Comment Response Summary_updated 11-22-2017.xlsx

ID
7
11
16
29
35
69
81
89
109
113
127
165
166
-
33
34
38
55
57
59
67
70
74
79
80
83
84
Comment Received
ID
4 Walkertown
Meetin
6 Walkertown
Meetin
10 Walkertown
Meetin
22 Walkertown
Meetin
28 Walkertown
Meetin
54 Stokesdale
Meetin
61 Stokesdale
Meetin
68 Stokesdale
Meetin
86 Mail
88 Mail
991 Mail
130 Letter
130 Letter
26 Walkertown
Meeting
27 Walkertown
Meetin
31 Walkertown
Meetin
44 Stokesdale
Meetin
46 Stokesdale
Meetin
48 Stokesdale
Meetin
52 Stokesdale
Meetin
55 Stokesdale
Meetin
57 Stokesdale
Meeting
60 Stokesdale
Meetin
61 Stokesdale
Meetin
62 Stokesdale
Meetin
64 Stokesdale
Meetin�
Date Category
10/24/2017 Access
10/24/2017 Access
10/24/2017 Access
10/24/2017 Access
10/24/2017 Access
10/26/2017 Access
10/26/2017 Access
10/26/2017 Access
11/3/2017 Access
11/3/2017 Access
11/6/2017 Access
11/9/2017 Access
11/9/2017 Access
10/24/2017 Alternative 2
Preference
10/24/2017 Alternative 2
Preference
10/24/2017 Alternative 2
Preference
10/26/2017 Alternative 2
Preference
10/26/2017 Alternative 2
Preference
10/26/2017 Alternative 2
Preference
10/26/2017 Alternative 2
Preference
10/26/2017 Alternative 2
Preference
10/26/2017 Alternative 2
Preference
10/26/2017 Alternative 2
Preference
10/26/2017 Alternative 2
Preference
10/26/2017 Alternative 2
Preference
10/26/2017 Alternative 2
Preference
Comment
Concerned about access to home business.
Question about how long access to Stanley Ave will be blocked.
Concerned about neighborhood access during construction.
Request driveway access onto 158 near Station 25.
I do not wish for my home to front on controlled access with a U-turn.
Turning into our neighborhood would be a nightmare. Need turn lanes into neighborhood.
Belews Creek Rd / HW 65 is heavily traveled, and it would be hard for all the traffic to make a U-turn to enter and exit
Stokesdale.
I am concerned that our house may be spared but our property will be split, so we will have a lot of land with no access.
The ROW will go through our house at lot 102. What is the control of access at this point?
We have a circle driveway with two access points. When will we be notified if there are any changes to our access? Will we
receive drawings? Two access points are necessary because of the highway traffic and speed, especially tractor trailers.
I rebuild further back in my lot, will there be an access to my business from the northbound lane? Will my clients have
continuous access to my buildin�/business?
Will combines and tractors be able to turn around on these synchronized streets?
I cannot figure out on the proposed map where the control of access and partial control of access starts and stops on my
property on the left side of the road. I do have to have access to my land.
Alt 2 seems like the logical solution, with less impact on people's houses.
Please do not choose Alt 3. I live in this area, and road access would be altered, noise would be worse. Current 158 in this
area is not an issue. Want to keep this area rural.
Alt 3 will bring a big impact to my neighborhood and will make it difficult to commute to work, because I will have to enter
4-lane hi�hway. I will be forced to sell if this route �oes throu�h.
Am opposed to the northern route - Alt 3- it would divide my property in half. Big economic loss for us.
I prefersouthern.
I prefer the southern route, which would encourage truckers to take 220 to 73 and stay away from Stokesdale downtown.
I live directly in the proposed Alt 3 section and don't want to move. The number of people affected by Alt 3 is higher than
Alt 2. Maybe it could move further north and take fewer houses.
I don't like either alternative, but the southern alternative is the lesser of 2 evils.
Not in favor of Northern route. The noise levels at our church would be unacceptable. The super highways will be
beneficial at most four hours during the day. Southern route has only one proposed superstreet vs four on the northern
Concerned about the number of homeowners impacted by Alt 3. Alt 2 seems like a much better choice.
I am concerned with noise abatement and night construction with option 3. US 158 would be moving closer to my
nei�hborhood. I would prefer option 2.
Alt 2 has my vote. Alt 2 would lead northbound traffic to 220/73, which is built to handle it.
I prefersouthern.
Response
NCDOT staff has been working with residents to explain how access to their properties will change
as a result of the proposed project. Restricting crossing movements with the median and limiting
crossover and U-turn locations reduces the number of conflict points and focuses them in the safest
practical locations. Access to all sidestreets and neighborhoods will be maintained during
construction. At least one access per property will be provided along US 158, with a few exceptions:
1) properties near the proposed interchanges (proposed Winston Salem Northern Beltway, and the
proposed interchange for R-2577C Alternative 3 and NC 68), and 2) properties adjacent to the turn-
around locations where access will not be allowed. The turn-around bulbs for U-turns will be able to
accommodate large tractor trailers and large farming equipment. Property owners will be notified
by NCDOT if access to their property will change as a result of the project after right of way
acquisition begins. Right of way acquisitions is currently in 2020 for Section A of the project and
2024 for Section B. Section C is currently not funded for Right of Way Acquisition. No control of
access is proposed from the beginning of the project to the proposed Winston-Salem North Beltway
interchange (except at U-turn locations).
Comments regarding the preference for Alternative 2 will be considered as the project is further
developed and when a decision is made regarding the preferred alternative.

86 66 Stokesdale 10/26/2017 Alternative 2 We are concerned about Alt 3, which would infiltrate our property. Truthfully, I do not like any of the alts.
Meetin Preference
93 71 Stokesdale 10/26/2017 Alternative 2 Our concerns about Alt 3 is how our driveway will be 150 from the middle of the highway. This is a major safety concern
Meeting Preference with two small children. The large increase in noise & disruptions that this will cause is also a concern. We are stuck not
bein able to sell our home with the unknown of this ro'ect.
98 76 Stokesdale 10/26/2017 Alternative 2 I feel the southern route affects fewer home or structures.
Meetin Preference
100 78 Stokesdale 10/26/2017 Alternative 2 Alt 2- preferred route. Least disruptive to majority of Stokesdale residences, most direct route and best option to grow
Meetin Preference Stokesdale town area.
115 90 Mail 11/3/2017 Alternative 2 We are opposed to Alt 3. Section C is not funded and will be too costly when 173 already exists to handle this traffic. Alt 3 is
Preference a longer distance and has more homes and establishments than Alt 2. Businesses and wetland would be affected. Our
subvision, Boone Landing, will experience excessive traffic noise. Noise walls would be required. Alt 3 does not comply with
�
123 95 Mail 11/6/2017 Alternative 2 I would prefer the southern route.
Preference
125 97 Mail 11/6/2017 Alternative 2 Since I live in the Marshall Woods development off of Lester Rd on HWY 68, I vote that the four-lane HWY 158 would be
Preference located on the south side of Stokesdale. The northern alt would disrupt the flow of traffic to downtown Stokesdale and
access to Belews Lake. The south site would be more through farmland and shorter distance to Winston-Salem. Big trucks
would more than likely use 220 and 158 and not cut though 68 to get to the Winston-Salem area.
130 100 Contact Us 10/25/2017 Alternative 2 I would like to voice my opposition to the northern Alternate 3 route for the US158 reroute through section R-2577 ABC
Preference around Stokesdale.
181 141 Mail 11/10/2017 Alternative 2 Northern route will cause burden on Stokesdale citizens to get back and forth to businesses. This route and U-turn concept
Preference will cause major accidents for those towing boats. This route will cause delays in fire department emergency response. The
reroute and U-turn conceptwill cause hazardous conditionsforvisitors and residents of Countryside RetirementVillage. If
you choose northern route, please consider moving farther from my property.
193 153 Contact Us 11/13/2017 Alternative 2 Our house is in the proposed right of way for the northern route. The northern route has greater impact on existing
Preference residential and commercial structures than the southern route. There will be substantially more road work needed on the
northern route. There are two new intersections with 158 (Hwy 65, and Ellisboro rd.) and an interchange with 65/68 with a
new overpass. There are also at least four existing roads that will need to be rerouted. This is in contrast to the southern
route needing only two new intersections with 158 (1: Hwy 68 an 2: Eversfield) and only three existing roads needing to be
rerouted. Furthermore, the major interchange for the southern route would be with the existing 220/I-73 interchange.
The southern route would improve commuting to Greensboro and High Point for virtually all of Stokesdale. The northern
route would either make this worse or have no benefit.
195 155 Mail 11/13/2017 Alternative 2 We moved here for the small downtown charm and quiet. Sad to think a loud interstate will be so close to our town and
Preference home. We feel the southern route will be the best for our town. It appears to be the safer of the two routes
196 156 Mail 11/13/2017 Alternative 2 Please choose the Southern Route, we feel this is a safer route, and also the best for our small downtown area.
Preference
197 157 Mail 11/13/2017 Alternative 2 I do not favor having the highway construction on the northern route (Lester Rd.). I am concerned the level of traffic noise
Preference will increase dramaticall .

202
52
54
56
58
62
73
78
85
88
90
91
94
163 Email 11/13/2017 Alternative 2 I am opposed to the proposed northern route in the Stokesdale area being selected as the route for the future US 158
Preference improvementsfor many reasons. The southern route has been on the planning mapsfortheTown of Stokesdale for many
years and has been a part of any rezoning decisions that have been made for the area during those years. Until more
recently, there was not a northern route and those living in or near what is now proposed as the northern route have not
had the same opportunityto plan forthe future asthose in the area of the southern route.
42 Stokesdale
Meetin
43 Stokesdale
Meeting
10/26/2017 Alternative 2
Preference
10/26/2017 Alternative 3
Preference
The northern route appears to close a part of Lester Road. It appears to me that this would be very detrimental to the
people that live on this road. It appears to me that this would increase response time needed in the event of emergencies
forthe Stokesdale Fire Departmentto reach people on Lester Road. Stokesdale Fire respondsto medical emergencies in
addition to fires.
The northern route has a much more complicated crossing for NC 68 since it would also include the NC 65 intersection.
Much additional land would be needed to make ramps and the building of a bridge would be more expensive.
The northern route would also require the crossing of Ellisboro Road and NC 65 West (Belews Creek Road). Both roads are
heavily traveled connector roads that currently have stoplights to help control traffic. Citizens traveling on either road will
have to go through the synchronized street method and then through a stop light possibly to reach their destination as the
new bypass may not take them where they need to go.
Do not like either design, but will vote for Southern Route.
Alt 2 is detrimental to Stokesdale.
The bypass will result in further corruption of the Stokesdale Land Use Plan and the vision of a town core.
Alt 2 will significantly increase the amount of high speed highway and associated environmental degradation. It will make
the intersection at NC 68 more dangerous, and will increase noise and air pollution.
The impacts of Alt 2 are greater than what is shown on the maps because of recent development.
Alt 2 will impact more creeks/watershed areas than Alt 3.
45 Stokesdale 10/26/2017 Alternative 3 Northern route keeps trucks going through Stokesdale and lake traffic makes more sense for north vs southern.
Meeting Preference Southern route affects high end homes and property value. Also affects large business paying taxes, while northern affects
zero businesses.
Also, travel from south to elementary school could be more difficult and more traffic around school vs the northern route.
Less traffic for school buses.
47 Stokesdale
Meetin
49 Stokesdale
Meetin
56 Stokesdale
Meetin
59 Stokesdale
Meeting
65 Stokesdale
Meetin
67 Stokesdale
Meetin
69 Stokesdale
Meetin
70 Stokesdale
Meetin
72 Stokesdale
Meetin�
10/26/2017 Alternative 3
Preference
10/26/2017 Alternative 3
Preference
10/26/2017 Alternative 3
Preference
10/26/2017 Alternative 3
Preference
10/26/2017 Alternative 3
Preference
10/26/2017 Alternative 3
Preference
10/26/2017 Alternative 3
Preference
10/26/2017 Alternative 3
Preference
10/26/2017 Alternative 3
Preference
Alt 2 would run right through our business, taking away our livelihood.
Proposed southern route has Shoeline Rd to be taken up. The homeowners on Shoeline Rd including we will have no
access to Ellison Rd.
Alt 2 would directly affect my home in the new development, The Landing at Angel Glen. Our homes aren't shown on the
map. There wouldn't be access to the nei�hborhood if this passes.
My home is located in the Alt 2 route, but is not showing up on the map. My neighborhood will be destroyed when it is less
than 2 years old. My preference is for Alt 3. If Alt 2 is selected, please do a speedy purchase process so I can move on with
Our property, which we just purchased in May 2017 will be affected by Alt 2. It would make more sense to go north, which
would result in fewer homes bein� taken.
It seems Alt 3 would be best. Least impact on environment, people, and keep truck traffic out of Stokesdale.
The northern route appears best in terms of reducing and diverting traffic from residential areas, but impact on creeks and
streams is also an important consideration. I hope that cost is not the major determination.
I preferthe northern route.
Please choose the northern route, or you will split my farm in half.
Comments regarding the preference for Alternative 3 will be considered as the project is further
developed and when a decision is made regarding the preferred alternative.NCDOT is currently in
the process of updating the traffic capacity analysis for the project based on an updated Traffic
Forecast that was completed in July 2017.

101 79 Stokesdale 10/26/2017 Alternative 3 Considering currenttraffic congestion, ourtown would be best served bythe northern option. We do not need traffic and
Meetin Preference an increase in crime otential in the heart of Stokesdale.
102 80 Stokesdale 10/26/2017 Alternative 3 I think the 158 to Branson Rd would be the most economical route to take with the widening.
Meetin Preference
103 81 Stokesdale 10/26/2017 Alternative 3 I live in Section C and prefer the northern route, as it affects fewer businesses and homes in my section. I am concerned
Meeting Preference about the significant increase in traffic and decrease in property values if the southern option is pursued.
104 82 Stokesdale 10/26/2017 Alternative 3 The southern alt will bisect a family farm, with wetlands on the property that would be impacted.
Meetin Preference
105 83 Stokesdale 10/26/2017 Alternative 3 Alt 2 looks like it would cost less since no bridges would be required over other roadways. Alt 3 route looks like it would
Meetin Preference affect fewer businesses.
114 89 Mail 11/3/2017 Alternative 3 I would prefer Alt 3. Alt 2 would cross through my street and I'm afraid of the traffic and noise this will bring and what it
Preference will do to m ro ert value.
122 94 Mail 11/3/2017 Alternative 3 For Section C, based on my discussion with DOT at the Oct 26 meeting, Alt 3 appears to be the better route, as it affects
Preference fewer families and businesses. Alt 2 would clobber a landmark restaurant and their home that opened in the 1950s. Alt 2
also makes Ellison Road into a cul-de-sac, with access to US 158 moved to a new location. Alt 3 is the obvious choice. Also
Alt 3 provides full control-of-access at NC 68, Alt 2 does not.
124 96 Mail 11/6/2017 Alternative 3 I feel the proposed Alt. 3 would be best for the community.
Preference
134 104 Contact Us 10/30/2017 Alternative 3 I am in support of the alternative 3 north around Stokesdale based upon the following:
Preference 1. The route north of Stokesdale would allow truck traffic to exit onto Hwy 68 north of the existing 158 and 68 intersection
eliminates truck traffic having to go north from the south proposal and back through that intersection
2. Noise/traffic/safety - Alt 2 sends traffic south of Stokesdale Elementary causing more noise past the school by trucks and
cars wanting to go north on Hwy 68 to 220.
3. Noise/traffic/safety - Alt 2 would be just south of Stokesdale Town Hall, park and sports fields.
4. Increased new construction along the Alt 2 route - further expense if homes need to be bought by the state.
5. Will there be a new traffic study to determine how much traffic is now using I 73 instead of 158? Some traffic may go I
40 to Hwy 68 and then new I 73 to go north.
6. It is doubtful trucks would continue on 158 to 220 when they want to go the shortest route and can take 68 north to
220.
142 109 Contact Us 11/9/2017 Alternative 3 I believe the southern Hwy 158 bypass alternative would do much more harm to the town of Stokesdale because it would
Preference direct north and west bound traffic through Stokesdale and the red light and by the school. North to south traffic on Hwy
68will bethe same no matterthe choice. Trafficto and from Winston Salem and to and from north to Virginia would flow
around Stokesdale if the northern bypass alternative is chosen. This would work perfectly with the Hwy 68 four lane
already funded from Hwy 65 to Hwy 220. Increased traffic (especially truck traffic) on Hwy 68 through Stokesdale would
ultimately require widening Hwy 68 and removing historic buildings near the red light.
Another problem I have with the Southern alternative is that it would eliminate two businesses important to Stokesdale.

143 110 Email 11/8/2017 Alternative 3 1. First, my parochial preference is for the northern route. My neighborhood is near the southern route, so naturally, I
Preference would prefer to avoid the increased traffic congestion, noise, etc. related to having a US highway near my home.
2. Beyond my neighborhood concerns, I am mostly worried about the traffic volume and flow on NC68. I live in Stokesdale
off of NC68 and work near the intersection of NC68 and 140, so I travel NC68 every day. My family and I have lived in
Stokesdale for over 13 years. Every year, I have seen the volume of traffic on NC68 increase. (The recent 173 connector
project has helped the southern part of NC68, but once I am north of Alcorn road in Oak Ridge, the traffic is essentially the
same.) I foresee that NC68 traffic will only increase, so I am concerned with the impact on traffic caused by the
intersection of NC68 and US158. The synchronized street proposal for the southern option appears to be significantly
inferior to the interchange of the northern option. Additionally, I often have need in the evenings to drive from my home
north on NC68 and west on US158 to the US Post Office in Stokesdale. My perception is that NC68 traffic is heavier than
US158 traffic. Therefore, an option that keeps both roads flowing with minimal disruption (i.e. the interchange of the
northern route) seems preferable.
3. I was told at the meeting that the northern route has an interchange, because the expectation is that more truck traffic
running north on US158 will continue to NC68 along the northern route. Whereas with the southern route, this truck
traffic will leave US158 for local roads that provide a shorter path to NC68 north. This seems to defeat the purpose of
expanding US158 as well as increase the chances of accidents, congested traffic, and wear-and-tear on local roads.
4. I was examining the PDFs with the proposed US158 tracks. To get a better understanding of the existing roads, land,
etc., I looked at the same area on Google Maps. I noticed that the Culp Fashions plant on US158 (near map ID 225) has an
additional building on Google Maps that is not shown in the NCDOT PDF file. The proposed southern route of US158 runs
directly through this building. While, obviously, there will be displacements due to the new roads, I am especially sensitive
to impacting businesses. This often cost people jobs and other disruptions.
5. Similarly, the southern route appears to go straight through Parkers Restaurant (near map ID 10), Lamination Services
(near map ID 10), Landreth Auto Sales (near map ID 15), and Oliver Diesel (near map ID15). On the whole, the southern
route seems to impact more businesses.
145 112 Email 11/6/2017 Alternative 3 This is to let you know that I STRONGLY OPPOSE THE SOUTHERN ROUTE OF HWY. 158 around Stokesdale, NC. The southern
Preference route would gothrough a more highly populated area with more homes and people displaced. Furtherthe southern route
would create considerable noise in the general vicinity of Stokesdale Elementary School and the Stokesdale Town Hall. The
considerable semi-truck traffic creates a great amount of road noise day and night. The northern route goes through far
less dense population and housing areas. Already Hwy.65 goes nearthe northern route and itwould more easily connect
147 115 Contact Us 11/8/2017 Alternative 3 As a property owner who would be adversely affected by Alternative 2 near US 158 and 68, I vehemently oppose
Preference Alternative 2 for the Highway 158 Improvements in Guilford County. If this route were chosen, it would decrease the value
of my property as well as dramatically reduce quality of life for myself and my family having a major highway come through
what is now a quiet neighborhood. Our neighborhood offers a community fishing pond which we enjoy several times per
week. From the maps I have seen, the new highway would run between my property and the community pond therefore
making it impossible to access and enjoy. Again, I oppose Alternative 2 and know others in the path of this proposed route
feel the same way. We appreciate the rural community that we live in now and do not want to see highway improvements
183 143 Email 11/11/2017 Alternative 3 This correspondence is written to address our concerns about the proposed plans for the expansion of Hwy 158. We are
Preference most concerned about the last phase, east of Stokesdale, and specifically Alternate Plan 2. This passes over the southern
boundary of our property and our most recent $10 million distribution centerexpansion, aswell as overthe septicfield
serving 450 of our employees.
187 147 Mail 11/10/2017 Alternative 3 Recently moved to the area for its rural feel. Alt 2 would be built right next to our property, and will cause depreciation to
Preference the house that we just purchased. It appears Alt 2 would take many homes and businesses.
189 149 Contact Us 11/9/2017 Alternative 3 Our properties are located in the southern route proposed. Our plans for our family has been constantly placed on hold or
Preference hindered by the "threat" of this highway coming through our property and taking our homes. This highway would cut us
off from a safe drive for our grandchildren and children to reach us. My husband is disabled and in a wheelchair and I am
nearly 70. We depend on ourfamilyto help us. This path forthe southern route of 158would put a hardship on ourfamily
and those in surrounding community. Several businesses vital to the community would be ruined and probably relocate in
other arts of the count . As I said we have worked hard and with a tearful lea I lea to locate this hi hwa to the

198
148
158 Mail 11/13/2017 Alternative 3 I am a homeowner in the Dorsett Downs neighborhood near alternate 2. I am opposed to the selection of alternate 2
Preference because of:
Negative impact to property values.
Concern about turning left out of Dorsett Downs, given superstreet design.
Noise levels near route. Are noise level projections available?
... _. . ._.. _. . . .._. .- - - -
117 Contact Us 11/7/2017 Alternative 3 Looking at the apparent demographics of the people affected by the two proposed routes it seems to me the most likely
Preference course will be the northern. Not because it is the most sensible or cost effective, but because the northern route impacts
primarily poor individuals who live along the existing roadway, and the southern route would go through newly developed
. . . . . . . , s .,. , .. ... ... ... ... . . . . .
48 39 Walkertown
Meeting
188 148 Mail
63
95
36
140
154
4
61
1
13
18
19
21
23
27
28
30
40
42
44
50 Stokesdale
Meetin
73 Stokesdale
Meetin
29 Walkertown
Meetin
107 Contact Us
1211 Mail
2 Walkertown
Meetin
48 Stokesdale
Meetin
1 Walkertown
Meetin
7 Walkertown
Meetin
12 Walkertown
Meetin
13 Walkertown
Meetin
15 Walkertown
Meetin
16 Walkertown
Meetin
19 Walkertown
Meetin
21 Walkertown
Meetin
24 Walkertown
Meetin
33 Walkertown
Meeting
34 Walkertown
Meetin
35 Walkertown
Meetin�
10/24/2017 Bicycle and
Pedestrian
11/10/2017 Bicycle and
Pedestrian
10/26/2017 Drainage
10/26/2017 � Drainage
The Winston-Salem MPO CTP Pedestrian recommendations include building sidewalks between Darrow Rd and Old Hollow Accommodations for bicycle and/or pedestrians have not been included in this project as no
(NC 66). Is there any way to incorporate? requests from either Walkertown or Stokesdale have been submitted to NCDOT.
I see no provisions for bike/walkways on any typical section.
Concerned about current drainage from 158, and potential increased drainage resulting from expanded road.
At the intersection of Happy Rd and 158, there is a deep gully or ditch that is part of the ROW. I hope this gets changed.
Drainage concerns will be taken into consideration as the project is further developed and design
plans are refined.
10/24/2017 Emergency Concerned about emergency access at U-turns. We have larger vehicles with larger turning radius that most vehicles. Also Concerns regarding emergency vehicle access and response will be taken into consideration as the
Res onse concerned about water oints where h drants are on o osite sides of divided hi hwa . project is further developed. Emergency vehicles will be able to crossover the proposed grass
11/8/2017 Emergency Tonight, I have heard the emergency vehicles come by twice from Walkertown. By making these vehicles turn right, make a median at any location along the proposed project, if it is necessary, except for areas where
Response U-turn and then come down our road, you have just added minutes to any emergency call. This is not good in my opinion. guardrail will be installed.
11/9/2017 E m e rge n cy
Res onse
10/24/2017 Funding
10/26/2017 � Fu nd i ng
Another concern is for emegency access that would require extra mileage to get into our development.
Question about funding- funded by NC or Federal?
I am curious how this would be funded.
10/24/2017�General Design �Stop light at Old Belews Creek Rd/ U.S. 158?
10/24/2017 � General Design � Question about traffic speed on U.S. 158.
10/24/2017 General Design Idea for bridge over NC 66, to avoid having 4 lanes for NC 66.
10/24/2017 General Design Opposed to superstreet intersection at US 158 and NC 66. Feels that four lanes and a working traffic light plan is a more
reasonable o tion.
10/24/2017 General Design Would like to U-turn at Piney Grove moved east to just before lake to avoid extra travel distance.
10/24/2017�General Design �A bridge for 66 over 158 for good traffic pattern.
10/24/2017 General Design Suggest a bridge for NC 66 over 158.
10/24/2017 General Design Request for additional directional crossover between Darrow Road and NC 66, for people who need to go toward Winston-
Salem.
10/24/2017 General Design Need to coordinate traffic signal with private security at schools on 66. Consider increased heavy truck traffic on 66.
10/24/2017 General Design Beeson Dairy Rd Should be extended to Reidsville Rd; Awkward turning movement; Reverse design and have Old Belews
Creek Rd T into Beeson Dairy Rd. Stretch between Stanley Ave and Beltway is a long stretch without a U-turn to Winston-
,.. , . . ,. , , .,, . . , . , . .
10/24/2017�General Design �Have you considered a bridge overthe highway?
10/24/2017 General Design The high use of the directional crossovers concerns me, particularly at NC 66. If secondary redlights are required at the
turnabouts. the the value of the crossovers becomes auestionable.
The project is state funded.
Specific requests for stop lights, bridges, additional cross-over locations, adding or moving U-turn
locations, or realigning intersections will be considered as the project is further developed and the
designs are refined. The project proposes the construction of two new bridges over Belews Lake
with increased clearance.

47 38 Walkertown
Meeting
68 53 Stokesdale
Meetin
120 92 Mail
141 108 Contact Us
146
10/24/2017 General Design We are concerned about intersection of 158 and Darrow Rd/ Old Belews Creek Rd, busy intersection at times. Need to
have Darrow Rd go straight across. There are too many U-turns - older population will have a hard time. We need a traffic
10/26/2017�General Design �It would be nice if an additional U-turn bulb could be added between Old Greensboro Rd and Gaither Rd.
11/3/2017�General Design �Encourage two new bridges over Belews Lake- increase height- currently too low for all boat access.
11/9/2017 General Design I wish to express need to cancel plansforturn around bulb nearold blews creek rd forsouth/westtraffic at current
placement site. Construction of buld would result in unessary waste of tax payers money for purchaze of partial properties
land and raise several OSHA issues. Concerns are reguarding safety of trucks and cars going at speed limit or faster on
highway not being able to stop in time for intances of unavoidable accidents such as turns using bad judgement by drunk
drivers and elderly. Proposed fence barrier or guard rail would not stop 18 wheeler from running into homes at
approximately 80ft away from hwy. Second placement would offer limited visual awareness of cars traveling north/east
dueto crest of hill priorto buld despite proposal of changing hwygrade nearold blews creek rd. Third, measuringtraffic
flow for use of buld on south/west buld would be minimum vs measure of traffic leaving residential areas that must use
north/east lane. Thus, a intersection at Stanley Park Rd is requested to accommodate turns from either lane. Thus, turn
around for north east traffic will be needed due to higher traffic volume seeking to reach busin. 40 downtown winston
salem. Old Blews creek rd users have current option to drive to intersection on the opposite end of old blews creek rd to
access north/east lane so use of south west bulb would be minimum and waste of money due to limited traffic use.
113 Other 11/8/2017 General Design A U-Turn bulb should be investigated for eastbound US 158 traffic around Sta. 127+00, west of Harvest Baptist Church and
the westbound US 158/Old Belews Creek Rd. bulb. There appears to be a lot of homes between Stanley Ave., Angel Dr.,
and Stanley Park Rd. that would either have to make a U-turn at the Old Belews Creek Rd. leftover or go all the way
through the interchangetothe Darrow Rd. U-turn bulb. This is quite a long distance and could deterthe performance of
167� 130�Letter � 11/9/2017�General Design �Does the DOT still use guardrails? What type of boundaries do you use between the road and homes?
168
169
180
199
37
66
87
96
97
108
111
118
130 Letter 11/9/2017 General Design Does the median have to be that wide in this area? Could it be smaller?
130 Letter 11/9/2017 General Design Why doesn't Old Flatrock Road and Rail Fence Road just come to a"crossing" together like is proposed with Goodwill
Church Road? Wh could it not 'ust be an intersection with no sto li ht?
140 Mail 11/10/2017 General Design I have for years tried to get a stop light at U.S. 158 with cross streets of Gaither Rd., and Old Belews Creek
Rd. There is a great need for an intersection and stop light at U.S. 158, Gaither Road, and Old
Belews Creek. I'm sure there are hundreds of people living off Old Belews Creek that would be
happy also. It makes more sense to make the above intersection than the plan to make us go to Stanley Avenue to make a
U-turn.
160 Mail 11/13/2017 General Design Please take another look at the intersection of U.S. 158 (Reidsville Rd), Gaither Rd, and Old Belews Creek Rd. Since houses
will be taken anyway, I believe it is the perfect time to realign this intersection and install a traffic signal. This would create
an alternative access to drivers from the residential areas wanting to access U.S. 158 West to Business 40.
30 Walkertown
Meetin
52 Stokesdale
Meetin
66 Stokesdale
Meetin
74 Stokesdale
Meetin
75 Stokesdale
Meetin
85 Stokesdale
Meeting
871 Mail
901 Mail
10/24/2017 G e n e ra I
O osition
10/26/2017 General
O osition
10/26/2017 General
O osition
10/26/2017 General
O osition
10/26/2017 General
O osition
10/26/2017 General
Opposition
11/3/2017 G e n e ra I
O osition
11/3/2017 G e n e ra I
Opposition
I do not wish to live 300 ft from a major highway. This will hurt me in several ways.
I don't think 158 needs to be changed at all at this time.
There is minimal traffic on 158, so I do not see the point. I like being able to turn in and out of our neighborhood with ease.
Our farm would be affected by the highway. A 4-lane obstruction at Flatrock Rd would be noisy and disturbing.
We do not need big highways. You are slowly destroying precious farmland, used to make a living.
We live in the Providence North subdivision off of US-158 and have concerns for parcels 890 and 869 with respect to
Alternative 3. We would also like to advocate the state reevaluate the need for this project. The traffic does not demand a
_ . .. . . . . . . _. . . ... . . . . ..
Don't think it will keep traffic flowing & will be flowing in wrong direction. 158 is a major road, look like NCDOT is trying to
use as a county road, 45 to 50 mph.
This project is much too costly and not required!
Comments are noted.

170 132 Telephone
173 133 Telephone
45 36 Walkertown
Meetin
60 48 Stokesdale
Meetin
138 107 Contact Us
155 122 Email
31 25 Walkertown
Meeting
112 87 Mail
8 4 Walkertown
Meeting
15
32
64
128
9 Walkertown
Meetin
26 Walkertown
Meetin
50 Stokesdale
Meeting
99 Mail
11/8/2017 General
O osition
11/8/2017 General
O osition
10/24/2017 G e n e ra I
Su ort
10/26/2017 General
Su ort
11/8/2017 General
Su ort
11/9/2017 G e n e ra I
10/24/2017 Historic
Resources
11/3/2017 Historic
Resources
Not happy at the prospect of these US 158, R-2577A roadway improvements
Not happy at the prospect of these US 158 roadway improvements concerning R-2577A, or the proposed superstreet
desi n.
I wish other attendees and homeowners could consider how the new road is going to benefit the community. Thanks for Comments are noted.
the detailed ma s.
I support 158 being improved 100%. Good job!
I have lived on Walkertown-Guthrie for 55 years and have seen the rapid growth in traffic during that time in our
community. So I understand and welcome the widenin� of Hwy 158 in our area.
First let me say I am very excited about the bypass being built near my home in High Knoll, Walkertown.
Edgewood Baptist Church is listed as a historic property on your maps, but the church does not have this designation.
Please contact us to discuss this issue. We have never filed for such designation.
All proposed for Edgewood Baptist Church & Churchland Av. Will totally destroy our church with the way NCDOT has
proposed.
10/24/2017�Home Value �Concerned about home value decreasing.
10/24/2017�Home Value �Concerned about noise wall on property, decrease in home value, increase in traffic.
10/24/2017�Home Value �Concerned about property value and noise. We can't afford to lose value on our house.
10/26/2017�Home Value �Concerned about decline in property value and quality of life, with increased noise and pollution.
11/6/2017�Misc �Will there be city/sewer available?
NCDOT conducted a survey of potentially historic properties pursuant to 36 CFR Section 800.4(b)
that might be affected by the proposed project. Edgewood Baptist Church were found Eligible for
Listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion C for architecture because of its
exceptional importance as a distinctive example of a religious facility built in the modernist style in
the Winston-Salem area. This determination is a result of a requirement of state and federal laws to
evaluate potentially historic properties and affords those properties special consideration when
federal fundingorfederal permits are required. Additional coordination with the North Carolina
State Historic Preservation Office will be completed to minimize and mitigate impacts to the church.
The R-2577 roadway design plans are not final. Efforts will be made to further reduce/minimize the
impacts to properties along US 158, during the final design phase of R-2577.
NCDOT Right-of-Way agents will work with the public during the ROW acquisition phase. Impacted
citizens will be contacted starting in 2020 for Part A of the project and 2024 for Part B, as per the
current project schedule. Further assistance may be obtained by contacting the NCDOT Highway
Division 7 Right-of-Way office in Greensboro at [phone] for properties located in Guilford
County, or contacting the NCDOT Division 9 Right-of-Way office in Winston-Salem at [phone]
for properties located in Forsyth County.
Additional right-of-way acquisition assistance information is available on the "U.S. 158 (Reidsville
Road) Improvements" webpage, on the NCDOT website at
https://www.ncdot.gov/projects/US158ReidsvilleRoad/
Water and sewer services are provided by local or county municipalities, not by the NCDOT.
43 34 Walkertown 10/24/2017 Neighborhood Please protect the small town nature of the area - do not create "islands" of residential communities that are cut off by Impacts to communities will be evaluated as the project further develops and will be addressed in
Meetin Im acts hi hwa . the environmental document (State EA/FONSI). NCDOT will attempt to minimize impacts to
76 58 Stokesdale 10/26/2017 Neighborhood The road will affect the rural nature of the town. neighborhoods, communities, farms, businesses and individual property owners to the fullest extent
Meeting Impacts practicable.
46 37 Walkertown
Meeting
72
77
82
106
117
55 Stokesdale
Meetin
58 Stokesdale
Meetin
62 Stokesdale
Meetin
83 Stokesdale
Meetin
90 Mail
10/24/2017 Noise The highway will be closer to my property (4600 Serene St), and noise will decrease property value. Noise survey should be NCDOT is currently conducting a Traffic Noise Analysis for the proposed project that will identify
accomplished and noise barrier installed. How will property owners be compensated for highway being closer to their potential noise study areas along the project that meet preliminary feasible and reasonable criteria
? found in the NCDOT Traffic Noise Policy. A more detailed analysis will be completed during project
10/26/2017 Noise Noise walls are needed. final design, at which point the location of noise barriers will be decided. Certain property owners
and tenants near the proposed barriers will be solicited to obtain their preferences for or against
10/26/2017 Noise Traffic noise will affect neighborhoods and wildlife. construction of the barriers. In accordance with NCDOT Traffic Noise Policy, the NCDOT is not
responsible for evaluating or implementing any noise barriers to protect developed lands that for
10/26/2017 Noise Personal concern is noise, which we already have from highway 68.
which building permits were not issued before the Date of Public Knowledge. The Date of Public
10/26/2017 Noise On Alt 3, would noise walls be installed near Rachel's Landing? It is an older development. Knowledge of the proposed highway project will be the approval date of the State Environmental
Assessment/Finding of No Significant Impact (State EA/FONSI). For development occurring after
11/3/2017 Noise Our home would be 1100 feet from the road, causin loud traffic noise. this date, local governing bodies are responsible to ensure that noise compatible designs are utilized

135 105 Contact Us
121 93 Mail
129 99 Mail
132 102 Contact Us
75 58 Stokesdale
Meeting
119 92 Mail
137 106 Contact Us
53 42 Stokesdale
Meetin
12 7 Walkertown
Meeting
99 77 Stokesdale
Meetin
107 84 Stokesdale
Meetin
110 86 Mail
126 98 Mail
133 103 Contact Us
136 105 Contact Us
149 118 Email
151 119 Email
164 130 Letter
171 133 Telephone
179 139 Mail
11/4/2017 Noise Will noise barrier be constructed on my property line.
11/3/2017 Other The most logical widening of HWY 158 through Stokesdale would be to go straight onto HWY 65 and then onto 220, since
Alternatives those highways are already in place and would just need widening.
11/6/2017 Project
Schedule
10/30/2017 Project
Schedule
10/26/2017 Public
Involvement
11/3/2017 P u b I i c
Involvement
11/2/2017 P u b I i c
Involvement
10/26/2017 Public
Involvement
10/24/2017 ROW
Acquisition
10/26/2017 ROW
Ac uisition
10/26/2017 ROW
Ac uisition
11/3/2017 ROW
Acquisition
11/6/2017 ROW
Acquisition
10/30/2017 ROW
Ac uisition
11/4/2017 ROW
Ac uisition
11/5/2017 ROW
Ac uisition
11/8/2017 ROW
Acquisition
11/9/2017 ROW
Ac uisition
11/8/2017 ROW
Ac uisition
11/10/2017 ROW
Acauisition
When will the project commence and be completed?
This road is atvery crowded today. This improvement should be started soonerthan the 2026time schedule. Frequent
accidents arethe norm forthis road now. Please consideracceleratingthe construction schedule.
Project needs to be put to a vote by citizens of Stokesdale. The road has minimal benefit to citizens of Stokesdale, who
should have a say.
Recommend - Add to website a one-page separate printable legend.
I can not read the legend or other writing on the online Highway 158 Improvements Project map. Zooming in is possible,
but the writing cannot be read.
Where can I�o to see the map?
Should have had water/drinks/snacks at public meeting.
Questions about compensation for property acquisition.
I am ok with the highway if the state buys the whole property from me.
About how much of my property or driveway taken.
The ROW will go through our house at lot 102. This will not be a good option for our house. For years any survey showed
ROW going through our house. The house won't be livable once the extra traffic starts flowing. Can we offer our house so
the state will purchase in the existin� ROW?
The project will impact our property's market value and may prevent us from being able to sell it. It will be a physical and
financial burden to maintain the house until ROW purchase begins in 2024. Is there any way you could go ahead and
ni irrhacA thA R(1\A/ anr) hni icA hAfnrA �n�a�
My husband and I would like to know if our house is going to be affected by this new project?
How many feet of my existing property line is being propsed for use for construction.
I still have serious concerns about my residence located in Part A at 4314 Reidsville Road (Lot 268) and ask the DOT to
please considerthe purchase of my property.
We live in section B and are inquiring on the right of way? Will the D.O.T. be purchasing the right of way? Our address is
6370 Reidsville Road Belews Creek, NC 27009. We are wondering when we should hear from anyone on this reference?
Many questions were unanswered at the meeting when we asked the guys there they didn't know the answers. Do you
know the footage from the road that is present now to where they would take it into our yard? The pictures show it
coming right uptothe front of our home. How accurate isthe picture reference?Thanksforyour response.
Concerned about ROW acquisition of properties that have been in the family for generations.
Questions regarding the proposed U-turn bulb behind his house, the control-of-access fencing, the current amount of ROW
that may be purchased from his property.
Request that property at 6900 US HWY 158 not be taken by NCDOT. Property has been in the family for generations and is
used for mv business.
along the proposed facility.
NCDOT has considered a full range of preliminary alternatives for improving US 158 through
Stokesdale, which included upgrading existing facilities as well as new location alternatives. Several
preliminary alternatives were eliminated from further study because they either did not meet the
purpose and need for the project, or had substantially more impacts than those that were chosen
Construction on Section A will begin in 2022 and in 2026 for Section B. Section C is not currently
funded for construction. Construction will be completed approximately 2-3 years after the start of
construction on each section of the project. Due to the remaining project planning requirements, it
is not likely that the project schedule will be advanced.
Hard copies of the public meeting maps can be viewed at the NCDOT Division 9 office at 375 Silas
Creek Parkway in Winston-Salem and at the NCDOT Division 7 office at 1584 Yanceyvile Street in
Greensboro.
The R-2577 roadway design plans are not final. Efforts will be made to reduce the impacts to
properties along US 158, during the final design phase of R-2577.
NCDOT Right-of-Way agents will work with the public during the ROW acquisition phase. Impacted
citizens will be contacted starting in 2020 for Part A and 2024 for Part B of the project. Further
assistance may be obtained by contacting the NCDOT Highway Division 7 Right-of-Way office in
Greensboro at [phone] for properties located in Guilford County, or contacting the NCDOT
Division 9 Right-of-Way office in Winston-Salem at [phone] for properties located in Forsyth
Co u nty.
Additional right-of-way acquisition assistance information is available on the "U.S. 158 (Reidsville
Road) Improvements" webpage, on the NCDOT website at
https://www.ncdot.gov/projects/US158ReidsvilleRoad/

194 154 Mail
205 166 M a i I
206
5
6
9
10
17
39
41
92
150
178
2
3
14
22
24
25
26
49
50
1671 Mail
3 Walkertown
Meetin
4 Walkertown
Meetin
5 Walkertown
Meetin
6 Walkertown
Meetin
11 Walkertown
Meetin
32 Walkertown
Meetin
34 Walkertown
Meetin
70 Stokesdale
Meetin
118 Email
1381 Email
1 Walkertown
2 Walkertown
Meetin
8 Walkertown
Meetin
16 Walkertown
Meetin
17 Walkertown
Meetin
18 Walkertown
Meetin
19 Walkertown
Meetin
40 Stokesdale
Meetin
41 Stokesdale
Meetin�
11/13/2017 ROW
Acquisition
11/15/2017 ROW
Acquisition
11/21/2017 ROW
Acquisition
10/24/2017 Safety
10/24/2017 Safety
10/24/2017 Safety
10/24/2017 Safety
10/24/2017 Safety
10/24/2017 Safety
10/24/2017 Safety
10/26/2017 Safety
I have a farm at 5938 Reidsville Rd, and my concern is abilityto sell produce as a roadside stand aswe have doingforyears.
They had originally planned forthe expansion on the otherside of the road. Whywasthis changed when people planned
for it? My neighbor will lose her house and also wants the expansion on the other side of the road. Taking several acres of
land could severely impact my operation, and losing the ability to sell roadside produce would impact my income in a
major way.
Please reconsidertaking my niece's property at 5924 Reidsville Rd. The property contains a housethat hergrandfather
built. She cherishes this house, which would be irreplaceable. Please consider expanding the road on the opposite side of
.. ... ... .. ... .. . . .. . .,....
We own a 186-acre farm at the end of Angel-Perdue Road. The road will split the farm in half and hurt our business. How
will we get harvesting machinery from one side to the other? The farm is surrounded with residential areas which will
cause a lot of contruction problems. We also own a house on HWY 68 what will be affected.
Concerned about visibility at hill near Stanley Ave.
Concerned about children playing near road with busy traffic.
Concerned about current safety of Vance Rd/Belews Creek Rd intersection at U.S. 158.
A signaled intersection is necessary at end of Stanley Ave.
Request for stoplight at Stanley Ave, after previous accidents at that intersection.
Don't wait until 2025, save a life! Stoplight needed at US 158 and Vance Rd - multiple accidents and deaths at that location.
Speed limit between Beltway and 66 should be no higherthan 45 mph.
I'd like to see speed limit reduced on Ellison Rd.
11/5/2017 Safety The U-Turn bulb control of access and construction concerns me due safety hazards pulling out of my driveway and
because my septic system is in the front yard only feet away from the highway and water lines. Highway 158 is a truck
route and widening the highway is only going to increase the flow of large trucks and other traffic at a high rate of speed.
Also, what is the projected speed limit at my location? The project in front of my home has safety and utility concerns
. . . . ,.,. . . . .
11/10/2017 � Safety
10/24/2017 � Su perstreet
10/24/2017 � Su perstreet
10/24/2017 � Su perstreet
10/24/2017 � Su perstreet
10/24/2017 � Su perstreet
10/24/2017 � Su perstreet
10/24/2017 � Su perstreet
If our suggested median changes cannot be implemented, I would strongly suggest the State consider lowering the speed
limit to 45 mph, which would be a logical step towards ensuring the safety of those vehicles required to change direction in
heavv traffic.
Would like easier left turn from Gaither Rd toward Winston-Salem.
Concerned about ability to make left turn out of Knoll Ridge Drive.
Concerned about extra distance required with right turn and U-turn.
Do not put u-turn below intersection at Belews Creek - Vance Rd. Have regular intersection.
Against U-turn concept at Belews Creek Rd +Vance Rd intersection. Wantsto be abletoturn eitherdirection orgo
strai�ht.
Against U-turn concept at Belews Creek & Vance Rd intersection. Should be able to turn either way at stoplight
Against U-turn concept.
The design speed for the proposed project vary between 50 and 60 miles per hour (mph), so the
proposed speed limit will be between 45 and 55 mph. Concerns regarding posted speed will be
taken into consideration as the project is further developed. The proposed project will address
visibility concerns as the vertical curves will be flattened and the horizontal curves will be
straightened as per current design standards. Request for speed limit reductions are submitted to
and considered by the NCDOT Division office. Requests for installing stop lights at specific
intersections will be considered.
The project proposes restricted "superstreet" access for all side streets within the project limits.
Restricting vehicular access at side streets to "right-in, right-out" (RIRO) turning-movements, is a
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) roadway design, that safely accommodates high volumes
of highway traffic in urban areas. This roadway design has been constructed along several highways
in North Carolina and in other states. It is currently in planning for other NCDOT roadway
improvement projects in North Carolina, and has proven to substantially improve motorists' safety,
as well as the traffic-carrying capacity along these highways.
Motorists, including emergency vehicles will move through the corridor efficiently even using the U-
turn bulbs as motorists will be spending less time in a superstreet corridor versus the existing
condition where motorists may wait long periods of time attempting to make highly dangerous left-
turns onto US 158. Traffic volumes within the project limits are expected to increase drastically in
the next twenty to thirty years. These improvements will handle those high traffic volumes.
10/26/2017 Superstreet Resident of the "Waters Edge" neighborhood. Need a turn lane instead of what is proposed. Inconvenient to drive past the
nei hborhood turn around 'ust to et into the nei hborhood. This roadway improvement design will improve the ease of making local trips in the immediate
10/26/2017 Superstreet Heron Point Homeowner. Concern of the turn around points not near the entrance of Marion Point Court, having to drive vicinity for local residents, as well as improving the mobility of through-traffic, along US 158 within
to turnaround to return to the nei hborhood in either direction. the proiect limits. Compared to traditional intersections, the superstreet corridor desi�n will handle

51 42 Stokesdale 10/26/2017 Superstreet U-turn concept is very bad. Does not work well on US-220/I-73 corridor. "Feels" unsafe and vehicles pull into on-coming
Meeting traffic often.
Superstreet design is "overkill" for this facility/area.
Quarry, asphalt plant, and concrete plant will create potential fatalities with the U-turn movements.
US-64 from US 421 to US 1 works very well w/o the superstreet design.
65 51 Stokesdale 10/26/2017 Superstreet Our neighborhood is Water's Edge at Marion Pointe Dr. Please consider better access to neighborhood to prevent having
Meetin to 0 1-2 miles ast entrance to turn around.
71 55 Stokesdale 10/26/2017 Superstreet The U-turn plan is highly dangerous with large trucks and dump trucks. The superstreet concept is overkill for this area.
Meetin
116 90 Mail 11/3/2017 Su erstreet We do not like the su erstreets, which would increase our travel time and milea e.
131 101 Contact Us 10/26/2017 Superstreet Current plan calls for no left turns onto 158 from Stanley Park Road. While I agree that keeping left turns to a minimum
improves overall traffic flow I disagree with the decision to prohibit them at this intersection and urge the DOT to
reconsider.
139 107 Contact Us 11/8/2017 Superstreet The main thing I question is the use of the turn lanes and u-turns in place of stoplights at certain intersections. I have a
hard time making it very easy and safe to use these new intersections with no stoplights with this amount of traffic. My
own family utilizes this intersection numerous times some days and I cringe at having to pull out, make a safe U-turn and
then turn a ain where I could have 'ust roceeded strai ht across with a traffic li ht.
144 111 Contact Us 11/8/2017 Superstreet I currently reside in Morris Farms off of Hwy 158. The proposal of no longer being able to turn left when exiting my
development will be a huge inconvenience. Your proposed changes would cause an instant decrease in the value of our
properties because it will make access to the development more difficult. Besides, it?s also ludicrous to make a right turn
just to be able to go left and the thought of unnecessary U-turns sounds like an accident waiting to happen on such a busy
stretch of highway. I strongly disagree to this proposal of no longer being able to turn left to access 158 from our
153 121 Mail 11/9/2017 Superstreet We live in the Water's Edge development and our concerns are about right turns only for in/out access to our homes and
the extra travel time and distance.
156 122 Email 11/9/2017 Superstreet I am very concerned about safety the proposed median will provide. As I understand, the median is proposed to be directly
in front of the entrance to my neighborhood. The hardship, inconvenience, and moreover, safety impact requiring this
many drivers to make a u-turn to get back into the neighborhood coming from W-S or leaving the neighborhood to go to
157 123 Email 11/9/2017 Superstreet I understand there is a plan to put a median at the entrance to our subdivision at Knoll Ridge Dr off 158. Putting a median
there to prevent us from turning in or out of would be an extreme burden to the homeowners. There is no reason there
can't be a turning lanetoturn in and oneto get out just likethere is now even afterthe expansion of the road.
158 124 Email 11/9/2017 Superstreet I am a resident within the High Knolls Subdivision off of Hwy 158. It is my understanding that when the construction is
complete, there will be a concrete median in front of the entrance that will force all traffic to turn right and conversely, any
traffic trying to enter coming from Winston Salem will no longer be able to turn left into the subdivision. My concern is
that having to U-turn to get into neighborhood may cause the traffic congestion to just be moved elsewhere and possibly
move the safety concerns to intersections versus main road. As long as safe, efficient alternatives are offered (i.e. Esther
Lane), I think it is reasonable for a median. Otherwise. I think the project needs to consider how the effect of the median
will impact major intersection and the resulting congestion. Please let me know the plans of the new diversion for the High
Knoll subdivision.
159 125 Email 11/9/2017 Superstreet I do NOT agree with the addition of a median that would prevent left turns out of High Knoll. With nearly 40 homes now in
this neighborhood and being that everything Walkertown has to offer is left out of this neighborhood would result in a
noticeable impact for everyone. I also don't feel forcing u-turns will aid in congestion, commute times or safety aspects, my
160 126 Email 11/9/2017 Su erstreet Concerned about access and safet related to RIRO at Hi h Knolls nei hborhood.
161 127 Email 11/9/2017 Su erstreet Concerned about access and safet related to RIRO at Hi h Knolls nei hborhood.
162 128 Email 11/9/2017 Su erstreet Concerned about access related to RIRO at Hi h Knolls nei hborhood.
163 129 Email 11/9/2017 Su erstreet Concerned about access related to RIRO at Hi h Knolls nei hborhood.
172 133 Tele hone 11/8/2017 Su erstreet Question re ardin the otential RIRO condition at Stanle Park Road.
174 134 Telephone 11/8/2017 Superstreet Is not happy about the proposed potential RIRO conditions at Stanley Park Road or Stanley Avenue, and not happy at the
ros ect of these US 158 R-2577A roadwa im rovements or the ro osed su erstreet desi n.
� � � . � v
the traffic more efficiently and provides a higher level of safety for cars and pedestrians, using fewer
lanes, at a lower cost.

175 135 Telephone 11/8/2017 Superstreet Is not happy about the proposed RIRO conditions at Stanley Park Road or the proposed superstreet design in R-2577A.
176 136 Telephone 11/8/2017 Superstreet Is not happy about the proposed RIRO conditions at Stanley Park Road or the proposed superstreet design. Concerned
about otential loss of ro ert value.
177 137 Tele hone 11/8/2017 Su erstreet Is not ha about the ro osed RIRO condition at Stanle Park Road or the ro osed su erstreet desi n.
182 142 Email 11/11/2017 Superstreet If I could make a suggestion, I still do not like the "synchronized lanes" proposed for this area, as it will be a nightmare for
residents and school buses trying to navigate these roads to transport children to and from school, but if you must use
those, if you could just move the one nearest to our Knoll Ridge Rd entrance a few hundred feet further down 158 W so we
could at least make a right turn out of our subdivision and then immediately get into the far left lane to access the
synchronized laneturn around. Thiswould at leastgive us accessto ourtown and merchantswe need and patronize
184 144 Email 11/10/2017 Superstreet Our town elected officials have received many negative comments and complaints concerning the "Synchronized street /
intersections. We ask that you strongly reconsider your plan for hwy. 158 as we have heard from many citizens who feel
very strongly opposed to these synchronized street concept especially with a high volume of school and church buses using
this highway on a regular basis. This is especially true for the intersections of 158 & 66, 158 7 Darrow road, Vance road and
Belews Creek road and the attached speaks to the growing subdivision of High Knolls which would involve Knoll Ridge Drive
with many resident needing to turn left when leaving their subdivision.
While this concept may be acceptable on a two lane road, it is extremely dangerous on what will be the four lane Hwy.
158.
Please reconsiderthe "synchronized street" concept .
185 145 Email 11/10/2017 Superstreet I am writing with concerns brought to my attention regarding the median slated to be placed in front of the High Knoll
subdivision on Hwy 158. If forced to make a u turn at the stoplight at Darrow Rd., I foresee increased wait times at the
light to make that turn which has the potential to back up traffic and possibilities of additional car accidents due to yielding
to right turn traffic off of Darrow. Would be it possible to consider a cut in the median to enable residents to utilize a left
�
186 146 Email 11/10/2017 Superstreet This is adding my voice to what Mayor Davis mentioned in his e-mail. Reading over the FHWA Restricted Crossing U-turn
Intersection Information Guide, it is understandable that you want to find the most effective designs that improve safety
and reduce delays. But reviewing that document and the NCSU research done in 2011, I don't think the intersections of
158 and 66, and Darrow road would meet the increased safety or reduced delays.
The NCSU study showed a 20% reduction in travel time for intersections with existing signals, but when you have the
number of cars entering a high speed corridor (currently 55 miles per hour) via a right turn, that will ultimately slow all
lanes of traffic. Kramer's arterial theory is that these intersections keep a continuous progress at a desirable speed. With
the volume at these intersections, that speed would not be maintained.
The statistics on reducing the number of collisions — this study was done on 13 intersections which had stop signs not a
signalized intersection. This is not the case for our intersections.
Highway 158 bisects the town of Walkertown with highway 66 and Darrow Rd as the main crossover access points.
The intersection of 158 and 66 has a high volume of traffic moving east and west, that is crossing 158 causing high through
demand. That puts that much more traffic into highway 158 for the length of the road to get to the u-turn crossover
spacing.
The arterial roads, 66 and Darrow Rd, are used by numerous school buses and large trucks which would require a larger
turning radius and larger crossovers and loons.
One of the disadvantages listed in the FHWAstudy puts it: The additional barrierto direct minorstreetthrough traffic
across arterial could be a concern for communities that straddle the arterial and desire direct vehicle connections.
These intersections are a big concern for Walkertown and the surrounding communities that drive through our town.
Please reconsider the user of superstreets within the Walkertown limits.
190 150 Contact Us 11/9/2017 Superstreet We are home owners in the High Knoll development. Having to make a U-turn to enter or exit our sub-division will not only
be an inconvenience but a safety hazard for the residents of High Knoll. My concern is for things like emergency response
vehicles that would be delayed because of the proposed median resulting in some cases U-turns as well as the safety of our
neighborhood children riding school buses. The population of this sub-division is going to grow. Look at the current
challenges associated with entering and exiting High Knoll Drive and consider what your current proposal calls for and if it

191 I 151 I Contact Us
11/13/2017 Superstreet We live in the Morris Farm community down Stanley Park Road and are concerned that the proposed plan severely limits
access to the development, the neighboring Spring Lake Farm, and two older developments. We already frequently
experience long wait times to turn left out of Stanley Park during the morning rush hour since so many of us travel toward
Winston Salem to work and school. So, we worry that the u-turn lane at Belews Creek will frequently fill and spill into US
158, creating a safety hazard. We are also concerned that the other u-turn we will need to use to return home from
Walkertown is quite some distance down US 158. While we understand that a stoplight at Stanley Park would disrupt the
flow of traffic, it seems to be a better way to manage the volume of vehicles entering and leaving these residential areas.
192 152 Contact Us 11/13/2017 Superstreet I live in High Knoll and am concerned about the median proposed in front of entrance. We should not have to right to get
out of the development and then make a u-turn to go back to Walkertown. We should not have to drive by our subdivision
to go to a u-turn and then come down to entrance.
This is going to take business away from Walkertown. Where are stoplights going to go? You will need them if you follow
your current plan. Please consider making it possible to turn left out of our subdivision. Or provide another way out that
200 161 Mail
201 162 Email
203
204
20
152
1641 Email
11/13/2017 � Su perstreet
11/9/2017 � Su perstreet
Against the synchronized street concept, which is dangerous and inconvenient. Will be difficult to navigate during heavy
traffic and with large vehicles present. Concerned about emergency vehicle response times in a synchronized street
setting. The concept is very unpopular and will result in additional expense, inconvenience, and reduction in property
I live in the High Knoll neighborhood off of 158 in Walkertown, NC and would like to know WHY a median is being put on
the outside of the neighborhood to prevent ALL left turns (or is the purpose of the median to prevent ALL right turns? This
11/10/2017 Superstreet I am writing to express my concerns with the potential decision to place a median in front of the entrance to the High Knoll
subdivision, leaving only the option to make a right turn (no left turn) on HWY 158. I am a home owner in the High Knoll
subdivision. I constantly travel east on HWY 158 and in the mornings must turn left to take my child to school. When I
return from work from Baptist in the evening, traffic is extremely heavy and having to pass my subdivision just so I can turn
around and re-enter it is a burden. I would liketo sell my home in the next couple of years and can seethis as a barrierto
a potential buyer wanting the home. Further, there are no other exit points out of this subdivision or the adjacent one -
only this one exit. If there was another exit point from the subdivision this would not be an issue, but there is only one
entrance/exit out.
165 Email 11/10/2017 Superstreet I would like to inquiry about this project. I am a resident of High Knoll and just heard about this. I learned that the map is
very old and shows only 6 homes in our subdivision when there are now 37 homes and growing. Can the map be updated
and the a re-evaluation of the area be performed? My understanding is we will have a median in front of the entrance to
High Knoll. This would mean when you come out of the subdivision, you will have to turn left and go until there is a chance
14 Walkertown
Meetin
120 Email
10/24/2017 � Traff i c
11/1/2017 � Traff i c
to make a U-Turn. Likewise coming home on 158 from Linville Rd or Winston means you can't turn left into the
subdivision. Has there been any consideration of creating another exit/entrance or reopening Esther Ln.?
How to get out. It's pretty bad now. Traffic.
I wanted to know the traffic counts for Stanley Park Rd, Stanley Ave and Angel Dr.
The proposed project will improve traffic flow and access to and from side streets. Providing right-
in, right-out access at side streets, restricting left-turn movements and cross-over movements (i.e.
eliminating many conflict points), and provided U-turn bulbs at strategic locations will improve
traffic flow and provide a much safer facility for travelers accessing US 158. Stanley Park Rd, Stanley
Ave, and Angel Drive are not considered major intersections, so the Traffic Forecast does not show
current or projected traffic volumes for these streets.