Bridge No. 106 and East 1st Street cross US 29 from the northwest to southeast. Unnamed tributaries to
Cold Water Creek run alongside East 1 st Street to the north and south crossing under the road west of the
bridge. These waterways are part of the Yadkin -Pee Dee drainage basin. The APE is situated mostly on
ridges and side slope adjacent to the drainages, but the majority of the landforms has been modified
"No ARCHAEOLOGY SURVEY REQUIRED " form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
1 of 5

DocuSign Envelope ID: FCA8FBAC-FAOB-4E9D-87EB-9DACDE92A739
Project Tracking No.:
15-02-0043
Revised
(Figure 2). It is likely that some of the area was in floodplain prior to the construction of US 29 and the
ramps. The channels for the tributaries have also been modified to improve drainage and prevent
flooding. Although the APE is forested in places, it is characterized by urban development and residential
properties. Overall, ground disturbance is very heavy.
The USDA soil survey map suggests that the APE is composed of two soil types (see Figure 2). The
Cecil -Urban land complex (CeB) covers most of the project area. These are mixed soils, where most of
the natural soils have been altered or covered as the result of grading or digging. The series also contain
households, pavement, and building complexes. It is very unlikely for intact deposits to be found in these
altered soils. The second series, Cecil sandy clay loam (CcD2), is situated along the side slopes next to
the tributaries. These are well drained but eroded soils with a slope of 8 to 15 percent. Due to soil
erosion, it is unlikely for a significant site to be present.
A review of the site files shows few archaeological surveys and no sites within a mile of the project area.
Although the current APE has not been reviewed or included in any previous studies, nearly all properties
surround the project have been reviewed and cleared by OSA as low potential due to disturbance. The
current project area shares the same characteristics as these other reviewed properties.
Lastly, a historic map review was conducted. Early and accurate historic maps of the project vicinity are
rare. The 1910 soil map of Cabarrus County is the earliest map to depict the project area with any
accuracy (Figure 3). This map shows no roads or structures in the vicinity of the current bridge.
Likewise, subsequent early 20th century maps illustrate no additional features. As a result, it seems that
no historic archaeological deposits should be affected by the proposed bridge replacement.
Brief Explanation of why the available information provides a reliable basis for reasonably predicting
that there are no unidentified historic properties in the APE:
The defined archaeological APE for the proposed replacement of Bridge No. 109 over US 29 consists of
heavily disturbed soils associated with past urban development and road construction. It is very unlikely
intact and significant archaeological deposits will be encountered within the APE. In addition, OSA has
cleared many neighboring properties with similar characteristics as low potential for significant sites.
Lastly, the historic maps suggest that no former historic structures and/or features are in the area. As long
as impacts to the subsurface occur within the defined APE, no further archaeological work is
recommended for the replacement of Bridge No. 109 in Cabarrus County. If construction should affect
subsurface areas beyond the defined APE, further archaeological consultation might be necessary.
Please note, this project falls within a North Carolina County in which the Catawba Nation have
expressed an interest. It is recommended that you contact each federal agency involved with this project
to determine their Section 106 Tribal consultation requirements.
SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION
See attached: ® Map(s) ❑ Previous Survey Info
❑ Photocopy of County Survey Notes
FINDING BY NCDOT ARCHAEOLOGIST
NO ARCHAEOLOGYSURVEYREQUIRED
c
C. Damon Jones
NCDOT ARCHAEOLOGIST II
® Photos ❑Correspondence
Other: Images from historic maps
1 /2/20
Date
"No ARCHAEOLOGY SURVEY REQUIRED" form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
2of5