19980224 Ver 1_Complete File_19980331

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
e??
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor NCDENR
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director ENVIRONMENT ANo NATURAL RESOURCES
April 29,1998
Halifax County
WQC 401 Project #980224
APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification and Neuse River Buffer Rules
Mr. David Robinson
NC DOT
PO Box 25201
Raleigh NC 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Robinson:
You have our approval, in accordance with the attached conditions, to place fill material in 0.01 acres of wetlands
or waters for the purpose of widening SR 1426 in Halifax County, as you described in your application dated March 4,
1998. After reviewing your application, we have decided that this fill is covered by General Water Quality Certification
Number 3103. This Certification allows you to use Nationwide Permit Number 14 when the Corps of Engineers issues
it. This approval is also valid for the Neuse River buffer rules (15A NCAC 2B .0233). In addition, you should get any
other federal, state or local permits before you go ahead with your project including (but not limited to) Sediment and
Erosion Control, Coastal Stormwater, Non-Discharge and Water Supply Watershed regulations. Also this approval will
expire when the accompanying 404 or CAMA permit expires unless otherwise specified in the General Certification.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you described in your application. If you change your
project, you must notify us and send us a new application. If the property is sold, the new owner must be given a copy
of this Certification and approval letter and is thereby responsible for complying with all conditions. If total wetland
fills for this project (now or in the future) exceed one acre, compensatory mitigation may be required as described in
15A NCAC 2H .0506 (h). For this approval to be valid, you must follow the conditions listed in the attached
certification.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this certification, you may ask for an adjudicatory hearing. You must
act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. To ask for a hearing, send a written petition which conforms
to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to the Office of Administrative Hearings, P.O. Box 27447,
Raleigh, N.C. 27611-7447. This certification and its conditions are final and binding unless you ask for a hearing.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Quality under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. If
you have any questions, please telephone John Dorney at 919-733-1786.
Attachment
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Raleigh Field Office
Washington DWQ Regional Office
Mr. John Dorney
Central Files
Sin ely,
ton Howard, Jr. P
980224.Itr
Division of Water Quality • Environmental Sciences Branch
Environmental Sciences Branch, 4401 Reedy Creek Rd., Raleigh, NC 27607 Telephone [phone] FAX # 733-
9959
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer • 50% recycled/10% post consumer paper
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES 13. HUNT J 2 P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGI I, N.C. 27611-5201 E. NoRRIs TOLSON
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
March 20, 1998
Memorandum to: I' i le ?o5 AP'R
3
s 2
l
149,98
I'rom: Phillip Todd
f T,
Subject: I-lalifax County, SR 1426 (Bolling Road/ fifth Street), from SR
1400 (West Tenth Street) to NC 48 (Roanoke Avenue); Federal
Aid Project No. S'I'P-1426(1); State Project No. 8.2300601;'1'IP
No. U-1007.
Project construction does include a hazardous spill catch basin. The basin will be
located at Station 21+80-L-, near Smoot Drive in Roanoke Rapids. The Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI) for the project states that Design Standards for Sensitive
Watersheds will also be used during project construction.
`? C) C?J F
C4-7 C
(Jl 1rY1 C?
? L J"

MEMO
DATE: 3
TO: SUBJECT:
T G
44 14 ??vf in c ?/
?, ? I I d /G?J/?
('e C
-f ?? ? rye ?° ? ssv e .
From

0 0+ ?A?ti
4
North Carolina Department of Environment,
V j-
??? M; '.3 Health, and Natural Resources ??? Printed on Recycled Paper
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
Mr. David Robinson
NC DOT
Planning and Environmental Branch
PO Box 25201
Raleigh NC 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Robinson:
Re: Improvements to SR 1426
Halifax County
DWQ # 980224
ilkf'?WAA
A00ft% 00=%
mom
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
April 14, 1998
The Division of Water Quality has reviewed your submittal for a 404 permit for
widening of SR 1426 in Roanoke rapids from SR 1400 to NC 48 in Halifax County. Your
application was not complete since plans for the required hazardous spill catch basin have
not been included as discussed with Philip Todd on March 19, 1998. This information is
needed by DWQ in order for us to decide whether this project is approvable.
Cyndi Bell can be reached at 733-1786 if you have any question. Until this
information is received, I will request (by copy of this letter) that the Corps of Engineers
place this project on hold. Also, the project will be placed on hold for our processing due
to incomplete information (15A NCAC 2H .0507(a)(4)).
Si cerel ,
h
o R. Dorney
W ter Quality C ifi tion Program
cc: Raleigh DWQ Regional Office
Wilmington District of Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Field Office Corps of Engineers
John Dorney
Central Files
Cyndi Bell
980224.hld
Division of Water Quality • Non-Discharge Branch
4401 Reedy Creek Rd., Raleigh, NC 27607 Telephone [phone] FAX # [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer • 50% recycled/10% post consumer paper
t
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
•
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGI 1. N.L. 27611-5201
GOVERNOR
March 4, 1998
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615
Attention: Mr. Eric Alsmeyer
NCDOT Coordinator
Dear Sir:
Subject: Halifax County, SR 1426 (Bolling Road/ Fifth Street), from SR 1400
(West Tenth Street) to NC 48 (Roanoke Avenue); Federal Aid Project
No. STP-1426(1); State Project No. 8.2300601; TIP No. U-1007; COE
Action ID 199602001.
3
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (DOT) proposes to widen
existing SR 1426 (Bolling Road/ Fifth Street) in Roanoke Rapids, from SR 1400 (West
Tenth Street) to NC 48 (Roanoke Avenue). The existing two-lane facility will be
widened to three lane section with curb and gutter. The project is scheduled to be let to
construction in October 1998.
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) signed the Environmental
Assessment (EA) for the widening of SR 1426 on August 31, 1995. The FHWA
approved the Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for TIP No. U-1007 on
March 29, 1996. These documents, particularly the EA, included studies pertaining to
impacts of natural systems for the proposed project. Copies of the EA and FONSI for
this project have been provided to regulatory agencies involved in the permit review
process.
The subject project cannot be accomplished without impacts to waters of the
United States. Surface waters will be impacted by extending two pipes and a culvert.
Table 1 summarizes project impacts by station number, pipe size, stream type, existing
stream length and surface water impact. Total impacts are 42 feet of streams will be
placed in pipe and <0.01 acre of fill in surface waters. Based on these impacts, the DOT
believes the proposed project can be permitted under a Section 404 Nationwide
Permit 14.
E. Noiiius TOLSON
SICRF.TARY

Table 1. Impacts to Waters' of the United States from TIP No. U-1007
Site Stream Type Existing Stream Length Surface Water Impact
L intermittent 20 feet < 0.01 acre
2 perennial 7 feet < 0.01 acre
3 intermittent 15 feet < 0.01 acre
Total Impacts 42 feet <0.01 acre
A pre-construction notification form for a Section 404 Nationwide Permit 14 has
been completed and attached with this letter. The impact sites have been identified on a
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangle map of Roanoke Rapids and is attached with
this letter. For sedimentation and erosion control, the DOT will utilize "Design Standards
in Sensitive Watersheds" in addition to the standard Best Management Practices.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact
Mr. Phillip Todd of my staff at [phone], Extension 314.
Sincerely,
H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
HFV/pct
cc: Mr. Mike Smith, COE, Wilmington
Mr. John Dorney, DWQ, Raleigh
Mr. David Cox, WRC, Northside
Mr. William Rogers, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. Whit Webb, P.E., Program Development Branch
Mr. Len Hill, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. A. L. Hankins, Hydraulics Unit
Mr. Tom Shearin, P.E., State Roadway Design Engineer
Mr. D. R. Dupree, P.E., Division 4 Engineer
I
DEM ID: CORPS ACTION ID: 199602001 T.I.P. No. U-1007
NATIONWIDE PERMIT REQUESTED (PROVIDE NATIONWIDE PERMIT #): NWP 14
PRE-CONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION APPLICATION
FOR NATIONWIDE PERMITS THAT REQUIRE:
1) NOTIFICATION TO THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS
2) APPLICATION FOR SECTION 401 CERTIFICATION
3) COORDINATION WITH THE NC DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
SEND THE ORIGINAL AND (1) COPY OF THIS COMPLETED FORM TO THE APPROPRIATE
FIELD OFFICE OF THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET). SEVEN
(7) COPIES SHOULD BE SENT TO THE N.C. DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
(SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET). PLEASE PRINT.
1. OWNERS NAME: NC Dept. of Transportation; Planning & Environmental Branch
2. MAILING ADDRESS: Post Office Box 25201
SUBDIVISION NAME:
CITY: Raleigh STATE: NC ZIP CODE: 27611
PROJECT LOCATION ADDRESS, INCLUDING SUBDIVISION NAME (IF DIFFERENT FROM
MAILING ADDRESS ABOVE):
3. TELEPHONE NUMBER (HOME):
(WORK) : [phone]
4. IF APPLICABLE: AGENT'S NAME OR RESPONSIBLE CORPORATE OFFICIAL, ADDRESS,
PHONE NUMBER:
H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
5. LOCATION OF WORK (PROVIDE A MAP, PREFERABLY A COPY OF USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP
OR AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY WITH SCALE):
COUNTY: Halifax NEAREST TOWN OR CITY: Roanoke Rapids
1
1
SPECIFIC LOCATION (INCLUDE ROAD
NUMBERS, LANDMARKS, ETC.):
SR 1426 between NC 48 and SR 1400 in Roanoke Rapids.
6. IMPACTED OR NEAREST STREAM/RIVER: Roanoke River
RIVER BASIN: Roanoke
7a. IS PROJECT LOCATED NEAR WATER CLASSIFIED AS TROUT, TIDAL SALTWATER (SA),
HIGH QUALITY WATERS (HQW), OUTSTANDING RESOURCE WATERS (ORW), WATER SUPPLY
(WS-I OR WS-II)? YES [ ] NO [x] IF YES, EXPLAIN:
7b. IS THE PROJECT LOCATED WITHIN A NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL
MANAGEMENT AREA OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN (AEC)? YES [ ] NO [x]
7c. IF THE PROJECT IS LOCATED WITHIN A COASTAL COUNTY (SEE PAGE 7 FOR LIST
OF COASTAL COUNTIES), WHAT IS THE LAND USE PLAN (LUP) DESIGNATION?
8a. HAVE ANY SECTION 404 PERMITS BEEN PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED FOR USE ON THIS
PROPERTY? YES [ ] NO [x] IF YES, PROVIDE ACTION I.D. NUMBER OF PREVIOUS
PERMIT AND ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (INCLUDE PHOTOCOPY OF 401
CERTIFICATION):
8b. ARE ADDITIONAL PERMIT REQUESTS EXPECTED FOR THIS PROPERTY IN THE FUTURE?
YES [ ] NO [x] IF YES, DESCRIBE ANTICIPATED WORK:
2
I
9a. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES IN TRACT OF LAND: N/A
9b. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES OF WETLANDS LOCATED ON PROJECT SITE:
10a. NUMBER OF ACRES OF WETLANDS IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT BY:
FILLING: N/A EXCAVATION:
FLOODING:
DRAINAGE:
OTHER:
TOTAL ACRES TO BE IMPACTED:
10b. (1) STREAM CHANNEL TO BE IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT (IF
RELOCATED, PROVIDE DISTANCE BOTH BEFORE AND AFTER RELOCATION):
LENGTH BEFORE: N/A FT AFTER: FT
WIDTH BEFORE (based on normal high water contours): FT
WIDTH AFTER:
AVERAGE DEPTH BEFORE: FT AFTER: FT
(2) STREAM CHANNEL IMPACTS WILL RESULT FROM: (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)
OPEN CHANNEL RELOCATION: PLACEMENT OF PIPE IN CHANNEL: x
CHANNEL EXCAVATION: CONSTRUCTION OF A DAM/FLOODING:
OTHER:
11. IF CONSTRUCTION OF A POND IS PROPOSED, WHAT IS THE SIZE OF THE WATERSHED
DRAINING TO THE POND?
WHAT IS THE EXPECTED POND SURFACE AREA?
12. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK INCLUDING DISCUSSION OF TYPE OF MECHANICAL
EQUIPMENT TO BE USED (ATTACH PLANS: 8 1/2" X 11" DRAWINGS ONLY):
Machines for road construction.
13. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED WORK: Widen public roadway.
3
f
14. STATE REASONS WHY IT IS BELIEVED THAT THIS ACTIVITY MUST BE CARRIED OUT
IN WETLANDS. (INCLUDE ANY MEASURES TAKEN TO MINIMIZE WETLAND IMPACTS):
Wetlands not impacted by work.
15. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO CONTACT THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE (USFWS)
AND/OR NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE (NMFS) (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET)
REGARDING THE PRESENCE OF ANY FEDERALLY LISTED OR PROPOSED FOR LISTING
ENDANGERED OR THREATENED SPECIES OR CRITICAL HABITAT IN THE PERMIT AREA THAT
MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT. DATE CONTACTED: June 24, 1994
(ATTACH RESPONSES FROM THESE AGENCIES.)
16. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO CONTACT THE STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER
(SHPO) (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET) REGARDING THE PRESENCE OF HISTORIC
PROPERTIES IN THE PERMIT AREA WHICH MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT.
DATE CONTACTED: November 13, 1995
17. DOES THE PROJECT INVOLVE AN EXPENDITURE OF PUBLIC FUNDS OR THE USE OF
PUBLIC (STATE) LAND?
YES [x] NO H (IF NO, GO TO 18)
a. IF YES, DOES THE PROJECT REQUIRE PREPARATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL
DOCUMENT PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL
POLICY ACT?
YES [x] NO [ ]
b. IF YES, HAS THE DOCUMENT BEEN REVIEWED THROUGH THE NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION STATE CLEARINGHOUSE?
YES [x] NO [ ]
IF ANSWER TO 17b IS YES, THEN SUBMIT APPROPRIATE DOCUMENTATION FROM THE STATE
CLEARINGHOUSE TO DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT REGARDING COMPLIANCE
WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT.
QUESTIONS REGARDING THE STATE CLEARINGHOUSE REVIEW PROCESS SHOULD BE DIRECTED
TO MS. CHRYS BAGGETT, DIRECTOR STATE CLEARINGHOUSE, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT
OF ADMINISTRATION, 116 WEST JONES STREET, RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27603-8003,
TELEPHONE [phone].
4
18. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS SHOULD BE INCLUDED WITH THIS APPLICATION IF PROPOSED
ACTIVITY INVOLVES THE DISCHARGE OF EXCAVATED OR FILL MATERIAL INTO WETLANDS:
a. WETLAND DELINEATION MAP SHOWING ALL WETLANDS, STREAMS, LAKES
AND PONDS ON THE PROPERTY (FOR NATIONWIDE PERMIT NUMBERS 14, 18, 21, 26, 29,
AND 38). ALL STREAMS (INTERMITTENT AND PERMANENT) ON THE PROPERTY MUST BE
SHOWN ON THE MAP. MAP SCALES SHOULD BE 1 INCH EQUALS 50 FEET OR 1 INCH
EQUALS 100 FEET OR THEIR EQUIVALENT.
b. IF AVAILABLE, REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOGRAPH OF WETLANDS TO BE
IMPACTED BY PROJECT.
C. IF DELINEATION WAS PERFORMED BY A CONSULTANT, INCLUDE ALL DATA
SHEETS RELEVANT TO THE PLACEMENT OF THE DELINEATION LINE.
d. ATTACH A COPY OF THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN IF REQUIRED.
e. WHAT IS LAND USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTY?
Single family residence and commercial
f. IF APPLICABLE, WHAT IS PROPOSED METHOD OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL?
g. SIGNED AND DATED AGENT AUTHORIZATION LETTER, IF APPLICABLE.
NOTE: WETLANDS OR WATERS OF THE U.S. MAY NOT BE IMPACTED PRIOR TO:
1) ISSUANCE OF A SECTION 404 CORPS OF ENGINEERS PERMIT,
2) EITHER THE ISSUANCE OR WAIVER OF A 401 DIVISION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT (WATER QUALITY) CERTIFICATION, AND
3) (IN THE TWENTY COASTAL COUNTIES ONLY), A LETTER FROM THE NORTH
CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT STATING THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY
IS CONSISTENT WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM.
A z lel-
O SI ATURE
DA TIE
(AGENT'S SIGNATURE VALID ONLY
IF AUTHORIZATION LETTER FROM
THE OWNER IS PROVIDED (18g.))
5
41111111111
,'Z,_
v

/' I
I
i;e.\\ f V?'?\
M ..411 ,. ?
•r
VI •
)'ir
I ? IS?

1 •?•I ? I . '. ?r' _l ? Il .•.r.r.
r'1 1 M -ri?i ? l? _
....y

u T•••r.
r•V7 \\ l CIIi? .y. .'md?Mr/ i A••.r.1-.
l u1V J\Ij+11111 \II\t1t,4r r \\ ` •~i "Z 4 `/ ?T `` ? •
/ j,. lU`III'"11???` v yr \?Itl \\ ' .\ < ? ,, ^•• r ?? ?I? nll b n\ 0
1 ?\? ``\? p\l?I`? 1111?Jt Ij Il \ „ ? I I ? :?,;: / I 'i : •• 1"?~ ° ?' ?\?.
1\ Ili, 4111ke, \1 1 14 1. 1;
it , u,, ?!i 1i l ? i /!i i t ? ? ?iJ ? •-_, -?.:. : ?• ? : •..•:., ? ? '?'>; :: li °? _ _;
nF ""I. r? I, ?:, •I? ,
unit v
(.%n[ ?l-fir /? // \ I ?---•? / ..r' I•J J F'+ \f???
plYr( r r Ar?a C/? C
1,11 !. ?•..\ North Carolina Department ofTransporation \
'i \N ?! 1 ?! Division of Highways
Halifax County /
TlPNo. U-1007
1\;? ry - ?? Widen SR 1426 (Bolling Road/ Fifth Street)
tt. ?1 1 \ from SR 1400 to NC 48
// I- JH . r, \' •?I USGS Quadrangle map of Roanoke Rapids v
Scale 1"= 2000'
,. STAi{ ?"•
. .,\
3 r
. Alt .+-T.'ISi
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARUMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES [i. HUNT JR. P.O. BOX 25201. RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201 E. NORRIS TO1.1ON
GOWI NOR SECRETARY
March 4, 1998
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615 ??
Attention: Mr. Eric Alsmeyer
NCDOT Coordinator
Dear Sir:
Subject: Halifax County, SR 1426 (Bolling Road/ Fifth Street), from SR 1400
(West Tenth Street) to NC 48 (Roanoke Avenue); Federal Aid Project
No. STP-1426(1); State Project No. 8.2300601; TIP No. U-1007; COE
Action ID 199602001.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (DOT) proposes to widen
existing SR 1426 (Bolling Road/ Fifth Street) in Roanoke Rapids, from SR 1400 (West
Tenth Street) to NC 48 (Roanoke Avenue). The existing two-lane facility will be
widened to three lane section with curb and gutter. The project is scheduled to be let to
construction in October 1998.
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) signed the Environmental
Assessment (EA) for the widening of SR 1426 on August 31, 1995. The FHWA
approved the Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for TIP No. U-1007 on
March 29, 1996. These documents, particularly the EA, included studies pertaining to
impacts of natural systems for the proposed project. Copies of the EA and FONSI for
this project have been provided to regulatory agencies involved in the permit review
process.
The subject project cannot be accomplished without impacts to waters of the
United States. Surface waters will be impacted by extending two pipes and a culvert.
Table 1 summarizes project impacts by station number, pipe size, stream type, existing
stream length and surface water impact. Total impacts are 42 feet of streams will be
placed in pipe and <0.01 acre of fill in surface waters. Based on these impacts, the DOT
believes the proposed project can be permitted under a Section 404 Nationwide
Permit 14.
0

Table 1. Impacts to Waters of the United States from TIP No. U-1007
Site " Stream Type Existing Stream Length Surface Water Impact
1 intermittent 20 feet < 0.01 acre
2 perennial 7 feet < 0.01 acre
3 intermittent 15 feet < 0.01 acre
Total Impacts 42 feet <0.01 acre
A pre-construction notification form for a Section 404 Nationwide Permit 14 has
been completed and attached with this letter. The impact sites have been identified on a
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangle map of Roanoke Rapids and is attached with
this letter. For sedimentation and erosion control, the DOT will utilize "Design Standards
in Sensitive Watersheds" in addition to the standard Best Management Practices.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact
Mr. Phillip Todd of my staff at [phone], Extension 314.
Sincerely,
H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
HFV/pct
cc: Mr. Mike Smith, COE, Wilmington
Mr. John Dorney, DWQ, Raleigh
Mr. David Cox, WRC, Northside
Mr. William Rogers, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. Whit Webb, P.E., Program Development Branch
Mr. Len Hill, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. A. L. Hankins, Hydraulics Unit
Mr. Tom Shearin, P.E., State Roadway Design Engineer
Mr. D. R. Dupree, P.E., Division 4 Engineer
0
DEM ID: CORPS ACTION ID: 199602001
T.I.P. No. U-1007
NATIONWIDE PERMIT REQUESTED (PROVIDE NATIONWIDE PERMIT #): NWP 14
PRE-CONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION APPLICATION
FOR NATIONWIDE PERMITS THAT REQUIRE:
1) NOTIFICATION TO THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS
2) APPLICATION FOR SECTION 401 CERTIFICATION
3) COORDINATION WITH THE NC DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
SEND THE ORIGINAL AND (1) COPY OF THIS COMPLETED FORM TO THE APPROPRIATE
FIELD OFFICE OF THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET). SEVEN
(7) COPIES SHOULD BE SENT TO THE N.C. DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
(SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET). PLEASE PRINT.
1. OWNERS NAME: NC Dept. of Transportation; Planning & Environmental Branch
2. MAILING ADDRESS: Post Office Box 25201
SUBDIVISION NAME:
CITY: Raleigh STATE: NC ZIP CODE: 27611
PROJECT LOCATION ADDRESS, INCLUDING SUBDIVISION NAME (IF DIFFERENT FROM
MAILING ADDRESS ABOVE):
3. TELEPHONE NUMBER (HOME):
(WORK) : [phone]
4. IF APPLICABLE: AGENT'S NAME OR RESPONSIBLE CORPORATE OFFICIAL, ADDRESS,
PHONE NUMBER:
H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
5. LOCATION OF WORK (PROVIDE A MAP, PREFERABLY A COPY OF USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP
OR AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY WITH SCALE):
COUNTY: Halifax NEAREST TOWN OR CITY: Roanoke Rapids
1
I
SPECIFIC LOCATION (INCLUDE ROAD
NUMBERS, LANDMARKS, ETC.):
SR 1426 between NC 48 and SR 1400 in Roanoke Rapids.
6. IMPACTED OR NEAREST STREAM/RIVER: Roanoke River
RIVER BASIN:
Roanoke
7a. IS PROJECT LOCATED NEAR WATER CLASSIFIED AS TROUT,
HIGH QUALITY WATERS (HQW), OUTSTANDING RESOURCE WATERS
(WS-I OR WS-II)? YES [ ] NO [x] IF YES, EXPLAIN: _
7b. IS THE PROJECT LOCATED WITHIN A NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL
MANAGEMENT AREA OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN (AEC)? YES [ ] NO [x]
7c. IF THE PROJECT IS LOCATED WITHIN A COASTAL COUNTY (SEE PAGE 7 FOR LIST
OF COASTAL COUNTIES), WHAT IS THE LAND USE PLAN (LUP) DESIGNATION?
8a. HAVE ANY SECTION 404 PERMITS BEEN PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED FOR USE ON THIS
PROPERTY? YES [ ] NO [x] IF YES, PROVIDE ACTION I.D. NUMBER OF PREVIOUS
PERMIT AND ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (INCLUDE PHOTOCOPY OF 401
CERTIFICATION):
8b. ARE ADDITIONAL PERMIT REQUESTS EXPECTED FOR THIS PROPERTY IN THE FUTURE?
YES [ ] NO [x] IF YES, DESCRIBE ANTICIPATED WORK:
TIDAL SALTWATER (SA),
(ORW), WATER SUPPLY
2
9a. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES IN TRACT OF LAND: N/A
9b. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES OF WETLANDS LOCATED ON PROJECT SITE:
10a. NUMBER OF ACRES OF WETLANDS IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT BY:
FILLING: N/A EXCAVATION:
FLOODING:
DRAINAGE:
OTHER:
TOTAL ACRES TO BE IMPACTED:
10b. (1) STREAM CHANNEL TO BE IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT (IF
RELOCATED, PROVIDE DISTANCE BOTH BEFORE AND AFTER RELOCATION):
LENGTH BEFORE: N/A FT AFTER: FT
WIDTH BEFORE (based on normal high water contours): FT
WIDTH AFTER:
AVERAGE DEPTH BEFORE: FT AFTER: FT
(2) STREAM CHANNEL IMPACTS WILL RESULT FROM: (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)
OPEN CHANNEL RELOCATION: PLACEMENT OF PIPE IN CHANNEL: x
CHANNEL EXCAVATION: CONSTRUCTION OF A DAM/FLOODING:
OTHER:
11. IF CONSTRUCTION OF A POND IS PROPOSED, WHAT IS THE SIZE OF THE WATERSHED
DRAINING TO THE POND?
WHAT IS THE EXPECTED POND SURFACE AREA?
12. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK INCLUDING DISCUSSION OF TYPE OF MECHANICAL
EQUIPMENT TO BE USED (ATTACH PLANS: S 1/2" X 11" DRAWINGS ONLY):
Machines for road construction.
13. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED WORK: Widen public roadway.
3
14. STATE REASONS WHY IT IS BELIEVED THAT THIS ACTIVITY MUST BE CARRIED OUT
IN WETLANDS. (INCLUDE ANY MEASURES TAKEN TO MINIMIZE WETLAND IMPACTS):
Wetlands not impacted by work.
15. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO CONTACT THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE (USFWS)
AND/OR NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE (NMFS) (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET)
REGARDING THE PRESENCE OF ANY FEDERALLY LISTED OR PROPOSED FOR LISTING
ENDANGERED OR THREATENED SPECIES OR CRITICAL HABITAT IN THE PERMIT AREA THAT
MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT. DATE CONTACTED: June 24, 1994
(ATTACH RESPONSES FROM THESE AGENCIES.)
16. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO CONTACT THE STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER
(SHPO) (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET) REGARDING THE PRESENCE OF HISTORIC
PROPERTIES IN THE PERMIT AREA WHICH MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT.
DATE CONTACTED: November 13, 1995
17. DOES THE PROJECT INVOLVE AN EXPENDITURE OF PUBLIC FUNDS OR THE USE OF
PUBLIC (STATE) LAND?
YES [x] NO H (IF NO, GO TO 18)
a. IF YES, DOES THE PROJECT REQUIRE PREPARATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL
DOCUMENT PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL
POLICY ACT?
YES [x] NO [ ]
b. IF YES, HAS THE DOCUMENT BEEN REVIEWED THROUGH THE NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION STATE CLEARINGHOUSE?
YES [x] NO H
IF ANSWER TO 17b IS YES, THEN SUBMIT APPROPRIATE DOCUMENTATION FROM THE STATE
CLEARINGHOUSE TO DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT REGARDING COMPLIANCE
WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT.
QUESTIONS REGARDING THE STATE CLEARINGHOUSE REVIEW PROCESS SHOULD BE DIRECTED
TO MS. CHRYS BAGGETT, DIRECTOR STATE CLEARINGHOUSE, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT
OF ADMINISTRATION, 116 WEST JONES STREET, RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27603-8003,
TELEPHONE [phone].
4
18. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS SHOULD BE INCLUDED WITH THIS APPLICATION IF PROPOSED
ACTIVITY INVOLVES THE DISCHARGE OF EXCAVATED OR FILL MATERIAL INTO WETLANDS:
a. WETLAND DELINEATION MAP SHOWING ALL WETLANDS, STREAMS, LAKES
AND PONDS ON THE PROPERTY (FOR NATIONWIDE PERMIT NUMBERS 14, 18, 21, 26, 29,
AND 38). ALL STREAMS (INTERMITTENT AND PERMANENT) ON THE PROPERTY MUST BE
SHOWN ON THE MAP. MAP SCALES SHOULD BE 1 INCH EQUALS SO FEET OR 1 INCH
EQUALS 100 FEET OR THEIR EQUIVALENT.
b. IF AVAILABLE, REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOGRAPH OF WETLANDS TO BE
IMPACTED BY PROJECT.
C. IF DELINEATION WAS PERFORMED BY A CONSULTANT, INCLUDE ALL DATA
SHEETS RELEVANT TO THE PLACEMENT OF THE DELINEATION LINE.
d. ATTACH A COPY OF THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN IF REQUIRED.
e. WHAT IS LAND USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTY?
Single family residence and commercial
f. IF APPLICABLE, WHAT IS PROPOSED METHOD OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL?
g. SIGNED AND DATED AGENT AUTHORIZATION LETTER, IF APPLICABLE.
NOTE: WETLANDS OR WATERS OF THE U.S. MAY NOT BE IMPACTED PRIOR TO:
1) ISSUANCE OF A SECTION 404 CORPS OF ENGINEERS PERMIT,
2) EITHER THE ISSUANCE OR WAIVER OF A 401 DIVISION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT (WATER QUALITY) CERTIFICATION, AND
3) (IN THE TWENTY COASTAL COUNTIES ONLY), A LETTER FROM THE NORTH
CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT STATING THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY
IS CONSISTENT WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM.
O R'S/AGENT'S SI ATURE
DA E
(AGENT'S SIGNATURE VALID ONLY
IF AUTHORIZATION LETTER FROM
THE OWNER IS PROVIDED (18g.))
? ???? 11,; ? v ? :jal ? ski - I? 1?,,--?. ???h ? ?: ,;,? _ 5' ? ? ?ua? o??•?
Ir ?• cif ? ?- ? ? --?W - ??.
•, A, ? IVA ? err ? I ? ? '? .? Y V? ?,
•Ft • .? • I I r \ •? edi' " O ? ? mom.- •
{ ??, a ??n/ ...+, 'w ??'' ? w? 'r - 1'• ?.?.
I;.,I?1v11`w?Vt??ll ?r ??IIe?111.-..?\ ? <ll •?•• • :,\ ??`--\-
1\ ?? . `?? SFr i1?1 ??r i t u ? ? ' o ,, ,., ? ? ? { ' •??? . ?^ \.
I ?.., ?ll? 111 f ?'• ?i ? s ? ?+ •,, ....-
f
r Qv
?/f
MINI r..?', , '
I?Ifo 7.. , ,/' `• North Carolina Department of Transporation \
`4f# Ib? °? \ Division of Ilighways
1 ?fll1?'nN ? r ,??? ? r r I
? ICI h},? fF 'I u?,,q y /?/ ?• Ialifax COLInty
J7 J.? ?1 •' i `'? T1P No. U-1007 ..
Widen SR 1426 (Bolling Road/ Fifth Street)
II vl Q 1 from SR 1400 to NC 48
u,._? .:
USGS Quadrangle map of Roanoke Rapids v
[/ ? If?• -!7???/???/? ? -/ ... !'°? \ =??? ? ? '- Scalc F= 2000' ?,
1? ? r
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMEs B. HUNT JR. P.O. 80X25201. RALEIGIi, N.C. 27611-5201
GOVERNOR
March 4, 1998
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615
Attention: Mr. Eric Alsmeyer
NCDOT Coordinator
Dear Sir:
Subject: Halifax County, SR 1426 (Bolling Road/ Fifth Street), from SR 1400
(West Tenth Street) to NC 48 (Roanoke Avenue); Federal Aid Project
No. STP-1426(1); State Project No. 8.2300601; TIP No. U-1007; COE
Action ID 199602001.
I#a
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (DOT) proposes to widen
existing SR 1426 (Bolling Road/ Fifth Street) in Roanoke Rapids, from SR 1400 (West
Tenth Street) to NC 48 (Roanoke Avenue). The existing two-lane facility will be
widened to three lane section with curb and gutter. The project is scheduled to be let to
construction in October 1998.
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) signed the Environmental
Assessment (EA) for the widening of SR 1426 on August 31, 1995. The FHWA
approved the Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for TIP No. U-1007 on
March 29, 1996. These documents, particularly the EA, included studies pertaining to
impacts of natural systems for the proposed project. Copies of the EA and FONSI for
this project have been provided to regulatory agencies involved in the permit review
process.
The subject project cannot be accomplished without impacts to waters of the
United States. Surface waters will be impacted by extending two pipes and a culvert.
Table I summarizes project impacts by station number, pipe size, stream type, existing
stream length and surface water impact. Total impacts are 42 feet of streams will be
placed in pipe and <0.01 acre of fill in surface waters. Based on these impacts, the DOT
believes the proposed project can be permitted under a Section 404 Nationwide
Permit 14.
E. NoizRis TOI.soN
SI CRP.IAKY
0
I
Table 1. Impacts to Waters of the United States from TIP No. U-1007
Site Stream Type Existing Stream Length Surface Water Impact
1 intermittent 20 feet < 0.01 acre
2 perennial 7 feet < 0.01 acre
3 intermittent 15 feet < 0.01 acre
Total Impacts 42 feet <0.01 acre
A pre-construction notification form for a Section 404 Nationwide Permit 14 has
been completed and attached with this letter. The impact sites have been identified on a
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangle map of Roanoke Rapids and is attached with
this letter. For sedimentation and erosion control, the DOT will utilize "Design Standards
in Sensitive Watersheds" in addition to the standard Best Management Practices.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact
Mr. Phillip Todd of my staff at [phone], Extension 314.
Sincerely,
H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
HFV/pct
cc: Mr. Mike Smith, COE, Wilmington
Mr. John Dorney, DWQ, Raleigh
Mr. David Cox, WRC, Northside
Mr. William Rogers, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. Whit Webb, P.E., Program Development Branch
Mr. Len Hill, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. A. L. Hankins, Hydraulics Unit
Mr. Tom Shearin, P.E., State Roadway Design Engineer
Mr. D. R. Dupree, P.E., Division 4 Engineer
I
DEM ID: CORPS ACTION ID: 199602001 T.I.P. No. U-1007
NATIONWIDE PERMIT REQUESTED (PROVIDE NATIONWIDE PERMIT #) NWP 14
PRE-CONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION APPLICATION
FOR NATIONWIDE PERMITS THAT REQUIRE:
1) NOTIFICATION TO THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS
2) APPLICATION FOR SECTION 401 CERTIFICATION
3) COORDINATION WITH THE NC DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
SEND THE ORIGINAL AND (1) COPY OF THIS COMPLETED FORM TO THE APPROPRIATE
FIELD OFFICE OF THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET). SEVEN
(7) COPIES SHOULD BE SENT TO THE N.C. DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
(SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET). PLEASE PRINT.
1. OWNERS NAME: NC Dept. of Transportation; Planning & Environmental Branch
2. MAILING ADDRESS: Post Office Box 25201
SUBDIVISION NAME:
CITY: Raleigh STATE: NC ZIP CODE: 27611
PROJECT LOCATION ADDRESS, INCLUDING SUBDIVISION NAME (IF DIFFERENT FROM
MAILING ADDRESS ABOVE):
3. TELEPHONE NUMBER (HOME):
(WORK): [phone]
4. IF APPLICABLE: AGENT'S NAME OR RESPONSIBLE CORPORATE OFFICIAL, ADDRESS,
PHONE NUMBER:
H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
5. LOCATION OF WORK (PROVIDE A MAP, PREFERABLY A COPY OF USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP
OR AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY WITH SCALE):
COUNTY: Halifax NEAREST TOWN OR CITY: Roanoke Rapids
1
T
SPECIFIC LOCATION (INCLUDE ROAD
NUMBERS, LANDMARKS, ETC.):
SR 1426 between NC 48 and SR 1400 in Roanoke Rapids.
6. IMPACTED OR NEAREST STREAM/RIVER: Roanoke River
RIVER BASIN:
Roanoke
7a. IS PROJECT LOCATED NEAR WATER CLASSIFIED AS TROUT,
HIGH QUALITY WATERS (HQW), OUTSTANDING RESOURCE WATERS
(WS-I OR WS-II) ? YES [ ] NO [x] IF YES, EXPLAIN: _
7b. IS THE PROJECT LOCATED WITHIN A NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL
MANAGEMENT AREA OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN (AEC) ? YES [ ] NO [x]
7c. IF THE PROJECT IS LOCATED WITHIN A COASTAL COUNTY (SEE PAGE 7 FOR LIST
OF COASTAL COUNTIES), WHAT IS THE LAND USE PLAN (LUP) DESIGNATION?
8a. HAVE ANY SECTION 404 PERMITS BEEN PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED FOR USE ON THIS
PROPERTY? YES [ ] NO [x] IF YES, PROVIDE ACTION I.D. NUMBER OF PREVIOUS
PERMIT AND ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (INCLUDE PHOTOCOPY OF 401
CERTIFICATION):
8b. ARE. ADDITIONAL PERMIT REQUESTS EXPECTED FOR THIS PROPERTY IN THE FUTURE?
YES [ ] NO [x] IF YES, DESCRIBE ANTICIPATED WORK:
TIDAL SALTWATER (SA),
(ORW), WATER SUPPLY
2
I
9a. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES IN TRACT OF LAND: N/A
9b. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES OF WETLANDS LOCATED ON PROJECT SITE:
0 acre
10a. NUMBER OF ACRES OF WETLANDS IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT BY:
FILLING: N/A EXCAVATION:
FLOODING:
DRAINAGE:
OTHER:
TOTAL ACRES TO BE IMPACTED:
10b. (1) STREAM CHANNEL TO BE IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT (IF
RELOCATED, PROVIDE DISTANCE BOTH BEFORE AND AFTER RELOCATION):
LENGTH BEFORE: N/A FT AFTER: FT
WIDTH BEFORE (based on normal high water contours): FT
WIDTH AFTER: FT
AVERAGE DEPTH BEFORE: FT AFTER: FT
(2) STREAM CHANNEL IMPACTS WILL RESULT FROM: (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)
OPEN CHANNEL RELOCATION: PLACEMENT OF PIPE IN CHANNEL: x
CHANNEL EXCAVATION: CONSTRUCTION OF A DAM/FLOODING:
OTHER:
11. IF CONSTRUCTION OF A POND IS PROPOSED, WHAT IS THE SIZE OF THE WATERSHED
DRAINING TO THE POND?
WHAT IS THE EXPECTED POND SURFACE AREA?
12. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK INCLUDING DISCUSSION OF TYPE OF MECHANICAL
EQUIPMENT TO BE USED (ATTACH PLANS: 8 1/2" X 11" DRAWINGS ONLY):
Machines for road construction.
13. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED WORK: Widen public roadway.
3
14. STATE REASONS WHY IT IS BELIEVED THAT THIS ACTIVITY MUST BE CARRIED OUT
IN WETLANDS. (INCLUDE ANY MEASURES TAKEN TO MINIMIZE WETLAND IMPACTS):
Wetlands not impacted by work.
15. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO CONTACT THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE (USFWS)
AND/OR NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE (NMFS) (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET)
REGARDING THE PRESENCE OF ANY FEDERALLY LISTED OR PROPOSED FOR LISTING
ENDANGERED OR THREATENED SPECIES OR CRITICAL HABITAT IN THE PERMIT AREA THAT
MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT. DATE CONTACTED: June 24, 1994
(ATTACH RESPONSES FROM THESE AGENCIES.)
16. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO CONTACT THE STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER
(SHPO) (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET) REGARDING THE PRESENCE OF HISTORIC
PROPERTIES IN THE PERMIT AREA WHICH MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT.
DATE CONTACTED: November 13, 1995
17. DOES THE PROJECT INVOLVE AN EXPENDITURE OF PUBLIC FUNDS OR THE USE OF
PUBLIC (STATE) LAND?
YES [x] NO H (IF NO, GO TO 18)
a. IF YES, DOES THE PROJECT REQUIRE PREPARATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL
DOCUMENT PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL
POLICY ACT?
YES [x] NO [ ]
b. IF YES, HAS THE DOCUMENT BEEN REVIEWED THROUGH THE NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION STATE CLEARINGHOUSE?
YES [x] NO [ ]
IF ANSWER TO 17b IS YES, THEN SUBMIT APPROPRIATE DOCUMENTATION FROM THE STATE
CLEARINGHOUSE TO DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT REGARDING COMPLIANCE
WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT.
QUESTIONS REGARDING THE STATE CLEARINGHOUSE REVIEW PROCESS SHOULD BE DIRECTED
TO MS. CHRYS BAGGETT, DIRECTOR STATE CLEARINGHOUSE, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT
OF ADMINISTRATION, 116 WEST JONES STREET, RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27603-8003,
TELEPHONE [phone].
4
18. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS SHOULD BE INCLUDED WITH THIS APPLICATION IF PROPOSED
ACTIVITY INVOLVES THE DISCHARGE OF EXCAVATED OR FILL MATERIAL INTO WETLANDS:
a. WETLAND DELINEATION MAP SHOWING ALL WETLANDS, STREAMS, LAKES
AND PONDS ON THE PROPERTY (FOR NATIONWIDE PERMIT NUMBERS 14, 18, 21, 26, 29,
AND 38). ALL STREAMS (INTERMITTENT AND PERMANENT) ON THE PROPERTY MUST BE
SHOWN ON THE MAP. MAP SCALES SHOULD BE 1 INCH EQUALS 50 FEET OR 1 INCH
EQUALS 100 FEET OR THEIR EQUIVALENT.
b. IF AVAILABLE, REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOGRAPH OF WETLANDS TO BE
IMPACTED BY PROJECT.
C. IF DELINEATION WAS PERFORMED BY A CONSULTANT, INCLUDE ALL DATA
SHEETS RELEVANT TO THE PLACEMENT OF THE DELINEATION LINE.
d. ATTACH A COPY OF THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN IF REQUIRED.
e. WHAT IS LAND USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTY?
Single family residence and commercial
f. IF APPLICABLE, WHAT IS PROPOSED METHOD OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL?
g. SIGNED AND DATED AGENT AUTHORIZATION LETTER, IF APPLICABLE.
NOTE: WETLANDS OR WATERS OF THE U.S. MAY NOT BE IMPACTED PRIOR TO:
1) ISSUANCE OF A SECTION 404 CORPS OF ENGINEERS PERMIT,
2) EITHER THE ISSUANCE OR WAIVER OF A 401 DIVISION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT (WATER QUALITY) CERTIFICATION, AND
3) (IN THE TWENTY COASTAL COUNTIES ONLY), A LETTER FROM THE NORTH
CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT STATING THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY
IS CONSISTENT WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM.
0 R'S/AGENT'S SI ATURE
DA E
(AGENT'S SIGNATURE VALID ONLY
IF AUTHORIZATION LETTER FROM
THE OWNER IS PROVIDED (18g.))
5
? A- i
'J/
love" if,
w?yh
? i ''' ? ? , ,?„? .o ,=/••I ? ? Ya I i , 1?r?. ?A-
c
I +'? '?,i? ?? I??? 1 ? _'.? • ? •. ? ':?` ilia ? ` w+ ??
I f ( .. IP. ff ,.r11 Q• ? ? ? . r
o /-
1` ,
PIC
-VA Ir
?_,,?r • ? ?0 111 ?. ?? 0 ? }??? "•,F p.a ? - ? ...6..
u11 ?11?+{I 11 ? jlrr r \ ?_ _
'?)/( 1 11 ?^` n jlll! I 1 N ?/i" ??.. •? ? ? . ..? y ? _002
// 111 I// I •: •?. -,`;'?... --_>
1 W1.4
Rr ? l l v? ?; ? ? 1 / 1 L•_
7 r-7 -4/
., n 1/ F6+ 1 /' 't,, t q ram„
?? +fi?!# bl ^ N - ? ??
C
Vol
Iuf ll° '•} j. F j ,'', / North Carolina Department of Transporation
1! p 1 °?? / Division of Highways
3 1
u 11 L h?'?Q ,?.-.?? .- ?;I •'? Halifax County /
7/ 1 • ?' 1/i, ?' TIP No. U-1007
C-
V. 4 U
Widen SR 1426 (Bolling Road/ Fifth Street)
\\I ~ Q 1 / from SR 1400 to NC 48
l /? ? '• USGS Quadrangle map of Roanoke Rapids v
scale I •' 2000•

STATE OF NORTFI CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. P.O. ROX 25201. RALEIGH. N.C. 27611-5201 E. NoRR1S TorsoN
GOMMOR SECR1 IARY
March 4, 1998
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615
Attention: Mr. Eric Alsmeyer
NCDOT Coordinator
Dear Sir:
Subject: Halifax County, SR 1426 (Bolling Road/ Fifth Street), from SR 1400
(West Tenth Street) to NC 48 (Roanoke Avenue); Federal Aid Project
No. STP-1426(1); State Project No. 8.2300601; TIP No. U-1007; COE
Action ID 199602001.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (DOT) proposes to widen
existing SR 1426 (Bolling Road/ Fifth Street) in Roanoke Rapids, from SR 1400 (West
Tenth Street) to NC 48 (Roanoke Avenue). The existing two-lane facility will be
widened to three lane section with curb and gutter. The project is scheduled to be let to
construction in October 1998.
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) signed the Environmental
Assessment (EA) for the widening of SR 1426 on August 31, 1995. The FHWA
approved the Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for TIP No. U-1007 on
March 29, 1996. These documents, particularly the EA, included studies pertaining to
impacts of natural systems for the proposed project. Copies of the EA and FONSI for
this project have been provided to regulatory agencies involved in the permit review
process.
The subject project cannot be accomplished without impacts to waters of the
United States. Surface waters will be impacted by extending two pipes and a culvert.
Table 1 summarizes project impacts by station number, pipe size, stream type, existing
stream length and surface water impact. Total impacts are 42 feet of streams will be
placed in pipe and <0.01 acre of fill in surface waters. Based on these impacts, the DOT
believes the proposed project can be permitted under a Section 404 Nationwide
Permit 14.
0
1)
Table 1. Impacts to Waters of the United States from TIP No. U-1007
Site Stream Type Existing Stream Length Surface Water Impact
l intermittent 20 feet < 0.01 acre
2 perennial 7 feet < 0.01 acre
3 intermittent 15 feet < 0.01 acre
Total Impacts 42 feet <0.01 acre
A pre-construction notification form for a Section 404 Nationwide Permit 14 has
been completed and attached with this letter. The impact sites have been identified on a
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangle map of Roanoke Rapids and is attached with
this letter. For sedimentation and erosion control, the DOT will utilize "Design Standards
in Sensitive Watersheds" in addition to the standard Best Management Practices.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact
Mr. Phillip Todd of my staff at [phone], Extension 314.
Sincerely,
H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
HFV/pct
cc: Mr. Mike Smith, COE, Wilmington
Mr. John Dorney, DWQ, Raleigh
Mr. David Cox, WRC, Northside
Mr. William Rogers, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. Whit Webb, P.E., Program Development Branch
Mr. Len Hill, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. A. L. Hankins, Hydraulics Unit
Mr. Tom Shearin, P.E., State Roadway Design Engineer
Mr. D. R. Dupree, P.E., Division 4 Engineer

DEM ID: CORPS ACTION ID: 199602001 T.I.P. No. U-1007
NATIONWIDE PERMIT REQUESTED (PROVIDE NATIONWIDE PERMIT #) NWP 14
PRE-CONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION APPLICATION
FOR NATIONWIDE PERMITS THAT REQUIRE:
1) NOTIFICATION TO THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS
2) APPLICATION FOR SECTION 401 CERTIFICATION
3) COORDINATION WITH THE NC DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
SEND THE ORIGINAL AND (1) COPY OF THIS COMPLETED FORM TO THE APPROPRIATE
FIELD OFFICE OF THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET). SEVEN
(7) COPIES SHOULD BE SENT TO THE N.C. DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
(SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET). PLEASE PRINT.
1. OWNERS NAME: NC Dept. of Transportation; Planning & Environmental Branch
2. MAILING ADDRESS: Post Office Box 25201
SUBDIVISION NAME:
CITY: Raleigh STATE: NC ZIP CODE: 27611
PROJECT LOCATION ADDRESS, INCLUDING SUBDIVISION NAME (IF DIFFERENT FROM
MAILING ADDRESS ABOVE):
3. TELEPHONE NUMBER (HOME): (WORK): [phone]
4. IF APPLICABLE: AGENT'S NAME OR RESPONSIBLE CORPORATE OFFICIAL, ADDRESS,
PHONE NUMBER:
H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
5. LOCATION OF WORK (PROVIDE A MAP, PREFERABLY A COPY OF USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP
OR AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY WITH SCALE):
COUNTY: Halifax NEAREST TOWN OR CITY: Roanoke Rapids
1

SPECIFIC LOCATION (INCLUDE ROAD
NUMBERS, LANDMARKS, ETC.):
SR 1426 between NC 48 and SR 1400 in Roanoke Rapids.
6. IMPACTED OR NEAREST STREAM/RIVER: Roanoke River
RIVER BASIN: Roanoke
7a. IS PROJECT LOCATED NEAR WATER CLASSIFIED AS TROUT,
HIGH QUALITY WATERS (HQW), OUTSTANDING RESOURCE WATERS
(WS-I OR WS-II) ? YES [ ] NO [x] IF YES, EXPLAIN: _
7b. IS THE PROJECT LOCATED WITHIN A NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL
MANAGEMENT AREA OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN (AEC) ? YES [ ] NO [x]
7c. IF THE PROJECT IS LOCATED WITHIN A COASTAL COUNTY (SEE PAGE 7 FOR LIST
OF COASTAL COUNTIES), WHAT IS THE LAND USE PLAN (LUP) DESIGNATION?
8a. HAVE ANY SECTION 404 PERMITS BEEN PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED FOR USE ON THIS
PROPERTY? YES [ ] NO [x] IF YES, PROVIDE ACTION I.D. NUMBER OF PREVIOUS
PERMIT AND ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (INCLUDE PHOTOCOPY OF 401
CERTIFICATION):
8b. ARE ADDITIONAL PERMIT REQUESTS EXPECTED FOR THIS PROPERTY IN THE FUTURE?
YES [ ] NO [x] IF YES, DESCRIBE ANTICIPATED WORK:

TIDAL SALTWATER (SA),
(ORW), WATER SUPPLY
2
I
9a. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES IN TRACT OF LAND: N/A
9b. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES OF WETLANDS LOCATED ON PROJECT SITE:
0 acre
10a. NUMBER OF ACRES OF WETLANDS IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT BY:
FILLING: N/A EXCAVATION:
FLOODING:
DRAINAGE:
OTHER:
TOTAL ACRES TO BE IMPACTED:
10b. (1) STREAM CHANNEL TO BE IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT (IF
RELOCATED, PROVIDE DISTANCE BOTH BEFORE AND AFTER RELOCATION):
LENGTH BEFORE: N/A FT AFTER: FT
WIDTH BEFORE (based on normal high water contours): FT
WIDTH AFTER: FT
AVERAGE DEPTH BEFORE:
FT AFTER:
(2) STREAM CHANNEL IMPACTS WILL RESULT FROM: (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)
OPEN CHANNEL RELOCATION: PLACEMENT OF PIPE IN CHANNEL: x
CHANNEL EXCAVATION:
OTHER:
CONSTRUCTION OF A DAM/FLOODING:
11. IF CONSTRUCTION OF A POND IS PROPOSED, WHAT IS THE SIZE OF THE WATERSHED
DRAINING TO THE POND?
WHAT IS THE EXPECTED POND SURFACE AREA?
12. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK INCLUDING DISCUSSION OF TYPE OF MECHANICAL
EQUIPMENT TO BE USED (ATTACH PLANS: 8 1/2" X 11" DRAWINGS ONLY):
Machines for road construction.
13. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED WORK: Widen public roadway.
3
14. STATE REASONS WHY IT IS BELIEVED THAT THIS ACTIVITY MUST BE CARRIED OUT
IN WETLANDS. (INCLUDE ANY MEASURES TAKEN TO MINIMIZE WETLAND IMPACTS):
Wetlands not impacted by work.
15. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO CONTACT THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE (USFWS)
AND/OR NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE (NMFS) (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET)
REGARDING THE PRESENCE OF ANY FEDERALLY LISTED OR PROPOSED FOR LISTING
ENDANGERED OR THREATENED SPECIES OR CRITICAL HABITAT IN THE PERMIT AREA THAT
MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT. DATE CONTACTED: June 24, 1994
(ATTACH RESPONSES FROM THESE AGENCIES.)
16. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO CONTACT THE STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER
(SHPO) (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET) REGARDING THE PRESENCE OF HISTORIC
PROPERTIES IN THE PERMIT AREA WHICH MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT.
DATE CONTACTED: November 13, 1995
17. DOES THE PROJECT INVOLVE AN EXPENDITURE OF PUBLIC FUNDS OR THE USE OF
PUBLIC (STATE) LAND?
YES [x] NO [] (IF NO, GO TO 18)
a. IF YES, DOES THE PROJECT REQUIRE PREPARATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL
DOCUMENT PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL
POLICY ACT?
YES [x] NO [ ]
b. IF YES, HAS THE DOCUMENT BEEN REVIEWED THROUGH THE NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION STATE CLEARINGHOUSE?
YES [x] NO [ ]
IF ANSWER TO 17b IS YES, THEN SUBMIT APPROPRIATE DOCUMENTATION FROM THE STATE
CLEARINGHOUSE TO DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT REGARDING COMPLIANCE
WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT.
QUESTIONS REGARDING THE STATE CLEARINGHOUSE REVIEW PROCESS SHOULD BE DIRECTED
TO MS. CHRYS BAGGETT, DIRECTOR STATE CLEARINGHOUSE, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT
OF ADMINISTRATION, 116 WEST JONES STREET, RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27603-8003,
TELEPHONE [phone].
4
18. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS SHOULD BE INCLUDED WITH THIS APPLICATION IF PROPOSED
ACTIVITY INVOLVES THE DISCHARGE OF EXCAVATED OR FILL MATERIAL INTO WETLANDS:
a. WETLAND DELINEATION MAP SHOWING ALL WETLANDS, STREAMS, LAKES
AND PONDS ON THE PROPERTY (FOR NATIONWIDE PERMIT NUMBERS 14, 18, 21, 26, 29,
AND 38). ALL STREAMS (INTERMITTENT AND PERMANENT) ON THE PROPERTY MUST BE
SHOWN ON THE MAP. MAP SCALES SHOULD BE 1 INCH EQUALS 50 FEET OR 1 INCH
EQUALS 100 FEET OR THEIR EQUIVALENT.
b. IF AVAILABLE, REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOGRAPH OF WETLANDS TO BE
IMPACTED BY PROJECT.
C. IF DELINEATION WAS PERFORMED BY A CONSULTANT, INCLUDE ALL DATA
SHEETS RELEVANT TO THE PLACEMENT OF THE DELINEATION LINE.
d. ATTACH A COPY OF THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN IF REQUIRED.
e. WHAT IS LAND USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTY?
Single family residence and commercial
f. IF APPLICABLE, WHAT IS PROPOSED METHOD OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL?
g. SIGNED AND DATED AGENT AUTHORIZATION LETTER, IF APPLICABLE.
NOTE: WETLANDS OR WATERS OF THE U.S. MAY NOT BE IMPACTED PRIOR TO:
1) ISSUANCE OF A SECTION 404 CORPS
2) EITHER THE ISSUANCE OR WAIVER OF
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT (WATER QUALITY)
3) (IN THE TWENTY COASTAL COUNTIES
CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
IS CONSISTENT WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA CO
O R'S/AGENT'S SI ATURE
OF ENGINEERS PERMIT,
A 401 DIVISION OF
CERTIFICATION, AND
ONLY), A LETTER FROM THE NORTH
STATING THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY
ASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM.
?B
DA E
(AGENT'S SIGNATURE VALID ONLY
IF AUTHORIZATION LETTER FROM
THE OWNER IS PROVIDED (18g.))
v_
I ?g /'I .v ?kI - I fir.
? ? ? ?? ??i?????Y_???,? a , /? __ I (YL.?,?11•lU l?a?'a*? ? _ ,rte ?? (?•
a

14
,,? ? , `f ? y i it ? r4. i ?f.'?y `..? a 1. .
I 8 ?? ?._ i?•?r ?r ?.1 CAYr ? mrM ,. ? rr ??? ? •I??• ? ? ...q ?1..,? "
Q'i
1 ??u. \\ o?lyr M11,
\I1''lltt 0 ` ;?, 1 ?_ t? ?• r a? ?.
? I r ll dll Il l t l ?l? j ? ?`) / ?/i' ^ -? :. ..: ? ? w.. ,, ? j? ?.-• .:. • ?/' _ ?ooz '
• - -_--
/^ t r / ? ' JJJ J
J ! ,•/,In ?11,Q dul`<<? .; I ((gg •.. / =I c 1. i .
//
l?Lr/
t bt (.,I 1 tip 1 w( Vj
I'll, F ? 4 IT \ North Carolina Department ofTransporation \
MI i° \ f Division of Highways _
^M1 ?/ni ? r 1 • •
J91 nlt4? Hal i fax County
u11ti f`I? ^'l
X1,1,;
A? O 'rill No. U-1007
p`71 Widen SR 1426 (Bolling Road/ Fifth Street)
\ Itl O Q l1 ?° from SR 1400 to NC 48
USGS Quadrangle reap of Roanoke Rapids
".. sin rr "•
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAWS 13. HUNT JR. P.O. BOX 25201. RALEIGH. N.C. 27611-5201
GO WRNOR
March 4, 1998
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615
Attention: Mr. Eric Alsmeyer
NCDOT Coordinator
Dear Sir:
E. NoRRIs TO?LSON
$[CREI'ARY
Subject: Halifax County, SR 1426 (Bolling Road/ Fifth Street), from SR 1400
(West Tenth Street) to NC 48 (Roanoke Avenue); Federal Aid Project
No. STP-1426(1); State Project No. 8.2300601; TIP No. U-1007; COE
Action ID 199602001.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (DOT) proposes to widen
existing SR 1426 (Bolling Road/ Fifth Street) in Roanoke Rapids, from SR 1400 (West
Tenth Street) to NC 48 (Roanoke Avenue). The existing two-lane facility will be
widened to three lane section with curb and gutter. The project is scheduled to be let to
construction in October 1998.
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) signed the Environmental
Assessment (EA) for the widening of SR 1426 on August 31, 1995. The FHWA
approved the Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for TIP No. U-1007 on
March 29, 1996. These documents, particularly the EA, included studies pertaining to
impacts of natural systems for the proposed project. Copies of the EA and FONSI for
this project have been provided to regulatory agencies involved in the permit review
process.
The subject project cannot be accomplished without impacts to waters of the
United States. Surface waters will be impacted by extending two pipes and a culvert.
Table 1 summarizes project impacts by station number, pipe size, stream type, existing
stream length and surface water impact. Total impacts are 42 feet of streams will be
placed in pipe and <0.01 acre of fill in surface waters. Based on these impacts, the DOT
believes the proposed project can be permitted under a Section 404 Nationwide
Permit 14.
0
Table 1. Impacts to Waters of the United States from TIP No. U-1007
Site Stream Type Existing Stream Length Surface Water Impact
1 intermittent 20 feet < 0.01 acre
2 perennial 7 feet < 0.01 acre
3 intermittent 15 feet < 0.01 acre
Total Impacts 42 feet <0.01 acre
A pre-construction notification form for a Section 404 Nationwide Permit 14 has
been completed and attached with this letter. The impact sites have been identified on a
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangle map of Roanoke Rapids and is attached with
this letter. For sedimentation and erosion control, the DOT will utilize "Design Standards
in Sensitive Watersheds" in addition to the standard Best Management Practices.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact
Mr. Phillip Todd of my staff at [phone], Extension 314.
Sincerely,
H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
HFV/pct
cc: Mr. Mike Smith, COE, Wilmington
Mr. John Dorney, DWQ, Raleigh
Mr. David Cox, WRC, Northside
Mr. William Rogers, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. Whit Webb, P.E., Program Development Branch
Mr. Len Hill, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. A. L. Hankins, Hydraulics Unit
Mr. Tom Shearin, P.E., State Roadway Design Engineer
Mr. D. R. Dupree, P.E., Division 4 Engineer
DEM ID: CORPS ACTION ID: 199602001 T.I.P. No. U-1007
NATIONWIDE PERMIT REQUESTED (PROVIDE NATIONWIDE PERMIT #): NWP 14
PRE-CONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION APPLICATION
FOR NATIONWIDE PERMITS THAT REQUIRE:
1) NOTIFICATION TO THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS
2) APPLICATION FOR SECTION 401 CERTIFICATION
3) COORDINATION WITH THE NC DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
SEND THE ORIGINAL AND ('1) COPY OF THIS COMPLETED FORM TO THE APPROPRIATE
FIELD OFFICE OF THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET). SEVEN
(7) COPIES SHOULD BE SENT TO THE N.C. DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
(SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET). PLEASE PRINT.
1. OWNERS NAME: NC Dept. of Transportation; Planning & Environmental Branch
2. MAILING ADDRESS: Post Office Box 25201
SUBDIVISION NAME:
CITY: Raleigh STATE: NC ZIP CODE: 27611
PROJECT LOCATION ADDRESS, INCLUDING SUBDIVISION NAME (IF DIFFERENT FROM
MAILING ADDRESS ABOVE):
3. TELEPHONE NUMBER (HOME):
(WORK): [phone]
4. IF APPLICABLE: AGENT'S NAME OR RESPONSIBLE CORPORATE OFFICIAL, ADDRESS,
PHONE NUMBER:
H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
5. LOCATION OF WORK (PROVIDE A MAP, PREFERABLY A COPY OF USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP
OR AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY WITH SCALE):
COUNTY: Halifax NEAREST TOWN OR CITY: Roanoke Rapids
1
SPECIFIC LOCATION (INCLUDE ROAD
NUMBERS, LANDMARKS, ETC.):
SR 1426 between NC 48 and SR 1400 in Roanoke Rapids.
6. IMPACTED OR NEAREST STREAM/RIVER: Roanoke River
RIVER BASIN: Roanoke
7a. IS PROJECT LOCATED NEAR WATER CLASSIFIED AS TROUT,
HIGH QUALITY WATERS (HQW), OUTSTANDING RESOURCE WATERS
(WS-I OR WS-II)? YES [ ] NO [x] IF YES, EXPLAIN:
TIDAL SALTWATER (SA),
(ORW), WATER SUPPLY
7b. IS THE PROJECT LOCATED WITHIN A NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL
MANAGEMENT AREA OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN (AEC)? YES [ ] NO [x]
7c. IF THE PROJECT IS LOCATED WITHIN A COASTAL COUNTY (SEE PAGE 7 FOR LIST
OF COASTAL COUNTIES), WHAT IS THE LAND USE PLAN (LUP) DESIGNATION?
8a. HAVE ANY SECTION 404 PERMITS BEEN PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED FOR USE ON THIS
PROPERTY? YES [ ] NO [x] IF YES, PROVIDE ACTION I.D. NUMBER OF PREVIOUS
PERMIT AND ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (INCLUDE PHOTOCOPY OF 401
CERTIFICATION):
8b. ARE ADDITIONAL PERMIT REQUESTS EXPECTED FOR THIS PROPERTY IN THE FUTURE?
YES [ ] NO [x] IF YES, DESCRIBE ANTICIPATED WORK:
2
9a. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES IN TRACT OF LAND: N/A
9b. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES OF WETLANDS LOCATED ON PROJECT SITE:
0 acre
10a. NUMBER OF ACRES OF WETLANDS IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT BY:
FILLING: N/A EXCAVATION:
FLOODING:
DRAINAGE:
OTHER:
TOTAL ACRES TO BE IMPACTED:
10b. (1) STREAM CHANNEL TO BE IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT (IF
RELOCATED, PROVIDE DISTANCE BOTH BEFORE AND AFTER RELOCATION):
LENGTH BEFORE: N/A FT AFTER: FT
WIDTH BEFORE (based on normal high water contours): FT
WIDTH AFTER:
AVERAGE DEPTH BEFORE: FT AFTER: FT
(2) STREAM CHANNEL IMPACTS WILL RESULT FROM: (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)
OPEN CHANNEL RELOCATION: PLACEMENT OF PIPE IN CHANNEL: x
CHANNEL EXCAVATION: CONSTRUCTION OF A DAM/FLOODING:
OTHER:
11. IF CONSTRUCTION OF A POND IS PROPOSED, WHAT IS THE SIZE OF THE WATERSHED
DRAINING TO THE POND?
WHAT IS THE EXPECTED POND SURFACE AREA?
12. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK INCLUDING DISCUSSION OF TYPE OF MECHANICAL
EQUIPMENT TO BE USED (ATTACH PLANS: 8 1/2" X 11" DRAWINGS ONLY):
Machines for road construction.
13. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED WORK: Widen public roadway.
3
14. STATE REASONS WHY IT IS BELIEVED THAT THIS ACTIVITY MUST BE CARRIED OUT
IN WETLANDS. (INCLUDE ANY MEASURES TAKEN TO MINIMIZE WETLAND IMPACTS):
Wetlands not impacted by work.
15. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO CONTACT THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE (USFWS)
AND/OR NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE (NMFS) (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET)
REGARDING THE PRESENCE OF ANY FEDERALLY LISTED OR PROPOSED FOR LISTING
ENDANGERED OR THREATENED SPECIES OR CRITICAL HABITAT IN THE PERMIT AREA THAT
MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT. DATE CONTACTED: June 24, 1994
(ATTACH RESPONSES FROM THESE AGENCIES.)
16. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO CONTACT THE STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER
(SHPO) (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET) REGARDING THE PRESENCE OF HISTORIC
PROPERTIES IN THE PERMIT AREA WHICH MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT.
DATE CONTACTED: November 13, 1995
17. DOES THE PROJECT INVOLVE AN EXPENDITURE OF PUBLIC FUNDS OR THE USE OF
PUBLIC (STATE) LAND?
YES [x] NO H (IF NO, GO TO 18)
a. IF YES, DOES THE PROJECT REQUIRE PREPARATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL
DOCUMENT PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL
POLICY ACT?
YES [x] NO [ ]
b. IF YES, HAS THE DOCUMENT BEEN REVIEWED THROUGH THE NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION STATE CLEARINGHOUSE?
YES [x] NO [ ]
IF ANSWER TO 17b IS YES, THEN SUBMIT APPROPRIATE DOCUMENTATION FROM THE STATE
CLEARINGHOUSE TO DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT REGARDING COMPLIANCE
WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT.
QUESTIONS REGARDING THE STATE CLEARINGHOUSE REVIEW PROCESS SHOULD BE DIRECTED
TO MS. CHRYS BAGGETT, DIRECTOR STATE CLEARINGHOUSE, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT
OF ADMINISTRATION, 116 WEST JONES STREET, RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27603-8003,
TELEPHONE [phone].
4
18. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS SHOULD BE INCLUDED WITH THIS APPLICATION IF PROPOSED
ACTIVITY INVOLVES THE DISCHARGE OF EXCAVATED OR FILL MATERIAL INTO WETLANDS:
a. WETLAND DELINEATION MAP SHOWING ALL WETLANDS, STREAMS, LAKES
AND PONDS ON THE PROPERTY (FOR NATIONWIDE PERMIT NUMBERS 14, 18, 21, 26, 29,
AND 38). ALL STREAMS (INTERMITTENT AND PERMANENT) ON THE PROPERTY MUST BE
SHOWN ON THE MAP. MAP SCALES SHOULD BE 1 INCH EQUALS 50 FEET OR 1 INCH
EQUALS 100 FEET OR THEIR EQUIVALENT.
b. IF AVAILABLE, REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOGRAPH OF WETLANDS TO BE
IMPACTED BY PROJECT.
C. IF DELINEATION WAS PERFORMED BY A CONSULTANT, INCLUDE ALL DATA
SHEETS RELEVANT TO THE PLACEMENT OF THE DELINEATION LINE.
d. ATTACH A COPY OF THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN IF REQUIRED.
e. WHAT IS LAND USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTY?
Single family residence and commercial
f. IF APPLICABLE, WHAT IS PROPOSED METHOD OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL?
g. SIGNED AND DATED AGENT AUTHORIZATION LETTER, IF APPLICABLE.
NOTE: WETLANDS OR WATERS OF THE U.S. MAY NOT BE IMPACTED PRIOR TO:
1) ISSUANCE OF A SECTION 404 CORPS OF ENGINEERS PERMIT,
2) EITHER THE ISSUANCE OR WAIVER OF A 401 DIVISION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT (WATER QUALITY) CERTIFICATION, AND
3) (IN THE TWENTY COASTAL COUNTIES ONLY), A LETTER FROM THE NORTH
CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT STATING THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY
IS CONSISTENT WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM.
llzz"l
O R'S/AGENT'S SI ATURE
DA E
(AGENT'S SIGNATURE VALID ONLY
IF AUTHORIZATION LETTER FROM
THE OWNER IS PROVIDED (18g.))

I Iw? IQ' I ??6 c M 1 1d
^ v 111 . i (?II 1' \ `?? , oI, /. ?/?? ??. } : /
• 1 _
•?I I ?! tp ? II ? ? I ,??vyV,
I
J
V 11 r
/ 111 n,:u?;, ^ //! i?I Ir•` l u _ _ .*, ?-.. :/ ?.'• ,_
I ?
t4 Alt, ??j
?^
Lit
Jy? I'? I r ? V r • ? / •
?1?r r
Illr°??e? .?Y o • ?j, North Carolina Department ofTransporation
11, Division of I lighwys
uu IIr? 1"?? ??y`1? 1;? - v '„i I •• Halifax County
TIP No. U-1007
Widen SR 1426 (Bolling Road/ Fifth Street)
11 y( from SR 1400 to NC 48
USGS Quadrangle map of Roanoke Rapids u
Z / 11
Scale 1" _ 11000'

?,TA1,;
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
)AMES 1?. HUNT JR. P.O. BOX 25201. RALLIGII, N.C. 27611-5201
600 RNOR
March 4, 1998
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers - -
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office J
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615 4
Attention: Mr. Eric Alsmeyer
NCDOT Coordinator
Dear Sir:

E. NORRIS ToisoN
si ikiilARY

Subject: Halifax County, SR 1426 (Bolling Road/ Fifth Street), from SR 1400
(West Tenth Street) to NC 48 (Roanoke Avenue); Federal Aid Project
No. STP-1426(1); State Project No. 8.2300601; TIP No. U-1007; COE
Action ID 199602001.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (DOT) proposes to widen
existing SR 1426 (Bolling Road/ Fifth Street) in Roanoke Rapids, from SR 1400 (West
Tenth Street) to NC 48 (Roanoke Avenue). The existing two-lane facility will be
widened to three lane section with curb and gutter. The project is scheduled to be let to
construction in October 1998.
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) signed the Environmental
Assessment (EA) for the widening of SR 1426 on August 31, 1995. The FHWA
approved the Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for TIP No. U-1007 on
March 29, 1996. These documents, particularly the EA, included studies pertaining to
impacts of natural systems for the proposed project. Copies of the EA and FONSI for
this project have been provided to regulatory agencies involved in the permit review
process.
The subject project cannot be accomplished without impacts to waters of the
United States. Surface waters will be impacted by extending two pipes and a culvert.
Table 1 summarizes project impacts by station number, pipe size, stream type, existing
stream length and surface water impact. Total impacts are 42 feet of streams will be
placed in pipe and <0.01 acre of fill in surface waters. Based on these impacts, the DOT
believes the proposed project can be permitted under a Section 404 Nationwide
Permit 14.
19
Table 1. Impacts to Waters of the United States from TIP No. U-1007
Site Stream Type ; Existing Stream Length Surface Water Impact
1 intermittent 20 feet < 0.01 acre
2 perennial 7 feet < 0.01 acre
3 intermittent 15 feet < 0.01 acre
Total Impacts 42 feet <0.01 acre
A pre-construction notification form for a Section 404 Nationwide Permit 14 has
been completed and attached with this letter. The impact sites have been identified on a
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangle map of Roanoke Rapids and is attached with
this letter. For sedimentation and erosion control, the DOT will utilize "Design Standards
in Sensitive Watersheds" in addition to the standard Best Management Practices.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact
Mr. Phillip Todd of my staff at [phone], Extension 314.
Sincerely,
H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
HFV/pct
cc: Mr. Mike Smith, COE, Wilmington
Mr. John Dorney, DWQ, Raleigh
Mr. David Cox, WRC, Northside
Mr. William Rogers, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. Whit Webb, P.E., Program Development Branch
Mr. Len Hill, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. A. L. Hankins, Hydraulics Unit
Mr. Tom Shearin, P.E., State Roadway Design Engineer
Mr. D. R. Dupree, P.E., Division 4 Engineer
DEM ID: CORPS ACTION ID: 199602001 T.I.P. No. U-1007
NATIONWIDE PERMIT REQUESTED (PROVIDE NATIONWIDE PERMIT #): NWP 14
PRE-CONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION APPLICATION
FOR NATIONWIDE PERMITS THAT REQUIRE:
1) NOTIFICATION TO THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS
2) APPLICATION FOR SECTION 401 CERTIFICATION
3) COORDINATION WITH THE NC DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
SEND THE ORIGINAL AND (1) COPY OF THIS COMPLETED FORM TO THE APPROPRIATE
FIELD OFFICE OF THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET). SEVEN
(7) COPIES SHOULD BE SENT TO THE N.C. DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
(SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET). PLEASE PRINT.
1. OWNERS NAME: NC Dept. of Transportation; Planning & Environmental Branch
2. MAILING ADDRESS: Post Office Box 25201
SUBDIVISION NAME:
CITY: Raleigh STATE: NC ZIP CODE: 27611
PROJECT LOCATION ADDRESS, INCLUDING SUBDIVISION NAME (IF DIFFERENT FROM
MAILING ADDRESS ABOVE):
3. TELEPHONE NUMBER (HOME):
(WORK): (919) 733-314
4. IF APPLICABLE: AGENT'S NAME OR RESPONSIBLE CORPORATE OFFICIAL, ADDRESS,
PHONE NUMBER:
H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
5. LOCATION OF WORK (PROVIDE A MAP, PREFERABLY A COPY OF USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP
OR AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY WITH SCALE):
COUNTY: Halifax NEAREST TOWN OR CITY: Roanoke Rapids
1
SPECIFIC LOCATION (INCLUDE ROAD
NUMBERS, LANDMARKS, ETC.):
SR 1426 between NC 48 and SR 1400 in Roanoke Rapids.
6. IMPACTED OR NEAREST STREAM/RIVER: Roanoke River
RIVER BASIN: Roanoke
7a. IS PROJECT LOCATED NEAR WATER CLASSIFIED AS TROUT, TIDAL SALTWATER (SA),
HIGH QUALITY WATERS (HQW), OUTSTANDING RESOURCE WATERS (ORW), WATER SUPPLY
(WS-I OR WS-II) ? YES [ ] NO [x] IF YES, EXPLAIN:
7b. IS THE PROJECT LOCATED WITHIN A NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL
MANAGEMENT AREA OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN (AEC)? YES [ ] NO [x]
7c. IF THE PROJECT IS LOCATED WITHIN A COASTAL COUNTY (SEE PAGE 7 FOR LIST
OF COASTAL COUNTIES), WHAT IS THE LAND USE PLAN (LUP) DESIGNATION?
8a. HAVE ANY SECTION 404 PERMITS BEEN PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED FOR USE ON THIS
PROPERTY? YES [ ] NO [x] IF YES, PROVIDE ACTION I.D. NUMBER OF PREVIOUS
PERMIT AND ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (INCLUDE PHOTOCOPY OF 401
CERTIFICATION):
8b. ARE ADDITIONAL PERMIT REQUESTS EXPECTED FOR THIS PROPERTY IN THE FUTURE?
YES [ ] NO [x] IF YES, DESCRIBE ANTICIPATED WORK:
2
9a. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES IN TRACT OF LAND: N/A
9b. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES OF WETLANDS LOCATED ON PROJECT SITE:
10a. NUMBER OF ACRES OF WETLANDS IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT BY:
FILLING: N/A EXCAVATION:
FLOODING:
DRAINAGE:
OTHER:
TOTAL ACRES TO BE IMPACTED:
10b. (1) STREAM CHANNEL TO BE IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT (IF
RELOCATED, PROVIDE DISTANCE BOTH BEFORE AND AFTER RELOCATION):
LENGTH BEFORE: N/A FT AFTER: FT
WIDTH BEFORE (based on normal high water contours): FT
WIDTH AFTER:
AVERAGE DEPTH BEFORE: FT AFTER: FT
(2) STREAM CHANNEL IMPACTS WILL RESULT FROM: (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)
OPEN CHANNEL RELOCATION: PLACEMENT OF PIPE IN CHANNEL: x
CHANNEL EXCAVATION: CONSTRUCTION OF A DAM/FLOODING:
OTHER:
11. IF CONSTRUCTION OF A POND IS PROPOSED, WHAT IS THE SIZE OF THE WATERSHED
DRAINING TO THE POND?
WHAT IS THE EXPECTED POND SURFACE AREA?
12. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK INCLUDING DISCUSSION OF TYPE OF MECHANICAL
EQUIPMENT TO BE USED (ATTACH PLANS: 8 1/2" X 11" DRAWINGS ONLY):
Machines for road construction.
13. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED WORK: Widen public roadway.
3
14. STATE REASONS WHY IT IS BELIEVED THAT THIS ACTIVITY MUST BE CARRIED OUT
IN WETLANDS. (INCLUDE ANY MEASURES TAKEN TO MINIMIZE WETLAND IMPACTS):
Wetlands not impacted by work.
15. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO CONTACT THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE (USFWS)
AND/OR NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE (NMFS) (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET)
REGARDING THE PRESENCE OF ANY FEDERALLY LISTED OR PROPOSED FOR LISTING
ENDANGERED OR THREATENED SPECIES OR CRITICAL HABITAT IN THE PERMIT AREA THAT
MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT. DATE CONTACTED: June 24, 1994
(ATTACH RESPONSES FROM THESE AGENCIES.)
16. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO CONTACT THE STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER
(SHPO) (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET) REGARDING THE PRESENCE OF HISTORIC
PROPERTIES IN THE PERMIT AREA WHICH MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT.
DATE CONTACTED: November 13, 1995
17. DOES THE PROJECT INVOLVE AN EXPENDITURE OF PUBLIC FUNDS OR THE USE OF
PUBLIC (STATE) LAND?
YES [xl NO H (IF NO, GO TO 18)
a. IF YES, DOES THE PROJECT REQUIRE PREPARATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL
DOCUMENT PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL
POLICY ACT?
YES [x] NO [ ]
b. IF YES, HAS THE DOCUMENT BEEN REVIEWED THROUGH THE NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION STATE CLEARINGHOUSE?
YES [x] NO (I
IF ANSWER TO 17b IS YES, THEN SUBMIT APPROPRIATE DOCUMENTATION FROM THE STATE
CLEARINGHOUSE TO DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT REGARDING COMPLIANCE
WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT.
QUESTIONS REGARDING THE STATE CLEARINGHOUSE REVIEW PROCESS SHOULD BE DIRECTED
TO MS. CHRYS BAGGETT, DIRECTOR STATE CLEARINGHOUSE, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT
OF ADMINISTRATION, 116 WEST JONES STREET, RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27603-8003,
TELEPHONE [phone].
4
18. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS SHOULD BE INCLUDED WITH THIS APPLICATION IF PROPOSED
ACTIVITY INVOLVES THE DISCHARGE OF EXCAVATED OR FILL MATERIAL INTO WETLANDS:
a. WETLAND DELINEATION MAP SHOWING ALL WETLANDS, STREAMS, LAKES
AND PONDS ON THE PROPERTY (FOR NATIONWIDE PERMIT NUMBERS 14, 18, 21, 26, 29,
AND 38). ALL STREAMS (INTERMITTENT AND PERMANENT) ON THE PROPERTY MUST BE
SHOWN ON THE MAP. MAP SCALES SHOULD BE 1 INCH EQUALS 50 FEET OR 1 INCH
EQUALS 100 FEET OR THEIR EQUIVALENT.
b. IF AVAILABLE, REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOGRAPH OF WETLANDS TO BE
IMPACTED BY PROJECT.
C. IF DELINEATION WAS PERFORMED BY A CONSULTANT, INCLUDE ALL DATA
SHEETS RELEVANT TO THE PLACEMENT OF THE DELINEATION LINE.
d. ATTACH A COPY OF THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN IF REQUIRED.
e. WHAT IS LAND USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTY?
Single family residence and commercial
f. IF APPLICABLE, WHAT IS PROPOSED METHOD OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL?
g. SIGNED AND DATED AGENT AUTHORIZATION LETTER, IF APPLICABLE.
NOTE: WETLANDS OR WATERS OF THE U.S. MAY NOT BE IMPACTED PRIOR TO:
1) ISSUANCE OF A SECTION 404 CORPS OF ENGINEERS PERMIT,
2) EITHER THE ISSUANCE OR WAIVER OF A 401 DIVISION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT (WATER QUALITY) CERTIFICATION, AND
3) (IN THE TWENTY COASTAL COUNTIES ONLY), A LETTER FROM THE NORTH
CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT STATING THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY
IS CONSISTENT WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM.
0 R'S/AGENT'S SI ATURE
DA E
(AGENT'S SIGNATURE VALID ONLY
IF AUTHORIZATION LETTER FROM
THE OWNER IS PROVIDED (18g.))
%
1 ` • ?. v? il`r ?•
\ t '?I
1,11 ?iiv it
U ? n r^
h Vl
11 v-9--T f
l t Jl
F k r ,K?•f`% 1 C/I / ?I / ?• •: t l_• ;?=
/ l ,1' n ?. r f. / i .i. ?•... l v
? In V l?l ?? ' • M... "/ J .. y / . ??• ? / ? K I ` ? 1 • I ??„ ... -
r -7 -4
,1}Li?,t, / J r?. ? ?/ __ ? ? •?\1 I,? j ? I
Rj/
j)llu
4 I L k. Ih I' ? /.
C'll t " u r'" " I• '? Y
North Carolina Department of Transporation
Division of Highways
Halifax County
TIP No. U-1007
Widen SR 1426 (Boiling Road/ Fifth Street)
Irom SR 1400 to NC 48
USGS Quadrangle map of Roanoke Rapids
Seale I-= 2000

v

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
j .,i' y
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES Q. HUNT JR. P.O. 110X25201. RALEIGH. N.C. 27611-5201 E. No)RRIS TOLSON
GOVPRNOR S[CRI'IARY
March 4, 1998
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office y,
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615
Attention: Mr. Eric Alsmeyer
NCDOT Coordinator
Dear Sir:
Subject: Halifax County, SR 1426 (Bolling Road/ Fifth Street), from SR 1400
(West Tenth Street) to NC 48 (Roanoke Avenue); Federal Aid Project
No. STP-1426(1); State Project No. 8.2300601; TIP No. U-1007; COE
Action ID 199602001.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (DOT) proposes to widen
existing SR 1426 (Bolling Road/ Fifth Street) in Roanoke Rapids, from SR 1400 (West
Tenth Street) to NC 48 (Roanoke Avenue). The existing two-lane facility will be
widened to three lane section with curb and gutter. The project is scheduled to be let to
construction in October 1998.
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) signed the Environmental
Assessment (EA) for the widening of SR 1426 on August 31, 1995. The FHWA
approved the Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for TIP No. U-1007 on
March 29, 1996. These documents, particularly the EA, included studies pertaining to
impacts of natural systems for the proposed project. Copies of the EA and FONSI for
this project have been provided to regulatory agencies involved in the permit review
process.
The subject project cannot be accomplished without impacts to waters of the
United States. Surface waters will be impacted by extending two pipes and a culvert.
Table 1 summarizes project impacts by station number, pipe size, stream type, existing
stream length and surface water impact. Total impacts are 42 feet of streams will be
placed in pipe and <0.01 acre of fill in surface waters. Based on these impacts, the DOT
believes the proposed project can be permitted under a Section 404 Nationwide
Permit 14.
0
Table 1. Impactsto Waters of the United States from TIP No. U-1007
Site Stream Type Existing Stream Length Surface Water Impact
1 intermittent 20 feet < 0.01 acre
2 perennial 7 feet < 0.01 acre
3 intermittent 15 feet < 0.01 acre
Total Impacts 42 feet <0.01 acre
A pre-construction notification form for a Section 404 Nationwide Permit 14 has
been completed and attached with this letter. The impact sites have been identified on a
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangle map of Roanoke Rapids and is attached with
this letter. For sedimentation and erosion control, the DOT will utilize "Design Standards
in Sensitive Watersheds" in addition to the standard Best Management Practices.
ve
'l
S d mac., Go??Q1 Z >,(>, \'DGt 5- ti,,J ?. S r+6 n,-4 0 - e)
If you have any questions or need additiohal information, please contact
Mr. Phillip Todd of my staff at [phone], Extension 314.
Sincerely,
H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
HFV/pct
cc: Mr. Mike Smith, COE, Wilmington
Mr. John Dorney, DWQ, Raleigh
Mr. David Cox, WRC, Northside
Mr. William Rogers, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. Whit Webb, P.E., Program Development Branch
Mr. Len Hill, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. A. L. Hankins, Hydraulics Unit
Mr. Tom Shearin, P.E., State Roadway Design Engineer
Mr. D. R. Dupree, P.E., Division 4 Engineer

DEM ID: CORPS ACTION ID: _ 199602001 T.I.P. No. U-1007
NATIONWIDE PERMIT REQUESTED (PROVIDE NATIONWIDE PERMIT #): NWP 14
PRE-CONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION APPLICATION
FOR NATIONWIDE PERMITS THAT REQUIRE:
1) NOTIFICATION TO THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS
2) APPLICATION FOR SECTION 401 CERTIFICATION
3) COORDINATION WITH THE NC DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
SEND THE ORIGINAL AND (1) COPY OF THIS COMPLETED FORM TO THE APPROPRIATE
FIELD OFFICE OF THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET). SEVEN
(7) COPIES SHOULD BE SENT TO THE N.C. DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
(SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET). PLEASE PRINT.
1. OWNERS NAME: NC Dept. of Transportation; Planning & Environmental Branch
2. MAILING ADDRESS: Post Office Box 25201
SUBDIVISION NAME:
CITY: Raleigh STATE: NC ZIP CODE: 27611
PROJECT LOCATION ADDRESS, INCLUDING SUBDIVISION NAME (IF DIFFERENT FROM
MAILING ADDRESS ABOVE):
3. TELEPHONE NUMBER (HOME): (WORK): [phone]
4. IF APPLICABLE: AGENT'S NAME OR RESPONSIBLE CORPORATE OFFICIAL, ADDRESS,
PHONE NUMBER:
H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
5. LOCATION OF WORK (PROVIDE A MAP, PREFERABLY A COPY OF USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP
OR AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY WITH SCALE):
COUNTY: Halifax NEAREST TOWN OR CITY: Roanoke Rapids
1

SPECIFIC LOCATION (INCLUDE ROAD
NUMBERS, LANDMARKS, ETC.):
SR 1426 between NC 48 and SR 1400 in Roanoke Rapids.
6. IMPACTED OR NEAREST STREAM/RIVER: Roanoke River
RIVER BASIN: Roanoke
7a. IS PROJECT LOCATED NEAR WATER CLASSIFIED AS TROUT, TIDAL SALTWATER (SA),
HIGH QUALITY WATERS (HQW), OUTSTANDING RESOURCE WATERS (ORW), WATER SUPPLY
(WS-I OR WS-II) ? YES [ ] NO [x] IF YES, EXPLAIN:
7b. IS THE PROJECT LOCATED WITHIN A NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL
MANAGEMENT AREA OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN (AEC)? YES [ ] NO [x]
7c. IF THE PROJECT IS LOCATED WITHIN A COASTAL COUNTY (SEE PAGE 7 FOR LIST
OF COASTAL COUNTIES), WHAT IS THE LAND USE PLAN (LUP) DESIGNATION?
8a. HAVE ANY SECTION 404 PERMITS BEEN PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED FOR USE ON THIS
PROPERTY? YES [ ] NO [x] IF YES, PROVIDE ACTION I.D. NUMBER OF PREVIOUS
PERMIT AND ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (INCLUDE PHOTOCOPY OF 401
CERTIFICATION):
8b. ARE ADDITIONAL PERMIT REQUESTS EXPECTED FOR THIS PROPERTY IN THE FUTURE?
YES [ ] NO [x] IF YES, DESCRIBE ANTICIPATED WORK:
2
9a. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES IN TRACT OF LAND: N/A
9b. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES OF WETLANDS LOCATED ON PROJECT SITE:
10a. NUMBER OF ACRES OF WETLANDS IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT BY:
FILLING: N/A EXCAVATION:
FLOODING:
DRAINAGE:
OTHER:
TOTAL ACRES TO BE IMPACTED:
10b. (1) STREAM CHANNEL TO BE IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT (IF
RELOCATED, PROVIDE DISTANCE BOTH BEFORE AND AFTER RELOCATION):
LENGTH BEFORE: N/A FT AFTER: FT
WIDTH BEFORE (based on normal high water contours): FT
WIDTH AFTER:
AVERAGE DEPTH BEFORE: FT AFTER: FT
(2) STREAM CHANNEL IMPACTS WILL RESULT FROM: (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)
OPEN CHANNEL RELOCATION: PLACEMENT OF PIPE IN CHANNEL: x
CHANNEL EXCAVATION: CONSTRUCTION OF A DAM/FLOODING:
OTHER:
11. IF CONSTRUCTION OF A POND IS PROPOSED, WHAT IS THE SIZE OF THE WATERSHED
DRAINING TO THE POND?
WHAT IS THE EXPECTED POND SURFACE AREA?
12. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK INCLUDING DISCUSSION OF TYPE OF MECHANICAL
EQUIPMENT TO BE USED (ATTACH PLANS: 8 1/2" X 11" DRAWINGS ONLY):
Machines for road construction.
13. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED WORK: Widen public roadway.
3
14. STATE REASONS WHY IT IS BELIEVED THAT THIS ACTIVITY MUST BE CARRIED OUT
IN WETLANDS. (INCLUDE ANY MEASURES TAKEN TO MINIMIZE WETLAND IMPACTS):
Wetlands not impacted by work.
15. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO CONTACT THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE (USFWS)
AND/OR NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE (NMFS) (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET)
REGARDING THE PRESENCE OF ANY FEDERALLY LISTED OR PROPOSED FOR LISTING
ENDANGERED OR THREATENED SPECIES OR CRITICAL HABITAT IN THE PERMIT AREA THAT
MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT. DATE CONTACTED: June 24, 1994
(ATTACH RESPONSES FROM THESE AGENCIES.)
16. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO CONTACT THE STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER
(SHPO) (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET) REGARDING THE PRESENCE OF HISTORIC
PROPERTIES IN THE PERMIT AREA WHICH MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT.
DATE CONTACTED: November 13, 1995
17. DOES THE PROJECT INVOLVE AN EXPENDITURE OF PUBLIC FUNDS OR THE USE OF
PUBLIC (STATE) LAND?
YES [x] NO [] (IF NO, GO TO 18)
a. IF YES, DOES THE PROJECT REQUIRE PREPARATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL
DOCUMENT PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL
POLICY ACT?
YES [x) NO H
b. IF YES, HAS THE DOCUMENT BEEN REVIEWED THROUGH THE NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION STATE CLEARINGHOUSE?
YES [x] NO [ ]
IF ANSWER TO 17b IS YES, THEN SUBMIT APPROPRIATE DOCUMENTATION FROM THE STATE
CLEARINGHOUSE TO DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT REGARDING COMPLIANCE
WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT.
QUESTIONS REGARDING THE STATE CLEARINGHOUSE REVIEW PROCESS SHOULD BE DIRECTED
TO MS. CHRYS BAGGETT, DIRECTOR STATE CLEARINGHOUSE, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT
OF ADMINISTRATION, 116 WEST JONES STREET, RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27603-8003,
TELEPHONE [phone].
4
18. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS SHOULD BE INCLUDED WITH THIS APPLICATION IF PROPOSED
ACTIVITY INVOLVES THE DISCHARGE OF EXCAVATED OR FILL MATERIAL INTO WETLANDS:
a. WETLAND DELINEATION MAP SHOWING ALL WETLANDS, STREAMS, LAKES
AND PONDS ON THE PROPERTY (FOR NATIONWIDE PERMIT NUMBERS 14, 18, 21, 26, 29,
AND 38). ALL STREAMS (INTERMITTENT AND PERMANENT) ON THE PROPERTY MUST BE
SHOWN ON THE MAP. MAP SCALES SHOULD BE 1 INCH EQUALS 50 FEET OR 1 INCH
EQUALS 100 FEET OR THEIR EQUIVALENT.
b. IF AVAILABLE, REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOGRAPH OF WETLANDS TO BE
IMPACTED BY PROJECT.
C. IF DELINEATION WAS PERFORMED BY A CONSULTANT, INCLUDE ALL DATA
SHEETS RELEVANT TO THE PLACEMENT OF THE DELINEATION LINE.
d. ATTACH A COPY OF THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN IF REQUIRED.
e. WHAT IS LAND USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTY?
Single family residence and commercial
f. IF APPLICABLE, WHAT IS PROPOSED METHOD OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL?
g. SIGNED AND DATED AGENT AUTHORIZATION LETTER, IF APPLICABLE.
NOTE: WETLANDS OR WATERS OF THE U.S. MAY NOT BE IMPACTED PRIOR TO:
1) ISSUANCE OF A SECTION 404 CORPS OF ENGINEERS PERMIT,
2) EITHER THE ISSUANCE OR WAIVER OF A 401 DIVISION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT (WATER QUALITY) CERTIFICATION, AND
3) (IN THE TWENTY COASTAL COUNTIES ONLY), A LETTER FROM THE NORTH
CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT STATING THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY
IS CONSISTENT WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM.
O R'S/AGENT'S SI ATURE
DA E
(AGENT'S SIGNATURE VALID ONLY
IF AUTHORIZATION LETTER FROM
THE OWNER IS PROVIDED (18g.))
5
.?4V??
10
' ?_? ?,. _ ? -• z,.? !. :sue % f •?, ; ?; -
/// kt ?? In r???s-?i \"/"?? -?///? J? `? _ 'A .•'\?•? 6 _
I d? ((/,W It yyl???? _'/ • ,' .?, `? , t ih L .v ,A '"5?
I J +? ?
III
417
t ?. ?? I l ? M ry vl I
I i ?{ V ? 'r ?%s ?•qh V/
I?
l ?n Nip p? /qa .?11 r' ? o m [ ,?•
J -j
iij
? I u,?ii?fil?frr ? I I N •?_/?' ? _?; )• ?. ••?.,, % ?,? ? C ? _o
414e It'll VI&I I
f •:
f ?%
1 v"r
.
X??(?A???r?l(?`
51-4 lp .11/ 1 1,
(fit 91 1
`III • / \o\• North Carolina Department ofTransporation
Division of Highways
1, 4
1;.
1 i Halifax County /
?/ (; .. M % ? ' ??• ---?cD TIP No. 0-1007
\\ 14_ry .; , '•? o ?% Widen SR 1426 (Bolling Road/ Fifth Street)
from SR 1400 to NC 48
p.
USGS Quadrangle map of Roanoke Ra
Ids i
Inow
fir. ?,tj

1
veo?sc
G?

k/z-7?1?
??
/7a/ 4-

State of North Carolina 1F.IWA
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management A&14
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, , Secretary
p E H N F1
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
June 4, 1996
MEMORANDUM
To: Melba McGee
From: Eric Galamb?
Subject: FONSI for SR 1426 Widening
Halifax County
State Project DOT No. 8.2300601, TIP #U-1007
E H N R # 96-0715
The subject document has been reviewed by this office. The Division of
Environmental Management is responsible for the issuance of the Section 401 Water
Quality Certification for activities which impact of waters of the state including
wetlands. The document states that no including wetlands will be impacted but three
streams will be impacted. Given that DOT has committed to the use of hazardous
spill catch basins to protect the existing water use and DOT will utilize high quality soil
and erosion control measures, DEM concurs with the FONSI.
DOT is reminded that endorsement of a FONSI by DEM would not preclude the denial
of a 401 Certification upon application if wetland or water impacts have not been
avoided and minimized to the maximum extent practicable.
Questions regarding the 401 Certification should be directed to Eric Galamb (733-
1786) in DEM's Water Quality Environmental Sciences Branch.
cc: Raleigh COE
Alan Clark
sr1426.fon
FAXED
JUN 0 41996
P.O, Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs
Project Review Form
? Project located in 7th floor library
Project Number: County: ' 1 ? Date: Date Response Due (firm deadline):
'? [o l S `?? _? ?' - -, ? S? J 9, 11. S 3 /
This project is being reviewed as indicated below:
Regional Office/Phone Regional Office Area In-House Review
? Asheville ? All RIO Areas ? Soil and Water ? Marine Fisheries
El Air [A Coastal Management [I Water Planning
? Fayetteville
? Water
? Water Resources ? Environmental Health
? Mooresville ?Groundwater kwildlife ?Solid Waste Management
? Raleigh ? Land Quality Engineer ? Forest Resources ? Radiation Protection
hi
t
? W ? Recreational Consultant ? Land Resources ? David Foster
on
ng
as ? Coastal management Consultant ? Parks and Recreation ? Other (specify)
? Wilmington ?Others Environmental Management
El Winston-Salem PW3 Monica Swihart
Manager Sign-Off/Region: Date: In-House Reviewer/Agency:
Response (check all applicable)
Regional Office response to be compiled and completed by Regional Manager
? No objection to project as proposed
? No Comment
? Insufficient information to complete review
? Approve
? Permit(s) needed (permit files have been checked)
? Recommended for further development with recommendations for
strengthening (comments attached)
? Recommended for further development if specific & substantive
changes incorporated by funding agency (comments
attached/authority(ies) cited)
In-House Reviewer complete individual response.
? Not recommended for further development for reasons
stated in attached comments (authority(ies) cited)
? Applicant has been contacted
? Applicant has not been contacted
? Project Controversial (comments attached)
? Consistency Statement needed (comments attached)
? Consistency Statement not needed
? Full EIS must be required under the provisions of
NEPA and SEPA
? Other (specify and attach comments)
RETURN TO:
Melba McGee
PS 104
Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs
9& -67it?'
Roanoke Rapids
SR 1426 (Bolling Road/Fifth Street)
From SR 1400 (West Tenth Street) to NC 48 (Roanoke Avenue)
Halifax County
Federal Aid Project No. STP-1426(1)
State Project No. 8.2300601
TIP No. U-1007
Aministrative Action
Finding of No Significant Impact
U. S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
and
N. C. Department of Transportation
Submitted pursuant to 42 U. S. C. 4332(2)(C)
3-V-9o? 4?z?? I
Date H. Fran in Vic P. E., Manager
` Planning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT
t
3?
.14?2, /" ZJ';' &'!?"
D
ate N Tc s L. Giraf,-P.-
., Division Administrator
Fede l Highway Administration, FHWA
Roanoke Rapids
SR 1426 (Bolling Road/Fifth Street)
From SR 1400 (West Tenth Street) to NC 48 (Roanoke Avenue)
Halifax County
Federal Aid Project No. STP-1426(1)
State Project No. 8.2300601
TIP No. U-1007
Aministrative Action
Finding of No Significant Impact
March, 1996
Documentation prepared in Planning and Environmental Branch by:
CA Ot
S. Eric Mi iT-`ff P. SEAL
? 19791
Project Planning Engineer '
J. i son Strou
ject Planning Unit Head
Lubin V. Prevatt, P. E., Assistant Manager,
Planning and Environmental Branch
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
1. TYPE OF ACTION 1
II. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION 1
III. SUMMARY OF SPECIAL PROJECT COMMITMENTS 2
A. PERMITS 2
B. LANDSCAPING 2
C. BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN COMMITMENTS 2
D. RAILROAD COORDINATION 2
E. UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS AND HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS 2
F. UTILITIES 3
G. SECTION 4(o PROPERTIES 3
H. HISTORIC ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES 4
1. WATER QUALITY 4
J. DESIGN EXCEPTIONS 4
K. RIGHT OF WAY 4
IV. SUMMARY OF BENEFICIAL AND ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACTS 5
V. COORDINATION AND COMMENTS 5
A. CIRCULATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 5
B. COMMENTS RECEIVED ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT 5
C. COMMENTS RECEIVED DURING AND FOLLOWING THE
PUBLIC HEARING 8
VI. REV ISIONS TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 9
A. HISTORIC ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES 9
B. REVISED DESIGN AND CAPACITY ANALYSIS FOR THE
SR 1426/NC48 INTERSECTION 9
C. PARKING 10
D. DESIGN SPEED AND DESIGN EXCEPTION 11
E. SIDEWALKS 11
F. RIGHT OF WAY I 1
PAGE
VII. ONLY PRACTICABLE ALTERNATIVE WETLAND FINDING 11
VIII. BASIS FOR FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT 12
FIGURES
Figure 1 - Vicinity Map
Figure 2 - Central Roanoke Rapids Historic District Boundaries
Figure 3 - Revisions to the Environmental Assessment
Figure 4 - Proposed Lane Configuration at the Intersection of SR 1426 (Fifth
Street) and NC 48 (Roanoke Ave.)
APPENDIX
Comments Received
Public Hearing Notice and Handout
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Prepared by the Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
North Carolina Department of Transportation
in Consultation with
the Federal Highway Administration
TYPE OF ACTION
This is a Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) administrative action, Finding
of No Significant Impact (FONSI).
The FHWA has determined this project will not have any significant impact on the
human environment. This FONSI is based on the Environmental Assessment, which has
been independently evaluated by the FHWA and determined to adequately and accurately
discuss the environmental issues and impacts of the proposed project. The Environmental
Assessment provides sufficient evidence and analysis for determining that an
Environmental Impact Statement is not required. The FHWA takes full responsibility for
the accuracy, scope, and content of the Environmental Assessment.
II. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION
The North Carolina Department of Transportation, Division of Highways,
proposes to widen SR 1426 (Bolling Road/Fifth Street) from SR 1400 (West Tenth
Street) to NC 48 (Roanoke Avenue) in Roanoke Rapids, Halifax County. The project
vicinity is shown in Figure 1.
NCDOT will widen SR 1426 (Bolling Road/Fifth Street) from the existing two
lane section to a three lane section with curb and gutter from SR 1400 (West Tenth
Street) to NC 48 (Roanoke Avenue). The proposed typical section will be 12 meters (40
feet) wide from face to face of curbs. NCDOT will construct two through lanes and a
continuous center left-turn lane. NCDOT will also construct sidewalks on each side of
Bolling/Fifth Street from Pinecrest Avenue to NC 48 (Roanoke Avenue). The completed
project will provide a design speed of approximately 70 km/h (45 mph) outside the
Roanoke Rapids city limits and 60 km/h (35 mph) within the city limits. It will require
an 18.3-meter (60-foot) wide right of way.
2
III. SUMMARY OF SPECIAL PROJECT COMMITMENTS
A. PERMITS
In accordance with provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C.,
1344), NCDOT anticipates that a Nationwide permit No. 14 (minor road crossings) will
be required from the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers for the proposed highway widening.
If the project requires a permit No. 14, a 401 Water Quality Certification will be required
from the Division of Environmental Management, N.C. Department of Environment,
Health, and Natural Resources.
B. LANDSCAPING
NCDOT will fully restore the proposed temporary easement areas at Melody Park,
Rochelle Park, and the Central Roanoke Rapids Historic District to a condition equal to
or better than what existed prior to the project. There are four trees at Melody Park that
the city would like to remain undisturbed during construction. These trees will be marked
on the plan sheets and delineated in the field. The landscaping plans will be coordinated
with the City of Roanoke Rapids, for Melody Park and Rochelle Park, and with SHPO,
for the Central Roanoke Rapids Historic District.
C. BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN COMMITMENTS
NCDOT and the City of Roanoke Rapids will enter into a municipal agreement to
share the cost of constructing new sidewalks on the project. NCDOT will replace the
existing sidewalk at no cost to the city. NCDOT and Roanoke Rapids will share the cost
of the new sidewalk at a ratio of 70% NCDOT and 30% Roanoke Rapids.
The NCDOT office of Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation reviewed the project
and indicated that there does not appear to be any special need for bicycle
accommodations.
D. RAILROAD COORDINATION
The CSX Railroad crosses SR 1426 (Bolling Road/Fifth Street) at grade near
Monroe Street. This crossing will require two cantilever railroad signals with gates. Any
improvements at this railroad crossing will be coordinated with the CSX Railroad.
E. UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
A field reconnaissance survey identified five underground storage tank (UST)
facilities within the project limits. There was evidence of a release of petroleum
hydrocarbons at one site, the Blue Flame Mini Mart No. 6/Citgo Station, located on the
north side of SR 1426 (Bolling Road/Fifth Street) across from Henry Street. Additionally,
consultants were denied access at one other site. Once proposed right of way boundaries
3
are determined and construction plans are available, further assessments will be performed
for the Blue Flame Mini Mart and, as needed, for the site for which access was denied and
forwarded to the Groundwater Section of the N. C. Division of Environmental
Management.
F. UTILITIES
NCDOT expects utility impacts to be moderate on this project. Any relocation of
public utilities along the project will be coordinated with the appropriate utility or local
government.
G. SECTION 4(f) PROPERTIES
There are four Section 4(f) properties in the project area: Melody Park on the
south side of SR 1426 at Cedar Street, Rochelle Park on the north side of SR 1426 at
Cedar Street, the Bibb Company office building on the southeast corner of the intersection
of SR 1426 and Jackson Street, and the Central Roanoke Rapids Historic District located
along both sides of SR 1426 at the project's eastern terminus. The Central Roanoke
Rapids Historic District was discovered after the completion of the Environmental
Assessment and was not addressed in that document.
No additional right of way will be required from these resources to accommodate
the proposed improvements to SR 1426; however, the project will require temporary
construction easements at Melody Park, Rochelle Park, and the Central Roanoke Rapids
Historic District. These easements will not last the duration of construction of the project.
There will be no transfer of ownership of the land. The scope of work in these easements
will be minor. The easements will not cause permanent adverse physical impacts, or
interfere with the activities or purposes of either park or the district. NCDOT will fully
restore each easement area to a condition equal to or better than what existed prior to the
project. There are four trees at Melody Park that the City of Roanoke Rapids would like
to remain undisturbed during construction. These trees will be marked on the plan sheets
and delineated in the field. As specified in 23 CFR 771.135, the temporary easements will
not constitute a use of property from either park or the historic district within the meaning
of Section 4(f), and a Section 4(f) Evaluation is not required. A letter from the City of
Roanoke Rapids is included on page A-19 of the appendix which documents their
agreement for use of temporary easements at Melody and Rochelle Parks. The State
Historic Preservation Officer also agrees with the use of temporary construction
easements through the Central Roanoke Rapids Historic District, and a letter documenting
the agreement is on page A-16 (a) of the appendix.
No additional right of way or temporary or permanent easement will be required at
the Bibb office. Therefore, there will not be a use of this property within the meaning of
Section 4 (f).
4
H. HISTORIC ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES
The Bibb Company Division Office, located at the southeast corner of SR 1426
and Jackson Street, and the Central Roanoke Rapids Historic District, located at the
project's eastern terminus, are eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic
Places. The State Historic Preservation Officer agrees with NCDOT that the proposed
improvements will have no effect on these historic architectural resources. A signed
concurrence form stating the project will have no effect on the Bibb Company Division
Office is included in the Environmental Assessment. A concurrence form stating the
project will have no effect on the Central Roanoke Rapids Historic District is included on
page A-16(b) of the appendix. A description of the Bibb Company Division Office is
included in the Environmental Assessment. A description of the Central Roanoke Rapids
Historic District and its contributing properties located in the project vicinity is included in
Section V.B. of this report within the section entitled "N.C. Department of Cultural
Resources". The district is shown in Figure 2.
WATER QUALITY
Hazardous spill catch basins will be installed on the project. The location of the
catch basins will be decided during the final design. NCDOT will implement Best
Management Practices for High Quality Waters to minimize impacts to water quality.
Special consideration will be given in final design to ensure that appropriate measures are
taken to preserve and maintain the high water quality in the critical intake area. Erosion
and sedimentation control measures appropriate for high quality water areas will be
specified, installed, and properly maintained during project construction.
DESIGN EXCEPTIONS
The proposed design speed is 80 km/h (49.71 mph) from SR 1400 to Pinecrest
Avenue (city limits) and 65 km/h (46.6 mph) from Pinecrest Avenue to NC 48. Design
exceptions to the proposed design speeds will be required at two locations, in the vicinity
of SR 1400 and in the vicinity of the Seaboard Coastline Railroad crossing near Monroe
Street. The design exception process will be completed during final design.
K. RIGHT OF WAY
Encroachment agreements will be prepared to allow two sheds to remain within
NCDOT's right of way limits. One shed is associated with the Branch property, located
along the north side of SR 1426 just east of Madison Street, and the other is associated
with the Brown property, located in the southwest corner of the SR 1426/NC 48
intersection.
5
IV. SUMMARY OF BENEFICIAL AND ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACTS
The proposed improvements will allow more efficient vehicle operation and
reduced travel times. This will result in road user cost savings. Automobile and pedestrian
traffic safety will be enhanced. Access to homes, businesses, and public facilities will be
improved. The project will improve the aesthetics of the roadway corridor.
Approximately 0.2 hectare (0.4 acre) of additional right of way will be required.
In addition, temporary easements will be required during construction. No residential or
business relocations will occur as a result of the project. Impacts to wetlands will be
minor. Protected species will not be impacted by the project.
V. COORDINATION AND COMMENTS
A. CIRCULATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
The Environmental Assessment was approved by the Division of Highways and the
FHWA on August 31, 1995. The approved Environmental Assessment was circulated to
the following federal, state, and local agencies for review and comments. An asterisk (*)
indicates a written response was received from the agency. Copies of the correspondence
received are included in the Appendix of this document.
* U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Federal Aviation Administration
* N.C. Department of Administration - State Clearinghouse
* N.C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources -
* - Division of Environmental Management
* - N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission
- Raleigh Regional Office
- Division of Forest Resources
* N.C. Department of Cultural Resources
N.C. Department of Public Instruction
* City of Roanoke Rapids
B. COMMENTS RECEIVED ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
N.C.D.E.1-I.N.R. - Division of Environmental Management
Comment - "DOT states that the Hydraulics Unit will review the feasibility of installing
the [hazardous spill] catch basins during final design. DEM will need to know whether the
catch basins will be installed at the FONSI stage as that information is important to
DEM's review and concurrence with a FONSI."
6
Response - NCDOT will install hazardous spill catch basins on the project. The location
of the catch basins will be decided during final design.
N,C. D.E.H.N.R. - N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission
Comment - "We request that NCDOT continue efforts to minimize impacts to the
streams crossed by the project and enforce NCDOT Best Management Practices."
Response - NCDOT will implement Best Management Practices for High Quality Waters
to minimize impacts at stream crossings.
N.C. Department of Cultural Resources
Comment - "in our April 6, 1995 letter to the Federal Highway Administration, we
recommended further consultation regarding eligibility and effects for properties not fully
evaluated in the survey report. We will comment on the EA once we have received
additional information about these properties."
Response - The April 6, 1995 letter (see page A-13 of the Appendix) from SHPO to the
FWHA refers to four properties (properties # 1, 2, 4, and 5) for which SHPO needs
dditional information in order determine their eligibility for inclusion in the National
Register of Historic Places.
The property referred to as #5 is the Roanoke Mills Village Historic District.
After evaluation of NCDOT's and FHWA's analysis of this resource, SHPO concurred
with NCDOT's determination that this property is not eligible for the National Register
(see concurrence letter on page A-11 of the Appendix).
The properties referred to as #1 (First Presbyterian Church), #2 (A. E. Akers
House), and # 4 (J. M. Jackson House) are located within the boundaries of the Central
Roanoke Rapids Historic District, which was determined eligible for the National Register
of Historic Places on March 2, 1993. SHPO considers properties 1, 2, and 4 to be
contributing elements within that district. The boundaries of the district and the location
of the three properties are shown in Figure 2.
NCDOT has taken the following measures to ensure the proposed improvements
will have no effect on the three properties contributing to the Central Roanoke Rapids
Historic District:
I) No additional right of way will be acquired from the three properties. Up to
ten feet of temporary construction easements, however, will be required.
2) The storage shed located on the J. M. Jackson House property is sitting within
NCDOT's existing right of way for SR 1426 (Bolling Road/Fifth Street). NCDOT
will leave the storage shed in place during and after construction so that it will not
be impacted.
7
3) The storage shed located on the A.E. Akers House is also sitting within NCDOT's
existing right of way for SR 1426. NCDOT will leave the storage shed in place
during and after construction so that it will not be impacted.
4) NCDOT has eliminated the proposed right turn lane along eastbound SR 1426 at
the intersection of SR 1426 and NC 48 (Roanoke Avenue), which was proposed in
the Environmental Assessment. This previously proposed right turn lane would
have been located adjacent to the A.E. Akers House property and would have
required additional right of way from that property. Since the right turn lane is no
longer proposed, no additional right of way will be required from that property.
5) A right turn lane is recommended along the southbound approach of NC 48
at the intersection of NC 48 and SR 1426 and was presented at the public hearing.
That right turn lane is still recommended; however, the alignment will be shifted to
the east so that trees located along the west side of NC 48 will not be impacted
during or following construction.
SHPO has reviewed the proposed design in the vicinity of the Central Roanoke
Rapids Historic District and concurs with NCDOT that the proposed project will have no
effect on the district. A signed concurrence form stating the project will have no effect on
the District is included on page A-16(b) of the appendix.
City of Roanoke Rapids
Comment - "In viewing the plans our staff has expressed concern regarding the impact of
the proposed Bolling Road/Fifth Street intersection improvements on accessibility to our
City cemetery. If Fifth Street is closed to traffic entering it off Bolling Road at the current
intersection, the only access to the cemetery would be via the side streets, namely Waldo,
Jewell, and Whitaker. Each of these streets are very narrow and residential in nature, and
would not be suitable for funeral processions to access the cemetery. Likewise, other
routes to the cemetery would require passing through narrower residential streets. We
would like to request that your office consider alternative improvements to this particular
intersection (Bolling/Fifth Street) that may allow for the continuation of vehicular traffic
onto Fifth Street from Bolling Road. Perhaps a solution exists whereby safety could be
enhanced while at the same time allowing continued traffic flow and access."
Response - The existing intersection of Bolling Road and Fifth Street is a five-leg
intersection with two-lane approaches. The intersection presents serious safety problems,
and should be improved if possible. NCDOT evaluated the proposed design further, and
still believes that the proposed intersection configuration shown at the Public Hearing and
in the Environmental Assessment is the best solution based on operation and safety.
The proposed design will affect the route taken to the cemetery. However, all
routes to the cemetery pass through narrower residential streets, including the existing
Fifth Street route which narrows at Rapids Street. The proposed design would necessitate
8
the use of only one extra block of narrower streets in route to the cemetery if Jewell,
Whitaker, or Harris Streets are used. Therefore, the existing route to the cemetery, via
Fifth Street, does not offer significant advantages over the proposed design in avoiding
use of narrow residential streets.
C. COMMENTS RECEIVED DURING AND FOLLOWING THE PUBLIC
HEARING
Following the circulation of the Environmental Assessment, an open forum public
hearing was held at the Lloyd Andrews City Meeting Hall in Roanoke Rapids on
November 9, 1995. A copy of the public hearing notice and a copy of the handout
presented at the public hearing is shown in the Appendix of this report (pages A-23 to A-
33). Interested citizens were given the opportunity to review preliminary designs of the
project, talk to NCDOT engineers and right of way agents, and make comments
concerning the proposed improvements. Approximately 70 people attended the public
hearing. The following is a list of comments received during and following the public
hearing, along with NCDOT's responses:
Comment - Sidewalk construction should not be part of the proposed improvements to
SR 1426 (Bolling Road/Fifth Street).
Response - The City of Roanoke Rapids has requested that NCDOT include sidewalk
construction as part of the proposed highway improvements. The City has demonstrated
the need for sidewalk construction; therefore, NCDOT has approved the inclusion of new
sidewalks along both sides of SR 1426 within the city limits of Roanoke Rapids, on a cost
sharing basis. If the City chooses not to incorporate sidewalks into the proposed
improvements, then the proposed sidewalk construction will be eliminated from the
project (existing sidewalk will still be replaced). Regardless of whether new sidewalks
are constructed or not, the proposed cross section, which contains a 2.4-meter (8-foot)
grass berm capable of accommodating sidewalks, will not be revised.
Comment - A retaining wall should be erected as part of the proposed improvements at
501 Franklin Street, near the intersection of SR 1426 and Franklin Street, so that the
proposed improvements will not impact landscaping associated with that property.
Response - The possibility of providing a retaining wall at the above property will be
investigated during the final design of the project.
Comment - Owners of the Village Grocery, located along the south side of SR 1426
between Oakley Avenue and Miles Street, are concerned that the proposed single 36-foot
entrance into that business will not be sufficient for handling traffic into and out of the
business and would have a significant impact on access to the business. The owners are
requesting three 36-foot entrances for the Village Grocery and the attached Bolling Road
Laundry.
9
Response - The possibility of providing more than one entrance into the above property
will be investigated during the final design of the project.
Comment - A property owner at 600 Robinson Drive is concerned that a right turn lane
will be constructed to provide access to the proposed school, to be located on the south
side of SR 1426 near Pinecrest Avenue, and will require additional right of way from his
property.
Response - A right turn lane at the above location is not included in the proposed
improvements and will not be constructed under Transportation Improvement Program
(T.I.P.) Project U-1007.
VI. REVISIONS TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
A. HISTORIC ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES
The Central Roanoke Rapids Historic District, which was determined eligible for
inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places on March 2, 1993, is located at the
eastern project terminus (see Figure 2). The District was discovered after the completion
of the Environmental Assessment and was not addressed in that document.
NCDOT coordinated with SHPO to ensure that the proposed project will have no
effect on the District. Refer to Section V.B. under comments received from the N. C.
Department of Cultural Resources for a listing of the properties in the project area
contributing to the District and for a description of the measures to be taken to ensure that
the proposed improvements will not affect the District. SHPO has agreed with NCDOT
that the proposed improvements will have no effect on the Central Roanoke Rapids
Historic District. A signed concurrence form is included on page A-16(b) of the appendix.
B. REVISED DESIGN AND CAPACITY ANALYSIS FOR THE SR 1426/
NC 48 INTERSECTION
The proposed design of the intersection of SR 1426 and NC 48 presented in the
EA and at the public hearing has been revised in order to minimize impacts to the Central
Roanoke Rapids Historic District. See Figure 3 for revisions to the Environmental
Assessment.
In the EA and at the public hearing it was reported that a right turn lane will be
added along eastbound SR 1426 at its intersection with NC 48. This design would have
required the acquisition of additional right of way from the A. E. Akers House, a property
which contributes to the historic district. In order not to impact this historic property, the
proposed right turn lane has been eliminated.
1.0
In the EA , it was reported that the level of service of the SR 1426 (Fifth
Street)/NC 48 (Roanoke Avenue) intersection could be improved by adding an exclusive
right turn lane on southbound NC 48. However, improvements to NC 48 were considered
outside the scope of project U-1007 and were not recommended. After further
evaluation, NCDOT now recommends providing an exclusive right turn lane along
southbound NC 48. Consequently, the right turn lane was presented at the public hearing
as part of the proposed improvements. No additional right of way or construction
easements will be required for the construction of the right turn lane. Adequate pavement
width exists to allow restriping of NC 48 to accommodate a right turn lane. The
alignment of NC 48 will be shifted to the east so that trees located along the west side of
NC 48 will not be impacted due to the proposed right turn lane; however, street parking
along a portion of both sides of NC 48 will be eliminated to allow room for the extra right
turn lane.
The proposed SR 1426/NC 48 intersection design now consists of one shared
through/right turn lane and an exclusive left turn lane along both eastbound and
westbound SR 1426; one through lane, one left turn lane, and one right turn lane along
southbound NC 48; and one shared through/right turn lane and one exclusive left turn lane
along northbound NC 48. The proposed lane configuration at this intersection is shown in
Figure 4. Without an exclusive right turn lane along eastbound SR 1426, traffic operation
for that movement will be strained (LOS E) in the year 2018. With the proposed
improvements and optimum signal timing, the entire intersection will operate at LOS C in
the year 2018.
The addition of a right turn lane along eastbound SR 1426 at its intersection with
NC 48 would improve the operation of the right turn movement to LOS C in the design
year 2018. Also, the entire intersection would operate at LOS C in the design year. The
addition of a right turn lane for this movement would, however, affect the historic A. E.
Akers house, as explained above, and is not recommended.
C. PARKING
As discussed above, the proposed improvements include restriping southbound
NC 48 at its intersection with SR 1426 to accommodate an exclusive right turn lane. The
right turn lane is needed in order to adequately accommodate the heavy right turn
movement from NC 48 onto SR 1426. Restriping NC 48 will impact parking along both
sides of the northern leg of NC 48 at the NC 48/SR 1426 intersection for a length of
approximately 100 meters (328 feet) to the north of the intersection. Approximately 20
parking spaces will be eliminated. Street parking will continue to be allowed along the
southern leg of NC 48 and along the eastern leg of SR 1426 at the NC 48/SR 1426
intersection. Also, parking will continue to be allowed along the northern leg of NC 48,
north of the 100-meter (328 feet) restriped area.
11
D. DESIGN SPEED AND DESIGN EXCEPTIONS
In the Environmental Assessment it was reported that the project will provide a
design speed of approximately 70 km/h (45 mph) from SR 1400 to Pinecrest Avenue (city
limits) and 60 km/h (35 mph) from Pinecrest Avenue to NC 48. In addition, it was
reported that NCDOT expects no design exceptions will be required for the project.
After further design studies, NCDOT now proposes a design speed of
80 km/h (49.71 mph) from SR 1400 to Pinecrest Avenue (city limits) and
65 km/h (46.6 mph) from Pinecrest Avenue to NC 48.
The above design speeds cannot be met at two locations along the project, in the
vicinity of SR 1400 and in the vicinity of Seaboard Coastline Railroad crossing near
Monroe Street. Design exceptions will be required at those locations.
E. SIDEWALKS
In the Environmental Assessment, it was reported that new sidewalks will be
included on the berm area from Pinecrest Avenue to Monroe Street on the south side of
SR 1426. After further design studies, NCDOT now proposes to construct sidewalk from
Robinson Road (SR 1552) to Monroe Street along the south side of SR 1426. The
approximately 122-meter (400-foot) sidewalk extension is needed in order to terminate
the sidewalk at an intersecting road (Robinson Road) instead of in the middle of a
property as was previously proposed (Pinecrest Avenue intersects SR 1426 on the north
side only).
F. RIGHT OF WAY
Two existing storage sheds are presently located within NCDOT's existing right of
way for SR 1426. One shed is associated with the Branch property located on the north
side of SR 1426 approximately 92 meters (300 feet) east of Madison Street. The other
shed is associated with the Brown property located in the southwest corner of the SR
1426/NC 48 intersection.
The two sheds are included in the Central Roanoke Rapids Historic District, and
are contributing elements to the district. In order to minimize impacts to the district,
NCDOT will leave the two sheds intact and at their present location within NCDOT's
right of way for SR 1426. An encroachment agreement will be prepared allowing the
sheds to remain within NCDOT right of way.
VII. ONLY PRACTICABLE ALTERNATIVE WETLAND FINDING
Impacts to wetlands due to the proposed improvements will be minor, and it is
anticipated that a Nationwide Permit # 14 (minor road crossings) will be applicable. It has
12
been determined there is no practicable alternative to the proposed construction in
wetlands and that the proposed action includes all practicable measures to minimize harm
to wetlands which may result from such use.
VIII. BASIS FOR FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Based upon a study of the proposed project documented in the Environmental
Assessment, and upon comments received from federal, state, and local agencies and the
public, it is the finding of the North Carolina Department of Transportation that this
project will not have a significant adverse impact upon the human or natural environment.
Therefore, an environmental impact statement will not be required.
SEM/tp
IV
I
k l
1

t
?
6
Littleton Oa0 a R7 id'
3 aavill 3 e

4 ? 6 ® 5 No
Airhe 1 Halifax
40
NORTH CAROLINA » o
? BnnMlewdle 3
9ryam
i Heat Aavdla
Holliat`r 5 f C, Tillery
301 2 5 I t
Ringwood H A L I F 5
5 1 t 6
Glenvia?iv 2 5 Son Hill
Enfield 10 258
' 0 Scotland Neca

?0? / ,
` `
I? - WLe,
'nee P

RAPIDS 6 P.
1

U f
U-1007
SX
Bo1Urp ,? r? ?,r ? ? A ? r `g
e 2.0 l ROANOKE
RA
14C? PIDS
POP. 15,939

ROSEMARY
(UNINC.) J' N p 25

4
.7 3.9 1- I I
158 ,
?'a 1
90

?? 1432 w . _ 4
2.0 \
14 Halifax , 73
i" County `iso
Airport 125
?. 8 I
1430 1434 1
r 1
3 •5 \ L%
903 ? - -
10 •W 1730 tJ
1627
1?1 I ? -- , ?oo
N
903 c?
1210
North Carolina Department Of

tea! Transportation
Planning & Environmental Branch
ROANOKE RAPIDS
SR 1426 FROM SR 1400 TO NC 48
HALIFAX COUNTY
T.I.P. NO. U-1007
0 km 1.6 km 3.2
i
- a I
gure 1
F
0 miles 1.0 miles 2.0
"J (n CC
pRtN % er,..
/ z W p Q
Ell:
OR. N vnrelrltn ___ I Jl __- --J C a p t? C7
0 LL
U) U,
901
F- p
IJAI_CIGI+ L;- I I?-r ??= - - o Z O C7 to
s 'r z Q pC p o
u F. a, F„ is a 0 CC (n -
ulRoi
_-
z w
_ -1n y u J II
R!-iinL??-- W - " ; GI O OG .? CY F- X
=T_? n ?? _ Z F A 0. Oa Z W
/? •/?
? 1 f.J 1? J / olTl _..1? W I- Q
-II V111_I Inl _=-L_ 'r ll._ W -?1_- -l Id I.
I ? I ll
All
L. +- r w - -- - ti ' n. - --- - c ..
AV I'
l._____._. _
tl: (? ( y OKL
1 I,- ? IJONJ
_
y/Z 11 fn
ll- ? <U
UN `` V /\ f \
kit
--- - .. J_I`" ? m _? ?? _ " _ _ {ter. 4
- 2111?klll
," ci nuI'_oIa
??II ?p/14
0 lit ?!?s
C- ?? No
I- W r
tanOtSOn.??=__ - Inotatlo L•--I_
T ?I?•-J ???r1 ` ] 1 11'1 W R t T- I?-- = ? ? ?- •
F. rJR? a 1
It r
a: V _ _ I O f•f(ArIKLIN '-
?? VAWCE... 1111. I'sR API r: L II J IY/ ????L! 1? -I 6? ST,
.-i I?---
°. u: :c m f ? .-JI_--_ = - ? 1?1 ?ii rr? ?I CI_I?-?-_ .--- _--__ _ I__=-._-__•--? 7. n. m ?.' _ ._- ---
7:1 F-- L?
00,
fl:
a n ?= ==I- -- - • ?'
]: E•'? :T. - La I /' I u_) \'ItLSOIJ .J l_-. U ?.)
Ill (, un- rota
n
? .I -) ??. hr•r '; t. i .l. , "I ('.I t vt'1
I I 11 IVNH l? -
t"o
SfNI
-_ __? tl 11 I.IVM c,S r kill"
I.iJnV \ /? (:\?ii" 7- " r)I). I t\IC\
\\0 M
r - I,InM ??t UI _:?
it L
r?
\ Q /tJl? ii,t\)
000 W
\// 1rP\?\./ S / n _- _..I.s a yt„ 1 tIN„'AVIN in
(1. 0
00
0 (D \ViV InI
loo
'0. Ilt
i
low/
?? / r, °., f..?\Cj-'."t /\? 1 W fir) ? _ ? - - 1 c)?
- - - - - - - - - - - -
Cl)
?V?\ to . I,
01
\
" ? t9 v
U LLI
100
0 Q)
C ? '1 lu U
tY_ Z n.:I: ??i
C',
?
--????? moo-. z ?_? ??
.III . o I?1
1 \?? j y -
1?ti N die CL ?? ll
J JUill
1
01 \AA
CIL-
PROPOSED LANE CONFIGURATION
AT THE INTERSECTION OF
SR 1426 (FIFTH STREET) AND NC 48 (ROANOKE AVE.)
SR 1426 (FIFTH STREET) J

l
z
00
0
D
Z
O
m
D
m
---------------------
N
. At
FIGURE 4
APPENDIX
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS 50'
P.O. BOX 1890
\ WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
March 13, 1996
REPLY TO
ATTENTION OF
Special Studies and 1
Flood Plain Services Section
3
i
Mr. H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
North Carolina Division of Highways
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Vick:
This is in response to your letter of January 31, 1996, requesting our comments
on the Federal Environmental Assessment for Roanoke Rapids, SR 1426 (Bolling
Road/Fifth Street) From SR 1400 (West eo. Tenth
Sto NC 48 tate Project No k8.2300601,
Halifax County, Federal Aid Project
T.I.P. No. U-1007" (Regulatory Branch Action I.D. No. 199602001).
Our comments involve impacts to flood plains and jurisdictional resources, which
include waters, wetlands, and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers projects. The proposed
roadway improvements would not cross any Corps-constructed flood control or
navigation project. Enclosed are our comments on the other issues.
We appreciate the opportunity to comment on this project. If we can be of further
assistance, please contact us.
Sincerely,
C. E. Sh ord, Jr., P.E.
Acting Chief, Engineering and
Planning Division
Enclosure
A-1
-2-
Copy Furnished (with enclosure
and incoming correspondence):
Ms. Stephanie Briggs
Supervisor, Permits Section
Planning and Environmental Branch
North Carolina Division of Highways
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201

A-2
March 13, 1996
Page 1 of 1
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS WILMINGTON DISTRICT, COMMENTS ON:
"Federal Environmental Assessment for Roanoke Rapids, SR 1426 (Bolling Road/Fifth
Street) From SR 1400 (West Tenth Street) to NC 48 (Roanoke Avenue), Halifax
County, Federal Aid Project No. STP-1426(1), State Project No. 8.2300601,
T.I.P. No. U-1007" (Regulatory Branch Action I.D. No. 199602001)
1. FLOOD PLAINS: POC - Mr. Bobby L Willis, Special Studies and Flood Plain
Services Section at [phone]
The proposed project is located in the city of Roanoke Rapids, which is a participant
in the National Flood Insurance Program. From a review of the September 1992
Roanoke Rapids Flood Insurance Rate Map, the section of roadway proposed for
improvements does not appear to be in an identified flood hazard area. This is
confirmed by a review of the pertinent United States Geological Survey topographic
map of the area. Therefore, we agree with the statement contained in the flood hazard
evaluation on page 21 of the Environmental Assessment that there will not be any
significant flood plain involvement associated with this project.
2. WATERS AND WETLANDS: POC - Mr. Eric Alsmever, Raleigh Field Office.
Regulatory Branch at [phone], Extension 23
Review of the project indicates that the proposed work may involve the
discharge of fill material into waters of the United States. Affected water
bodies are unnamed tributaries to the Roanoke River, above headwaters.
Prior Department of the Army permit authorization, pursuant to Section 404
of the Clean Water Act of 1977, as amended, will be required for the discharge
of excavated or fill material into waters and/or wetlands in conjunction with
this project, including the disposal of construction debris. Under our
mitigation policy, impacts to wetlands should first be avoided or minimized.
We will then consider compensation or mitigation for unavoidable impacts.
When final plans are completed, including the extent and location of any work
within waters of the United States and wetlands, our Regulatory Branch would
appreciate the opportunity to review these plans for a project-specific
determination of Department of the Army permit requirements. It is probable,
if the impacts from the proposed project are minor, that the work could be
authorized under one or more nationwide or regional general permits.
Questions or comments pertaining to permits may be directed to Mr. Alsmeyer.
A-3
?? ?? u1 Z
NORTH CAROLINA STATE CLEAR1N6hUW c
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION
116 WEST JONES STREET
,i, RALEIGH NORTH CAROLINA 27603-8003
I j, _.
10-25-95 OCT 2 f 195 ':
L
- 5L,
0712
IN GOVERNMENTAL REVIEW COMMENTS
' f
MAILED TO FROM
N-C- DEPT- OF TRAINSPORTATION MRS. CHRYS BAGGETT
WHIT WEBB DIRECTOR
PROGRAM DEV- BRANCH N C STATE CLEARINGHOUSE _
TRANSPORTATION BLDG./INTER-OFF .'.vPROJECT DESCRIPTION eMI?
C?
ENV. ASSESS- - PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS TO SR 1426 (BOLLING RD-/FIFTH
Si-) FFtUM SR 1400 TO NC 48 IN ROANCKE RAPIDS TIP #U-1007
S:,I NC 95-=422G0232 PROGRAM TITLE - ENV- ASSESS-
THE A30VE PROJECT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO THE NORTH CAROLINA
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS- AS A RESULT CF THE REVIEW THE FOLLOWING
IS SUbM1TtED ( ) NO COMMENTS WERE RECEIVED
( X) COMMENTS ATTACHED
SHOULD YOU HAVE ANY CUESTIONSi PLEASE CALL THIS OFFICE [phone]-
v
C-C- RZiGION L
v EF
opt 31
?? Er1viF°N
A-5
/..
State pf North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources gjtr)?;l
Legislative & Intergovernmental Affairs James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor ??
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary IDEF-HNF;Z-
Henry M. Lancaster II, Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Chrys Baggett
FROM: Melba McGee
RE: 96-0232 EA for SR 1426 Widening, Halifax County
DATE: October 23,1995
The Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources has reviewed the proposed
project.
The Division of Environmental Management does not concur with this document because
NCDOT has not committed to use hazardous spill catch basins. The NCDOT is encouraged to
continue coordinating with the Division of Environmental Management prior to circulating the '
final document. This will help avoid unnecessary delays during the permit process..
Thank you for the opportunity to respond.

RECEIVED
OCT 2 5 1995
N1C, STATE CLEARINGHOUSc
A-6
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 2761 1-7687 Telephone [phone]
An EGucl Opportunity AMrmoNe Action Employer 50 o recycled/ 10% post-consumer pcper
State of-Norfh-Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes. Secretary
A. Preston Howard. Jr., P.E.. Director
UEHNF=t
October 3, 1995
MEMORANDUM '
To: Melba McGee
Through: John Domey
From: Eric Galamb 1
Subject: EA for SR 1426 Widening)
Halifax County I
State Project DOT No. 8.300601, TIP #U-1007
EHNR # 96-0232, DEM NP. 11076
The subject document has been revieWIed by this office. The Division of
Environmental Management Is responsible for the issuance of the Section 401 Water
Quality Certification for activities which impact of waters of the state including
wetlands. The document states that nQ including wetlands will be impacted but three
streams will be Impacted. The following comments are based on a review of the EA
document:
A) DEM acknowledges that DOT w l utilize high quality soil and erosion control
measures since the Roanoke RiYer at this location is in a water supply critical
area. During the March 1994 scoping meeting for this project: DEM requested
that DOT use hazardous spill catch basins to protect the existing water use.
DEM met with DOT in May 1996 to develop a policy for hazardous spill catch
basins. It was decided that the basins would be installed for streams that are
within, a 112 mile of the water supply critical area. DEM also requested,that the
location of the basins be stated in the environmental documents. DOT states
that the Hydraulics Unit will review the feasibility of installing the catch basins
during final design. DEM will need to know whether the catch basins will be
installed at the FONSI stagge as hat information is Important to OEM's review
and concurrence with a FONSI.
DEM does not.concur with the document due to the unresolved water issue described
above. DOT is reminded that endorsement of an EA by DEM would not preclude the
denial of a 401 Certification upon application if wetland or water impacts have not
been avoided and minimized, to the makimum extent practicable.
Questions regarding the 401 Certification should be directed to Eric Galamb (733-
1786) in OEM's Water Quality Environmental Sciences Branch.
cc: Wayne Fedora, DOT
Raleigh COE
Monica Swihart
sr1426.ea
A-7
P.O. Box 29535, Rdeigh. North CgfOQna 27626.0535 Teiephone 919-733-7015 FAX [phone]
r
Aft EQud. Opportunity Affirmative Actlon Employer =%racyc:ed/ 10'1. post-eonaxner papor
' eResources Commission
North rnrnurawfl
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba Mcgee
Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs
FROM: David Cox, Highway Project Co ..?a,.torJ
Habitat Conservation Program ??o'+••J
DATE: October 9, 1995
SUBJECT: North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
Environmental Assessment (EA) for SR 1426 (Bolling
from SR 1400 (West
• Road/Fifth Street) improvements,
Tenth Street) to NC 48 (Roanoke Avenue) ' Halifax oject
County, North Carolina. TIP No.
No. 96-0232.
Staff biologists with the N. C Wildlife
have reviewed the subject EA and are
in the project area. The purpose of this review was to assess
project impacts to fish and wildlife resources. Our comments are
provided in accordance with certain provisions of the Natioislh nal
Environmental Policy Act (42 U,S.C. 4332(2)(c)) and the F and
Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C.
661-667d)
NCDOT proposes to widen existing g. from SR 1400 tooNCa48s tThe
three-lane, curb and gutter
project length is approximately 2.4 miles,,, No wetland impacts
are anticipated.
We support NCDOT in the decision to improve existing
facilities rather that to construct new roadways. Improving
A-9
Memorandum
2
October 9, 1995
existing roadways avoids new stream and wetland crossings, does
not further fragment wildlife habitat, and does not promote
secondary development.
We feel the EA adequately addresses impacts to wildlife and
fisheries resources. Surface water impacts will likely be
authorized under a..nationwide "404" permit.
Due to the limited scope of the project and the environmental
commitments outlined in the document, we concur with this EA and
anticipate concurrence with the upcoming Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI). we request that NCDOT continue
efforts to minimize impacts to the streams crossed by the project
and enforce NCDOT Best Management Practices.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this EA. If we
can be of any further assistance please call me at (919) 528-
9886.
CC: Howard Hall, U.S
Fish and Wildlife Service, Raleigh

A-10

y
a7'?
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
November 13, 1995
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Improvements to SR 1426 from SR 1400 to NC
48, Halifax County, U-1007, Federal Aid Project
STP-1426(1), State Project 8.2300601

?ED

N1Nu u -
? Iv Dear Mr. Graf:
On November 2, 1995, members of our staff met with a representative of the
North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) for a photograph review
session concerning the above project. The goal of the meeting was to clarify the
National Register eligibility of four properties within the project's area of potential
effect.
We have determined that First Presbyterian Church (#1), the A. E. Akers House
(#2), and the J. M. Jackson House (#4) are located within the boundaries of the
Central Roanoke Rapids Historic District, which was determined to be eligible for
the National Register of Historic Places on March 2, 1993. We consider the three
properties to be contributing elements within that district. We regret not having
identified this district earlier, but our file reorganization, indexing, and GIS mapping
project has not yet begun for Halifax County.
After reviewing our survey files and consulting with the principal investigator for
the 1990 survey of Roanoke Rapids, we concur with NCDOT's determination that
the Roanoke Mills Village Historic District (#5) is not eligible for the National
Register.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations
for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
A-11
Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
109 East Jones Street - Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807
Nicholas L. Graf
November 13, 1995, Page 2
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental
review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
Sincerely,
I'Da id Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
cc: H. F. Vick
B. Church

A-12
U

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, secretary
April 6, 1995
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Historic Structures Survey Report fo•r SR 1426
from SR 1400 to NC 48, Halifax County, U-1007,
Federal Aid Project No. STP-1426(1), State Project
No. 8.2300601, ER 95-8559
Dear Mr. Graf:
ocr 1995
<9 r^''L
Thank you for your letter of March 2, 1995, transmitting the historic structures
survey report by Scott Owen concerning the above project.
For purposes of compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act, we concur that the following property is eligible for the National Register of
Historic Places under the criterion cited:
Roanoke Mills Plant #2 Office (property #3). Criterion C--This professionally L
designed office building is an excellent example of the Colonial Revival style,J)
and retains a high degree of integrity. We believe the sidewalk provides a
distinct, visual demarkation between the street and the historic property,
and concur with the boundaries proposed in the report.
The following properties are determined not eligible for listing in the National
Register of Historic Places:
Roanoke Mills Plant #2 (property #6). This mill complex lacks integrity of
design and materials because it has been severely altered.
Properties #7-23. These properties lack special historical or architectural
significance.
Our notes from the December 8, 1994 meeting regarding this project differ from
the meeting summary included in the report. At that,ineeting, we agreed that
properties located west of the railroad tracks (properties #7-23) did not appear to
be eligible and would not need further evaluation in the report. We did not offer
an opinion about the eligibility of properties #1, 2, 4, or 5.
A-13
Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
109 East Jonas Street - Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807
Nicholas L. Graf
April 6, 1995, Page 2
We did state that the project would have no effect on the Roanoke Mills Village
Historic District (property #5) if it were determined eligible. For the purposes of
this project we need photographs of each house in the mill village that fronts on
SR 1426 and a few additional representative photos from the rest of the mill
village. Because the area of potential effect for the Mill Village is limited, the
boundaries beyond SR 1426 do not need additional work. However, with only one
photograph of representative housing for a multi-block area we cannot make a
final evaluation of the village as a whole.
The report in general meets our office's guidelines and those of the Secretary of
the Interior.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
rSincerely,
David Brook
Deputy State Historic
DB:slw
cc: H. F. Vick
B. Church
bc: 4z;-)-
Brown/Sevin
Eastern Office
County
RF
Preservation Officer

A-14
y M
1
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt. Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
October 18, 1995
Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
.MEMORANDUM
TO: H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager ?
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highvy-ays 1 OCT 199,5
Department of Trans nation,,, ti Z1
FROM: David Brook
Deputy State st reservation Officer
SUBJECT: Improvements to SR 1426 from SR 1400 r
to NC 48, Halifax County, U-1007,
Federal Aid project STP-1426(1), State
Project 8.2300601, 96-E-4220-0232
We have received the Environmental Assessment (EA) for the above project from
the State Clearinghouse and would like to comment.
In terms of historic architectural resources, additional properties need to be
addressed before we are able to comment on the EA. In our April 6, 1995 letter to
the Federal Highway Administration, we recommended further consultation
regarding eligibility and effects for properties not fully evaluated in the survey
report. We will comment on the EA once we have received additional information
about these properties.
There are no known archaeological sites within the proposed project area. Based
on our present knowledge of the area, it is unlikely that any archaeological
resources which may be eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic
Places will be affected by the project construction. We, therefore, recommend that
no archaeological investigation be conducted in connection with this project.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations
for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental
review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
DB:slw
Enclosure
V.
cc: State Clearinghouse
N. Graf
B. Church A_15
T. Padgett
109 East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807
? ??A ? . surco
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
March 27, 1996
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Widen SR 1426, Bolling Road, from SR 1400 to NC
48, Halifax County, U-1007, Federal Aid Project STP-
1426(1), State Project 8.2300601
Dear Mr. Graf:
Division of Archives and History
Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
On March 21, 1996, Debbie Bevin of our staff met with representatives of the North
Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) to review preliminary plans for the above
project and determine its effects on the Central Roanoke Rapids Historic District, a property
eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. Based upon the preliminary
plans dated March 5, 1996, we believe that the project will have no effect on the historic
district and have signed the enclosed concurrence form.
We also understand temporary construction easements will be required within the historic
district, that the easements will be restored* to their preconstruction condition at the
completion of the project, and that no large trees or contributing structures are located
within the easements. Based on this information, we have no objection to the acquisition
of temporary construction easements for this undertaking and wish to commend NCDOT
for its efforts to avoid the trees and contributing structures within the historic district.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for
Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the
above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at
919/733-4763.
Sincerely,
"a rook
Deputy State Historic Preservation: Officer
DB:slw
Enclosure
cc: H. F. Vick
B. Church
A-16(A)
109 East Jones Strcet • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2507 1 j33
Federal Aid A -5rP. 10.4 C,) Trp IAr lee., County ` -t4.,
CONCIJRRE:YCE FORM ?-
FOR
ASSESSb)E.YT OF EFFECTS
Brief Project Dntsiptioo
4. LA14ao
On Al..-,.(n u, 111( .reproeoatmesofthe
? North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
_I North Carolina State Historic Preservation Me (SHPO)
Other
reviewed the subject project and agreed
there are no effects an the National Register-pasted property within the project's
res of potemW affect and listed on the reverse.
? there are no efface on the National Register-dipble properties located within the
project's am of potential effect and lined on the reverse.
them is an affect on the National Register-listed property/properties within the
project's area of potential effect The property-properties and the effect(s) are
lined on the reverse. _
there is an effect an the National Register-eligible properry/properties within the
project's area of potential effect. The propey/properties and effect(s) are listed
on therevene
Signed
,- !Y(/«N Lr /t t(
R,17' e)ntative. NCDOTT,, Historic Atehitecttual Resources Section Date
04
FH',YA. for the Division Administrator, or other Federal Agency Data
Representative.SHPO ate
??riyrA f La na-Lro , 312-F tn/
State Historic Preservation Officd- . r V Date
(over)
A-16(B)
Federal Aid r SrP- 14ZC (t) TIP M u-(,o-I County
fol. c
Properties within am of/ ?p?optential drect for which there is m ertct. Indicue Yproperty is
National Registr-lined M) or determined iyn?ed eligible (DE).
ONK p
Properties within area of potential CTe:-. for which there is an effect.. Indicam p ,terry stave (YR
or DE) and describe efse.
Reason(s) why effect is not adverse (if appficable).
Initialed: NCDOT? MVA? SHPO (f
f uuwv ??I ...-. - .- .
RECEIVED
CITY OF ROANOKE RAPIDS
woV 22 I"s

P. O. BOX 38 • ROANOKE RAPIDS, NC 27870 • (919) S3S-2031
November 20, 1995
Mr. L. L. Hendricks
Public Hearing Officer
N. C. Department of Transportation
P. O. Box 25201
Raleigh, N. C.' 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Hendricks,

The City of Roanoke Rapids would like to thank your staff for the work being
undertaken for the Boiling Road improvements project. Please continue to keep us
informed as the project progresses.
In reviewing the plans our staff has expressed concern regarding the impact of the
proposed Bolling Road/Fifth Street intersection improvements on accessibility to
our City cemetery. I've noted on the attached map the location of the cemetery,
just north of Bolling Road and Fifth Street. We are also concerned for the impact
on the wildlife landing as well on Roanoke Rapids Lake.
As you can see, Fifth Street is the major street access to the cemetery, both for
individuals and for funeral processions. Fifth Street is used by all funeral
processions traveling to and from the cemetery. If Fifth Street is closed to traffic
entering it off Bolling Road at the current intersection, the only access to the
cemetery would be via the side streets, namely Waldo, Jewell, and Whitaker. Each
of these streets are very narrow' and residential in nature, and would not be
suit-?hle for funeral precessions t^ •:.?e to p=cac.^.'t.hz cerrete:ry. Lik-awiss, other
routes to the cemetery would require passing through narrower residential streets.
We understand the safety concerns that exist with the current configuration of the
Bolling. Road/Fifth Street intersection. However, we also can foresee additional
access and safety concerns that will result if the intersection is completed as
currently proposed. Perhaps the impact of the street improvements with regard to
the City cemetery and associated traffic needs were not included in the original
analysis.
We would like to request that your office consider alternative improvements to this
particular intersection that may allow for the continuation of vehicular traffic onto
Fifth Street from Bolling Road. Perhaps a solution exists whereby safety could be
enhanced while at the same time allowing continued traffic flow and access.
A-17
Mr. L. L. Hendricks
Page 2
November 20, 1995
Please feel free to contact us if you have any questions or comments. We would
appreciate being kept informed as to the recommendations for improvements at
this intersection.
Again, thanks so much for your involvement.
With kindest regards,
Rick Benton
City Manager
Attachment

A-18
C@j
CITY OF ROANOKE RAPIDS
P. O. BOX 38 • ROANOKE RAPIDS, NC 27870 • [phone]
August 3, 1995
Mr. Wayne Fedora, P. E.
Project Planning Engineer
North Carolina Department of Transportation.
PO Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611-5201
SUBJECT: Temporary Easements for T.I.P. Project No. U-1007
(SR 1426/Bolling Road widening)
Dear Mr. Fedora:
I am writing in response to your letter dated July 7, 1995
regarding the above referenced project. The City of Roanoke
Rapids does agree that the impact of the temporary construction
easements at Rochelle Park and Melody Park are minimal. However,
we prefer that the trees in Melody Park inside and adjacent to
the easement not be disturbed during construction without the
expressed approval of the City in advance. It is our
understanding the encroachment upon the easement is temporary and
the easement will be restored to its pre-construction condition
at the completion of the project. The City continues to support
the timely completion of this project.
Should you have any questions or need additional
information, please feel free to call me at [phone].
Sincerely yours,
Charles B. Archer, AICP
Planning Director
cc: Rick Benton, City Manager
Chris Wicker, Recreation Director
CBA
X:\WPG0\CBARLES\D0T\30LL1NG
A-19
.? I
1 \?
1
r+ ?. f
. ?1 1
1 1
1 / \\ 1
\ 1
1 ;\ ?\ 44
1
\ 1
'. L
/ /• 1?11111? ??-

---_. f-__? 11 MAY I
•M
Yr?
% ••• r
J ? 1
Lis
\ •It
w
Q• C GGf S ?? ? •.'-
• fir.-..
.1
1 13L 1 am
1
du dA I
lyL
1W1 Itt I
VM
Lim
y
1 w••r
1
1 r
1 ?
1w 1 AM 1 1111 / r
am f As
1 / Ltd 1
• 1 ?' 11i1 or,) 1
". 1 Ma tau
` Awk \ 1
WI ?, LW 1 1
IY I!r 1 A_2 •
.1
• ; uy 1 -
.011,.... 1 -
C
ROANOKE
RAPIDS
IM
.M _•I
r. p
r -

NOTICE OF AN OPEN-HOUSE PUBLIC HEARING
ON THE WIDENING. OF BOLLING ROAD/FIFTH STREET (SR 1426)
FROH WEST TENTH STREET (SR 1400) TO ROANOKE AVENUE (NC 48)
Project 8.2300601
U-1007
Halifax county
The North Carolina Department of Transportation will
hold the above open-house public hearing on Thursday,
November 9, 1995 between."the hours of 5:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m.
in the Lloyd Andrews Meeting Hall located at 700 Jackson
Street in Roanoke Rapids. Interested individuals may attend
this hearing at their convenience between the above stated
hours. Division of Highways personnel will be available to
provide information, answer questions, and take comments
regarding this project.
. The proposed project consists of constructing a
multi-lane roadway with curb and gutter from West Tenth
Street to Roanoke Avenue. The existing two-lane section will
be widened to a three-lane roadway with curb and gutter.
Sidewalks are proposed on each side of the project from
Pinecrest Avenue to Roanoke Avenue. The length of the
project is 2.4 miles. Additional right of way will be
required for this project.
Plans setting forth the location and design and a copy
of the environmental document - Environmental Assessment -
are available for public review in the Public Library located
at 319 Roanoke Avenue in Roanoke Rapids.
Anyone desiring additional information may write to:
Mr. L. L. Hendricks, P.O. Box 25201, Raleigh, NC 27611 or
telephone [phone].
NCDOT will provide auxiliary aids and services to
disabled persons who wish to participate in the hearing. To
receive special services, please call Mr. Hendricks at the
above number to give adequate notice prior to the date of the
hearing.
A-23
onto#
ROLLING ROAD/
FIFTH STREET
FROM WEST TENTH STREET
TO NC 48
PROJECT 8.2300601
TIP NO. U-1007
HALIFAX COUNTY
A-25
COMBINED PUBLIC HEARING
LLOYD ANDREWS CITY MEETING HALL
NOVEMBER 9, 1995
iwl
JAMES B. HUNT JR.
GOVERNOR
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P.O. BOX 25201. RALEIGH. N.C 27611-5201 GARLAND B. GARRM JR.
SECRETARY
NOVEMBER 9, 1995
DEAR CITIZEN:
THANK YOU FOR ATTENDING THE OPEN-FORUM PUBLIC HEARING ON THE
PROPOSED WIDENING/IMPROVEMENTS OF BOLLING ROAD FROM WEST TENTH
STREET TO ROANOKE AVENUE. CONTAINED IN THIS HANDOUT PACKAGE IS
INFORMATION ABOUT THE PURPOSE OF THE PROJECT, THE DESIGN, AND
RIGHT OF WAY PROCEDURES. YOU ARE INVITED TO READ THE MATERIAL
TO BECOME ACQUAINTED WITH THE PROPOSED PROJECT.
A DESIGN MAP OF THE PROJECT AND SEVERAL SETS OF PLANS ARE
AVAILABLE FOR YOUR REVIEW. REPRESENTATIVES OF THE DEPARTMENT
OF TRANSPORTATION ARE AVAILABLE TO DISCUSS THE PROJECT AND
ANSWER QUESTIONS ABOUT THE DESIGN. REPRESENTATIVES OF THE
RIGHT OF WAY BRANCH ARE AVAILABLE TO DISCUSS THIS AREA AND TO
ADDRESS YOUR QUESTIONS.
THE PURPOSE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING IS TO SOLICIT YOUR THOUGHTS
ON THE PROPOSED PROJECT. YOU MAY PROVIDE THEM BY USING THE
COMMENT SHEET IN YOUR HANDOUT OR RECORDING THEM ON THE TAPE
RECORDER AVAILABLE FOR THAT PURPOSE. WRITTEN COMMENTS MAY BE
DEPOSITED IN THE DESIGNATED BOX OR MAILED DURING THE NEXT
10 DAYS TO THE ADDRESS PROVIDED. ALL COMMENTS WILL BECOME PART
OF THE PUBLIC RECORD.
r
AGAIN, I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR ATTENDING THE PUBLIC HEARING AND
FOR GIVING US YOUR COMMENTS. A DECISION ON THE PROPOSED
PROJECT WILL BE MADE IN THE NEAR FUTURE.
YOURS TRULY,
3.i.
L. L. HENDRICKS
PUBLIC HEARING OFFICER
A-27
Go)
RO OSE OF PROJECT
The proposed widening/improvements of Bolling Road/Fifth Street will
allow safer and more efficient travel throughout the project area.
Safety will be enhanced by increasing through lanes to standard width
and by separating left turning traffic from the through traffic
stream. These improvements will improve the efficiency of travel by
reducing stops and slow downs due to conflicts between left turning
traffic and through traffic. Pedestrian access and safety will also
be improved by providing sidewalks along the project segment lying
within the city limits.
PURPOSE OF PUBLIC MEETING
Tonight's meeting is one step in the Department of Transportation's
procedure for making you, the public, a part of the planning process.
The Department of Transportation is soliciting your views on the
proposed widening/improvements of Bolling Road/West Fifth Street from
West Tenth Street to Roanoke Avenue (NC 48).
OUR PARTICIPATION
Several representatives of the North Carolina Department of
Transportation are present at this meeting. Any of these people will
be happy to talk with you, explain the design to you, and answer your
questions. Now that the opportunity is here, you are encouraged to
participate by voicing your comments to Department of Transportation
representatives at this meeting, by writing them on the comment sheet
and leaving it with one of the representatives, by mailing them in
during the 10 days following the Public Hearing, or by recording your
statements on the tape recorder available.
Those wishing to submit written material may send it to:
Mr. L. L. Hendricks
NCDOT - DOH
Citizens Participation Unit
P. 0. Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611
Telephone - [phone]
FAX, - [phone]
WHAT T8 ONE WITH THE INFORMATION
All input received through the public involvement process will be
made available for review and consideration by the Administrative and
Engineering staffs of the Division of Highways. The Engineering
staff will review and consider all comments on an individual basis to
determine those that can be effectively incorporated into the final
design.
A-28
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT
The North Carolina Department of Transportation proposes to
widen/improve Bolling Road/West Fifth Street from West Tenth Street
to Roanoke Avenue - a distance of approximately 2.52 miles (4.06
kilometers). The existing highway will be widened from two lanes
with shoulders and ditches to a three-lane roadway with curb and
gutter. The two through-lanes and the proposed center left-turn lane
will each be 12 feet (3.66 meters) wide. Sidewalks 5 feet (1.5
meters) wide are proposed on both sides of the roadway from Robinson
Street to Roanoke Avenue.
The right of way width required to construct this project is 60
feet (18.29 meters). The improvements will follow the existing
roadway alignment and will be constructed within existing right of
way throughout most of the project; however, additional right of way
(approximately 10 feet or 3 meters) will be necessary along the
segment between Miles Street and the beginning of the existing curb
and gutter near Waldo Street. Construction easements will be
required to tie adjacent property into the finished project.
In addition to the widening improvements, left-turn lanes will
be provided for all approaches at the Bolling Road - West Tenth
Street intersection. A right-turn lane will be constructed for the
eastbound approach at the West Fifth Street - Roanoke Avenue
intersection. A raised concrete island is proposed to channel
eastbound West Fifth Street traffic onto northbound Cedar Street.
Traffic from West Fifth Street will be able to access Bolling Road
by using Rapids Street.
Driveway entrances to adjacent properties will be allowed along
the project as no control of access is proposed. The speed limit
along the route is projected to be 35 mph. All roadway intersections
will be at grade. TrafficIptudies conducted during construction of
the project will determine if additional signals are warranted.
Parking will not be permitted along the road.
A-29
`? CNA»I:urm 6 A I- I
?- ?riunamrr
Z a
1
fT. ? [/t. 1TA fIRRAteR ? W ? i
?j? ,Iruugr«« n4w11-°?? ?I iuj'v2
L taR ?.Tw wR Ull t
A-j
LRRA «R,t w I AYC, i "RO 1 NR i S2'T Y Y
:>? f T
JAt,/al III 1?:, - I _? "r i i III
tom'
?I f lA?, RR sT.
in
I -mAnilnn is "to"
I er', ? RI I' l X U 7T b l0l/j A"f OR
I I ?/.er st.
YR««o[ tt.
' M
ITIRRT
IN,IMT I TATIOn ft. T ? fT.
In In
? Iw l:
YIIRC[ ilf '? iw u tt... ? i
¦ ?. .. YAR[t Rt. ??
•1 R,PIR, i}, RA"IMI
T : ?. _ f T
+ JTj
JAY ,711T« M /,«Tlf ' ? ¦•; = La R?
Ja 11' I. ft' _OO ? ra V/, AM Oft.
'EvE' a «D "'
C/ AT lll». `l r
aw I? 1 go- ,t.
?! rtll• O + al ? T IRMIlORJ
Ls ,v1?
laa
1 ele w ? R
i
•/'I Mlt - ? 1• i w PRAT ,t. «h
11«Y..r. '
I` rAM1 ?: al. u A? 1I.
AL an%.Aftn
r1A? a`% ? 11
,. "
/ O MI?RR ` ti O ?R
fell,
?\ ` .1 ?ALaI ll,?? LIM$ t - - - - - -tl I L
\,, \ \ ? T111•i 1 ? ? ?? ? O11 w,ra'
IL-
n
?' , ;*!? rp tQi
? I F- ?\ ?la"T ? Rf y ¦ r
?? z Z • ` x
-cj
1 t `? ? « 71.1+
I ?i?/ M 11 ZAP
we
C w w _'rn?,Il
i It w5 ¦/
00
r Zia,
Al
2 a ?
J y s
CL uj
A- r I . .
C ? ¢ ` awl ¢ ... 7 ~1:..
• ..1 a•' N i
u
?t«s.ea ?U .l (10 7.
r

PROJECT INFORMATION
Length 2.520 Miles (4.056 Kilometers)
Typical Section Three Lanes 12 Feet (3.66 Meters) Wide
With Curb and Gutter; Sidewalks 5 Feet
(1.52 Meters) Wide Within City Limits
Right of Way 60 Feet (18.28 Meters)
-Required
Relocatees Residences - 0
Businesses - 0
Estimated Cost Right of Way $ 1,005,000
Construction 2,900,000
------------
Total $ 3,905,000
Tentative Schedule Right of Way - September, 1996
Construction - May, 1998
RIGHT OF WAY PROCEDURES
After the route is selected and the final design is completed, the
proposed right of way limits will be staked on the ground. Affected
owners of property will be contacted by a Right of Way Agent and a
meeting will be arranged. The agent will explain the plans and the
property owner will be advised as to how the project will affect him.
The agent will inform you of your rights as a property owner.
Professionals who are familiar with real estate values will evaluate
or appraise your property. The evaluations or appraisals will be
reviewed for completeness and accuracy and then a written offer will
be made to you by the Right of Way Agent. The current.market value
of the property at its,highest and best use when it is appraised will
be offered as compensation. The Department of Transportation must:
1) Treat all owners and tenants' equally.
2) Fully explain the owner's rights.
3) Pay just compensation in exchange for property rights.
4) Furnish relocation advisory assistance.
NOTE: PAMPHLETS SUMMARIZING RIGHT OF WAY PROCEDURES ARE AVAILABLE.
ASK THE HEARING MODERATOR FOR COPIES OF THIS DOCUMENT.
A-31
Z
O
_
F
F- 0
W LL!
L!J (n
roc =
r n? LU
v' F-
_ F
F-
O
LL. 0
\ Z
?
d
O im

c ?

0 V
Z W
J Z
J ?
O J

M
N O
d' W
T
Cf)
OC O
cry a:
O
X
a.
N
w
w
K
e
ri
0i
s

W LL

S 1n ¢
W 1=
W Q
us W W
I-- - W
N O
Q

w 1D

?' U.
e
e ^
W e
C '

n
e
i
H
R
W W
t ? W W
m?
N
A-32
n
tl
v
W
W ...
?n
J b
J V
o t°
h`

. n
V
W
F
W ?.
t ?
:3 .4
J V
.e b
O
n ?

t

COMMENT SHEET
Widening of Bolling Road/West Fifth Street
From West Tenth Street to Roanoke Avenue (NC 48)
November 9, 1995
U-1007 Halifax County Project 8.230060
NAME:
ADDRESS:
COMMENTS AND/OR QUESTIONS:
Comments may be mailed to:
L. L. Hendricks, Public Hearing Officer
N. C. Department of Transportation - Division of Highways
Citizens Participation Unit
P. O. Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611
Telephone: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
A-33
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E„ Director
MEMORANDUM
October 3, 1995
A Iq I F
44
ID FE F1
To: Melba McGee
Through: John Dorney v
From: Eric Galamb
Subject: EA for SR 1426 Widening
Halifax County
State Project DOT No. 8.2300601, TIP #U-1007
EHNR # 96-0232, DEM No. 11076
The subject document has been reviewed by this office. The Division of
Environmental Management is responsible for the issuance of the Section 401 Water
Quality Certification for activities which impact of waters of the state including
wetlands. The document states that no including wetlands will be impacted but three
streams will be impacted. The following comments are based on a review of the EA
document:
A) DEM acknowledges that DOT will utilize high quality soil and erosion control
measures since the Roanoke River at this location is in a water supply critical
area. During the March 1994 scoping meeting for this project, DEM requested
that DOT use hazardous spill catch basins to protect the existing water use.
DEM met with DOT in May 1995 to develop a policy for hazardous spill catch
basins. It was decided that the basins would be installed for streams that are
within a 1/2 mile of the water supply critical area. DEM also requested that the
location of the basins be stated in the environmental documents. DOT states
that the Hydraulics Unit will review the feasibility of installing the catch basins
during final design. DEM will need to know whether the catch basins will be
installed at the FONSI stage as that information is important to DEM's review
and concurrence with a FONSI.
DEM does not concur with the document due to the unresolved water issue described
above. DOT is reminded that endorsement of an EA by DEM would not preclude the
denial of a 401 Certification upon application if wetland or water impacts have not
been avoided and minimized to the maximum extent practicable.
Questions regarding the 401 Certification should be directed to Eric Galamb (733-
1786) in DEM's Water Quality Environmental Sciences Branch.
cc: Wayne Fedora, DOT FAXED
Raleigh COE
Monica Swihart OCT 0 .'a 1995
sr1426.ea
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper

Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources RECEIVED
Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs SEP 2 91995 Project located in 7th floor library
Project Review Form I D / _
FNvigoNMENTAL ES
Project Number: County: xn Date: Date Response Due (firm deadline):
teb r I I
This project is being reviewed as Indicated below: 1) A
o iD
Regional Office/Phone Regional Office Area In-House Review
? Asheville ? All R/O Areas ? Soil and Water ? Marine Fisheries
? Fayetteville ? Air ? Coastal Management ? Water Planning
El
Mooresville ? Water El Water Resources ? Environmental Health
El Groundwater Wildlife ? Solid Waste Management
? Raleigh ? Land Quality Engineer Forest Resources ? Radiation Protection
? Washington ? Recreational Consultant ? Land Resources r

? Wllmington
? Coastal Management Consultant

?Others i
Yparks and Recreation 1 et.(sifr? t
?,
'Environmental M
anag
? Winston-Salem PWS Monica Swihart SEP 23 1945
*-MR QUM-M

Manager SI n-Off/Re Ion:
9 9
Date:
In-House Reviewer/Agency:
r
Response (check all applicable)
Regional Office response to be compiled and completed by Regional Manager
? No objection to project as proposed
? No Comment
? Insufficient information to complete review
? Approve
? Permit(s) needed (permit files have been checked)
? Recommended for further development with recommendations for
strengthening (comments attached)
? Recommended for further development if specific & substantive
changes incorporated by funding agency (comments
attached/authority(ies) cited)
In-House Reviewer complete Individual response.
? Not recommended for further development for reasons
stated in attached comments (authority(ies) cited)
?Applicant has been contacted
? Applicant has not been contacted
? Project Controversial (comments attached)
? Consistency Statement needed (comments attached)
? Consistency Statement not needed
? Full EIS must be required under the provisions of
NEPA and SEPA
? Other (specify and attach comments)
ncgumn iu:
Melba McGee
Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs
PSis
'W ' - c_v;? 3'-?
Roanoke Rapids
SR 1426 (Bolling Road/Fifth Street)
From SR 1400 (West Tenth Street) to NC 48 (Roanoke Avenue)
Halifax County
Federal Aid Project No. STP-1426(1)
State Project No. 8.2300601
T.I.P. No. U-1007
Administrative Action
Environmental Assessment
U. S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
and
N. C. Department of Transportation
Submitted Pursuant to 42 U. S. C. 4332(2)(C)
APPROVED:
Dat54 H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
`Planning and Environmental Branch
Datey? Nicholas L. Graf, P.E., Division Administrator
1 Federal Highway Administration
Roanoke Rapids
SR 1426 (Bolling Road/Fifth Street)
From SR 1400 (West Tenth Street) to NC 48 (Roanoke Avenue)
Halifax County
Federal Aid Project No. STP-1426(1)
State Project No. 8.2300601
T.I.P. No. U-1007
Environmental Assessment
August 1995
Documentation Prepared in Planning and Environmental Branch By:
Richard Wayne Fed &a Sr., P.E.
Project Planning Engineer
k IJ 'I? ,.1
s on Stroud
Project Planning Unit Head
V
Lubin V. Prevatt, P.E., Assistant Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
•.•oj?H CARp
313?? 0s
.' ?,f' .
•••? ESSI•'''•.9''••
• SE AI ;?.
$ • 2042 = =
Ol NEtt??,?
., ?qYN •
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PROJECT SUMMARY
1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
II. NEED FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT
A. Project Status and History
B. Project Terminals
C. Existing Conditions
1. Length of Roadway Section Studied
2. Route Classification
3. Existing Cross Section
4. Existing Right of Way
5. Access Control
6. Speed Limits
7. Bridges and Drainage Structures
8. Traffic Data
9. Horizontal and Vertical Curvature
10. Intersecting Roads
11. Degree of Roadside Interference
12. Railroad Crossings
13. School Bus Data
14. Existing Sidewalk
15. Utilities
D. Capacity Analysis
E. Accident Analysis
F. Thoroughfare Plan
G. Benefits to the State, Region, and Community
H. Nearby Airports
1. Conclusion
III. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
PAGE
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
6
6
6
6
A. General Description 6
B. Cost Estimate 6
C. Proposed Typical Section 6
D. Design Speed 7
E. Right of Way 7
F. Access Control 7
G. Intersection Treatment 7
H. Bridges and Other Drainage Structures 7
1. Railroad Crossing Treatment 8
J. Changes in State Highway System 8
K. Permits Required 8
L. Multiple Use of Space 8
M. Bikeways and Sidewalks 8
N. Noise Barriers 9
0. Anticipated Design Exceptions 9
P. Other Proposed Highway Improvements in the Area 9
PAGE
IV. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION 10
A. Recommended Improvements 10
B. Design Alternatives 10
C. Postponement of Proposed Action 10
D. Do Nothing Alternative 11
E. Alternative Modes of Transportation 11
V. SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 11
A. Social Effects 11
1. Land Use and Planning 11
a. Scope of Local Planning Activities 11
b. Existing Land Use 11
c. Future Land Use 12
2. Neighborhood Characteristics 12
3. Public Facilities 13
4. Relocations 13
5. Social Impacts 13
6. Historic and Cultural Resources 13
a. Historic Architectural Resources 13
b. Archaeological Resources 15
B. Section 4(f) Properties 16
C. Economic Effects 16
D. Environmental Effects 17
1. Biological Resources 17
a. Biotic Communities 17
b. Anticipated Impacts to Biotic Communities 18
c. Federally-Protected Species 19
2. Soils 20
3. Wetlands and Permits 21
4. Flood Hazard Evaluation 21
5. Water Resources and Water Quality 21
6. Farmland 22
7. Highway Traffic and Construction Noise Analysis 23
a. Background 23
b. Noise Abatement Criteria 23
c. Ambient Noise Levels 23
d. Procedure for Predicting Future Noise Levels 24
e. Traffic Noise Impact Analysis 25
f. Do Nothing Alternative 25
g. Construction Noise 25
h. Conclusion 25
8. Air Quality Analysis 25
a. Background 25
b. Hydrocarbons and Nitrogen Oxide 26
c. Particulate Matter 26
d. Lead 26
e. Carbon Monoxide 27
f. Burning 28
g. Conclusion 28
PAGE
9. Stream Modification 28
10. Hazardous Materials 28
11. Geotechnical Impacts 29
12. Construction Impacts 29
VI. COMMENTS AND COORDINATION 31
A. Comments Received from Federal, State, and Local Agencies 31
B. Citizens Informational Workshop 31
C. Public Hearing 31
TABLES
Table 1 - Intersection Level of Service 5
Table 2 - Anticipated Impacts to Biotic Communities 19
Table 3 - Federally Protected Species for Halifax County 19
Table 4 - One Hour CO Concentrations 27
FIGURES
Figure IA - General Vicinity Map (shows other T.I.P. projects)
Figure 1B - Project Area Map
Figures 2A-2D - Aerial Mosaic Showing Project
Figure 3A-3B - Photographs of Existing Conditions
Figure 4A - 1998 Projected Traffic Volumes
Figure 4B - 2018 Projected Traffic Volumes
Figure 5 - Thoroughfare Plan
Figure 6 - Proposed Typical Section
Figure 7 - 100-Year Flood Limits
Figure 8 - T.I.P. Projects in Area
APPENDIX
Appendix 1 - Right of Way Abstract and Relocation Information
Appendix 2 - Traffic Noise Analysis Tables and Figures
Appendix 3 - Air Quality Analysis Tables
Appendix 4 - Comments Received from Federal, State, and Local Agencies
Appendix 5 - Citizens Informational Workshop News Release and Handout
Summary
Environmental Assessment
Prepared by
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
North Carolina Department of Transportation
in Consultation with
Federal Highway Administration
1. Type of Action
This is a Federal Highway Administration Action, Environmental Assessment.
2. Additional Information
The following people can be contacted for additional information concerning this
project:
Mr. Nicholas L. Graf, P.E.
Division Administrator, FHWA
Suite 400, 310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601
[phone]
Mr. H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
N.C. Department of Transportation
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
[phone]
3. Summary of Special Proiect Commitments
Special consideration will be given during final hydraulic design to preserve and
maintain the high water quality in the City of Roanoke Rapids water-supply intake critical
area. High Quality Waters erosion and sedimentation control measures will be specified,
installed, and properly maintained during construction. The Hydrualics Unit will review the
feasibility of including hazardous spill basins during final design.
NCDOT will fully restore the proposed temporary easement areas at Melody Park
and Rochelle Park to a condition equal to or better than what existed prior to the project.
There are four trees at Melody Park that the city would like to remain undisturbed during
construction. These trees will be marked on the plan sheets and delineated in the field.
Impacts to these parks are discussed in Section V.B. of this document.
Once proposed right of way is determined and construction plans are available,
Planning and Environmental will request additional hazardous material site assessments for
the Blue Flame Mini Mart No. 6/Citgo Station, located on the north side of SR 1426 (Fifth
Street) across from Henry Street (see Figure 2). One other site may need a preliminary
assessment performed. Once plans are available, the Geotechnical Unit will determine if it
is necessary to complete an assessment of this property. Hazardous materials are discussed
in Section V.D.10. of this report.
NCDOT and the City of Roanoke Rapids will enter into a municipal agreement to
share the cost of constructing new sidewalks on the project. NCDOT will replace the
existing sidewalk at no cost to the city. NCDOT and Roanoake Rapids will share the cost
of the new sidewalk at a ratio of 70% NCDOT and 30% Roanoke Rapids. Proposed
sidewalks are discussed in Section III.M. of this report.
If the current design proposal changes, the Planning and Environmental Branch will
evaluate potential impacts to the city parks and Bibb Company Office, which is considered
eligible for the National Register of Historic Places.
4. Design Exceptions
NCDOT expects no design exceptions will be required for the project.
5. Actions Required by Other Agencies
In accordance with provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C.,
1344), NCDOT anticipates that a Nationwide permit No. 14 (minor road crossings) will be
required from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for the proposed highway widening. If
the project requires a permit No. 14, a 401 Water Quality Certification will be required
from the Division of Environmental Management, N.C. Department of Environment,
Health, and Natural Resources.
6. Description of Action
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to widen
SR 1426 (Bolling Road/Fifth Street) from SR 1400 (West Tenth Street) to NC 48
(Roanoke Avenue) in Roanoke Rapids, Halifax County.
NCDOT will widen SR 1426 (Bolling Road/Fifth Street) from the existing two lane
section to a three lane section with curb and gutter from SR 1400 to NC 48. The proposed
typical section will be 12 meters (40 feet) wide from face to face of curbs. NCDOT will
construct two through lanes and a continuous center left-turn lane. NCDOT will also
construct sidewalk on each side of Bolling Road/Fifth Street from Pinecrest Avenue to NC
48 (Roanoke Avenue). The completed project will provide a design speed of approximately
70 km/h (45 mph) outside the Roanoke Rapids city limits and 60 km/h (35 mph) within the
city limits. It will require an 18.3-meter (60-foot) wide right of way.
7. Summary of Beneficial and Adverse Impacts
The proposed improvements will allow more efficient vehicle operation and reduced
travel times. This will result in road user cost savings. Automobile and pedestrian traffic
safety will be enhanced. Access to homes, businesses, and public facilities will be improved.
The project will improve the aesthetics of the roadway corridor.
Approximately 0.2 hectare (0.4 acre) of additional right of way will be required. In
addition, temporary easements will be required during construction. No residential or
business relocations will occur as a result of the project. No wetlands or protected species
will be impacted by the project.
8. Alternatives Considered
a. Recommended Improvements--NCDOT will widen SR 1426 (Bolling
Road/Fifth Street) from the existing two lane section with shoulder and ditches
ill
(curb and gutter from Rapids Street to NC 48) to a three lane section with
curb and gutter from SR 1400 (West Tenth Street) to NC 48 (Roanoke Avenue)
in Roanoke Rapids (see Figure 2). The proposed typical section will be 12
meters (40 feet) wide from face to face of curbs. It will provide two through
lanes and a continuous center left-turn lane. It will also provide sidewalk on
each side from Pinecrest Avenue to NC 48 (Roanoke Avenue). It will require
18.3 meters (60 feet) of right of way. The completed project will provide a
design speed of approximately 80 km/h (45 mph) from SR 1400 to Pinecrest
Avenue (city limits) and 60 km/h (35 mph) from Pinecrest Avenue to NC 48.
b. Design Alternatives--At the scoping meeting for this project, NCDOT and other
agencies discussed build alternatives in addition to the proposed alternative.
Based on discussion, the participants of that meeting eliminated each additional
build alternative from further consideration. The additional build alternatives are
as follows.
Improving the existing two lanes by widening each to standard width, but
adding no additional lanes or curb and gutter. This alternative would not
substantially reduce right of way impacts. In addition, it would not greatly
improve the safety and efficiency of travel; therefore, it would not meet the
purpose and need of the project. For these reasons, the participants
rejected this alternative.
* Widening SR 1426 (Bolling Road/Fifth Street) to five lanes from SR 1400
to NC 48. This alternative would result in higher construction costs,
increased right of way impacts, and potential impacts to historic properties
and two city parks. NCDOT expects the proposed three lane road to
operate at an acceptable level of service (LOS D or better) in the design
year. For these reasons, the participants rejected the five-lane alternative.
* Widening to five lanes from SR 1400 to Rapids Street and three lanes
from Rapids Street to NC 48. The participants rejected this alternative
due to the extra cost of constructing the five lane section, the increased
right of way impacts, and the difficult transition required to drop from
five lanes to three lanes in the vicinity of intersecting streets.
c. Postponement of Proposed Action--The existing facility exhibits constrained
flow and has a much higher accident rate than the statewide average for similar
roadways. With the projected design year traffic volumes, the facility will
exhibit gridlock conditions in some areas. Postponement of the project would
result in continuing traffic service deterioration as traffic volumes increase.
Therefore, NCDOT does not recommend this alternative.
d. Do Nothing Alternative--This alternative would avoid the limited environmental
impacts anticipated to result from construction of the project. However, this
alternative would not improve the substandard lane widths or improve turning
conditions in the project area. Therefore, it would not improve the safety and
efficiency of traffic flow along SR 1426. For these reasons, NCDOT does not
recommend the Do Nothing Alternative.
e. Alternative Modes of Transportation--No alternative mode of transportation
such as mass transit, HOV lanes, or van pooling or carpooling appears to be a
practical alternative. Highway transportation is the dominant transportation
Iv
mode in the project area, and the project involves widening an existing road.
9. Federal, State, and Local Agencies Contacted at the Beginning of this Study
U.S. Department of the Army--Raleigh District Corps of Engineers
U.S. Department of the Interior--Fish and Wildlife Service
N.C. Department of Administration—State Clearinghouse
N.C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources-
Division of Environmental Management, Division of Forest Resources,
Office of Policy Development, and Wildlife Resources Commission
N.C. Department of Cultural Resources--State Historic Preservation Officer
N.C. Department of Public Instruction
Region L Council of Governments
Halifax County Commissioners
City of Roanoke Rapids--Mayor, City Manager, City Planner, City Schools
Superintendent
10. Basis for Environmental Assessment
On the basis of planning and environmental studies, NCDOT and FHWA anticipate
this project will have no significant detrimental effect on the quality of the human
environment. The proposed project will cause no significant changes in route classification
and land use and is not controversial. Federal, state, and local agencies have reviewed the
project, and raised no objections. Members of the public voiced no major objections to the
project at the Citizens Informational Workshop held 23 August 1994 in Roanoke Rapids.
For these reasons, NCDOT and FHWA conclude an Environmental Assessment applies to
the project.
Environmental Assessment
Prepared by
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
North Carolina Department of Transportation
in Consultation with
Federal Highway Administration
1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to widen SR
1426 (Bolling Road/Fifth Street) from SR 1400 (West Tenth Street) to NC 48 (Roanoke
Avenue) in Roanoke Rapids, Halifax County (see Figures 1, 1A, and 1B). NCDOT
includes this project in the 1996-2002 Transportation Improvement Program (T.I.P.).
NCDOT will widen SR 1426 (Bolling Road/Fifth Street) from the existing two lane
section to a three lane section with curb and gutter from SR 1400 to NC 48 (see Figures 2A
through 2D). The proposed typical section will be 12 meters (40 feet) wide from face to
face of curbs. NCDOT will construct two through lanes and a continuous center left-turn
lane (see Figure 6). NCDOT will also construct sidewalk on each side of Bolling
Road/Fifth Street from Pinecrest Avenue to NC 48 (Roanoke Avenue). The completed
project will provide a design speed of approximately 70 km/h (45 mph) outside the
Roanoke Rapids city limits and 60 km/h (35 mph) within the city limits. It will require an
18.3-meter (60-foot) wide of right of way.
The estimated cost of the project is $3,304,000. The funding shown in the 1996-
2002 T.I.P. is $3,195,000. The cost estimate exceeds the T.I.P. funding by $109,000.
II. NEED FOR PROPOSED PROJECT
A. PROJECT STATUS AND HISTORY
The 1996-2002 NCDOT T.I.P. proposes widening SR 1426 (Bolling Road/Fifth
Street) to a multi-lane curb and gutter facility from SR 1400 (West Tenth Street) to NC 48
(Roanoke Avenue). The current project schedule includes right of way acquisition
beginning in fiscal year 1996 and construction in fiscal year 1998.
The T.I.P. includes total funding of $3,195,000 for the project. The total includes
$495,000 for right of way and $2,700,000 for construction.
The estimated right of way cost is $404,000. The estimated construction cost is
$2,900,000. This includes $114,000 for sidewalks. The total estimated cost for the project
is $3,304,000. This is $109,000 more than the T.I.P. funding.
NCDOT completed a Feasibility Study for this project in 1981. That study
concluded the most feasible improvement for SR 1426 is widening to a three-lane curb and
gutter roadway. This roadway would provide two standard-width lanes plus a continuous
center left-turn lane. The study recommended three lanes to minimize through traffic delays
caused by left turning vehicles. The study recommended curb and gutter to provide more
effective control of driveway entrances, improve the appearance of the project area,
minimize right of way damages, and provide accommodations for sidewalks.
B. PROJECT TERMINALS
The western project terminal is the intersection of SR 1426 (Bolling Road) and
SR 1400 (West Tenth Street). This is a two-way stop sign controlled intersection. The
stop signs control both approaches on SR 1400, and SR 1426 is free-flow through the
intersection. South of this intersection, SR 1426 is called Zoo Road and consists of a two-
lane 6.1-meter (20-foot) pavement with 1.2-meter (4-foot) grass shoulders. North of this
intersection, the name of SR 1426 changes to Bolling Road, and it curves from a north-
south direction to an east-west direction. It maintains this orientation through the eastern
terminal of the project.
The eastern project terminal is the intersection of SR 1426 (Fifth Street) and NC 48
(Roanoke Avenue). This is a four-way signal controlled intersection. There is a separate
left turn lane on all but the eastern approach to this intersection. At this intersection, there
is sidewalk on each side of SR 1426 and NC 48. SR 1426 is called Fifth Street here, having
changed from Bolling Road at the junction of Bolling Road and Fifth Street (see Figures 1B
and 2D). NC 48 is a three lane road with parking on both sides and curb and gutter. It is
15.8 meters (52 feet) wide from face to face of curbs. East of NC 48, Fifth Street is
maintained by the City of Roanoke Rapids. It is 10 meters (33 feet) from face to face of
curbs. It has marked parking on the north side and sidewalk on both sides.
C. EXISTING CONDITIONS
1. Length of Roadway Section Studied
The length of the studied section of SR 1426 from SR 1400 to NC 48 is
approximately 3.9 kilometers (2.4 miles).
2. Route Classification
The NCDOT Statewide Functional Classification for SR 1426 from SR 1400 to
NC 48 is Urban Collector.
3. Existing Cross Section
SR 1426 is two lanes with shoulder and ditch from SR 1400 to Rapids Street
(2.9 kilometers/1.8 miles). It varies in width from 6.2 meters to 7.4 meters (20 to 24 feet).
SR 1426 is two lanes with curb and gutter from Rapids Street to Monroe Street
(0.7 kilometer/0.4 mile). It varies from 7.4 meters to 9.7 meters (24 to 32 feet) in width
from face to face of curbs. SR 1426 is two lanes with curb and gutter and sidewalks from
Monroe Street to NC 48 (0.3 kilometer/0.2 mile). It is 9.7 meters (32 feet) wide. The
existing cross section of SR 1426 at NC 48 also includes a left turn lane.
Figures 3A and 3B show photographs of the existing roadway sections.
4. Existing Right of Way
The existing right of way along SR 1426 from SR 1400 to Miles Street
(2.5 kilometers/1.5 miles) is 18.3 meters (60 feet). The existing right of way from Miles
Street to the beginning of the curb and gutter between Waldo Street and Rapids Street
(0.4 kilometers/0.3 miles) is 15.2 meters (50 feet). The existing right of way from the
beginning of curb and gutter between Waldo Street and Rapids Street to NC 48
(1.0 kilometers/0.6 miles) is 18.3 meters (60 feet). Appendix 1 includes a right of way
abstract for the streets in the project area (see pages A14 through Al-3).
5. Access Control
There is no access control along SR 1426 in the project area.
6. Speed Limits
The posted speed limit is 80 km/h (45 mph) from SR 1400 to Pinecrest Avenue
(1.9 kilometers/1.2 miles) and 60 km/h (35 mph) from Pinecrest Avenue to NC 48
(1.9 kilometers/1.2 miles). Pinecrest Avenue to NC 48 is within the city limits of Roanoke
Rapids.
7. Bridges and Drainage Structures
There are no bridges along the project. There are two intermittent streams and one
perennial stream crossing SR 1426. The structures carrying these crossings are pipes and
culverts. One intermittent stream crosses near Smoot Drive. The other crosses through a
900 millimeter (36 inch) concrete pipe at Cedar Street. The perennial stream crosses SR
1426 through a two barrel box culvert near Henry Street. The barrels are 1.2 meters x 1.8
meters (4 feet x 6 feet).
8. Traffic Data
NCDOT projects 1998 traffic on SR 1426 to range from 6,200 vehicles per day
(VPD) at SR 1400 to 8,200 VPD at Franklin Street to 4,800 VPD at NC 48. The design
year (2018) projected traffic ranges from 7,600 VPD at SR 1400 to 11,400 VPD at
Franklin Street to 8,400 VPD at NC 48. This traffic includes 2 % truck-tractor semi-trailers
(TTST) and 4 % dual-tired trucks near the western end of the project and 1 % TTST and
2% dual-tired trucks near the eastern end of the project. Currently, the City of Roanoke
Rapids does not allow trucks with more than three axles on Bolling Road. If this restriction
remains in place, actual truck percentages will be lower. Figures 4A and 4B show detailed
breakdowns of the traffic data.
9. Horizontal and Vertical Curvature
Most of SR 1426 has straight horizontal alignment; however, there are two major
exceptions. There is a long horizontal curve that starts just north of SR 1493 (Woodstore
Road) and ends just east of SR 1523 (Western Drive). The second exception is a long
reverse curve starting near Jewell Street and ending near Cedar Street (see Figures IA, 1B,
and 2A through 2D).
SR 1426 is along rolling terrain throughout the project area. One of the vertical
curves occurs just west of the city limits at the intersection with SR 1552 (Robinson Road).
Another vertical curve occurs at the railroad crossing just west of the intersection with
Monroe Street (see Figure 3B).
10. Intersecting Roads
All the intersections along SR 1426 (Bolling Road/Fifth Street) are at grade. All but
those at Jackson Street and NC 48 are unsignalized. All intersecting roads are two-lane
roads except NC 48 (Roanoke Avenue), which has three-lane approaches. The intersection
of SR 1426 (Bolling Road/Fifth Street) and Cedar Street is a five-leg intersection with two-
lane approaches.
4
11. Degree of Roadside Interference
There is a high degree of roadside interference along SR 1426 due to intersecting
streets, driveways, adjacent businesses, and one railroad crossing.
12. Railroad Crossings
One railroad crosses SR 1426 near the intersection of SR 1426 and Monroe Street.
The existing traffic controls include signs, flashers, and cantilever gates. Approximately 27
trains cross here daily. The speeds of these trains range from 80 km/h (50 mph) for freight
trains to 130 km/h (79 mph) for passenger trains.
The exposure index for this crossing is 162,000. This index warrants a grade
separation; however, due to the dense development in the area, a nearby historic property,
and two nearby parks, a grade separation would cause substantial impacts. No accidents
were reported at this crossing during the period from 1 May 1992 to 30 April 1995. For
these reasons, a grade separation is not recommended.
Figures 1, 1A, and 1B shows two railroad crossings near the western end of the
project. The tracks at each of these crossings have been removed and paved over.
13. School Bus Data
Outside the city limits of Roanoke Rapids (west of Pinecrest Avenue), four school
buses use SR 1426 twice daily. Within the city limits (east of Pinecrest Avenue), three
school buses use SR 1426 twice daily.
14. Existing Sidewalks
There is no sidewalk along SR 1426 between SR 1400 and Monroe Street. There is
sidewalk on only the southern side of SR 1426 from Monroe Street to Madison Street (107
meters/350 feet). There is sidewalk on both the southern and northern side of SR 1426
from Madison Street to NC 48 (213 meters/700 feet). The existing sidewalks are 1.5
meters (5 feet) wide.
15. Utilities
Underground telephone cables exist along both sides of SR 1426 and down
intersecting roads. A sanitary sewer line exists along the south side of SR 1426. Power
lines exist along the north side of SR 1426. There is evidence of an existing gas line near
the intersection of SR 1426 and Pinecrest Avenue. This gas line continues along the north
side of SR 1426 to the vicinity of Monroe Street. A 400 millimeter (16-inch) water line
crosses SR 1426 in the eastern and northern portions of the intersection with SR 1400.
There is a water meter vault in the northeast quadrant of this intersection and one in the
northwest quadrant. In addition to these utilities, there is one NCGS control monument
(Bolling 1993) located 60 meters (196 feet) east of the center of the SR 1426/SR 1400
intersection. It is on the north side of SR 1400.
NCDOT expects utility impacts to be moderate on this project.
D. CAPACITY ANALYSIS
Table 1 lists the estimated level of service (LOS) at the major intersections along
SR 1426 (Bolling Road/Fifth Street) based on projected traffic. The intersections at
Jackson Street and NC 48 are signalized. The remaining intersections are unsignalized.
The results of the highway capacity analysis for the unsignalized intersections
include the LOS for the major road and minor road (SR 1426 is the major road). For the
two signalized intersections, the results present one LOS for each total intersection.
The analysis for 2018 with improvements included a separate, right turn lane on
eastbound SR 1426 at NC 48. It also included a separate left turn lane on each approach
to the SR 1426/SR 1400 intersection.
TABLE 1. Intersection Level of Service
Intersection 1998 2018
o Im rovements 2018
With Im rovements
SR 1426/SR 1400 A/D A/F A/D
SR 1426/Oakley Avenue A/B A/C A/D
SR 1426/Fifth Street A/B A/C A/C
SR 1426/Jackson Street B C B
SR 1426/NC 48 C F E
The year 2018 LOS E for the SR 1426/NC 48 intersection is somewhat low for a
design year. The LOS could be improved to D by adding an exclusive right turn lane on
southbound NC 48; however, improvements to NC 48 are considered outside the scope of
project U-1007 and are not recommended.
E. ACCIDENT ANALYSIS
Sixty-six accidents occurred along SR 1426 between SR 1400 and NC 48 during the
period from 1 May 1992 to 30 April 1995. The accident rate during this period was 231.82
accidents per 100 million vehicle miles (acc/100MVM). This compares to a statewide
average of 317.30 acc/100MVM for two lane urban secondary roads during the period from
1992 through 1994.
Angle, rearend, and left turn accidents on SR 1426 accounted for 53 of the 66
accidents between SR 1426 and NC 48. These accident types occur in areas with a high
number of turning movements, stop and go traffic, and congested conditions. These
conditions prevail along SR 1426 due to the lack of turning lanes.
Five intersections (West Tenth Street, Franklin Street, Henry Street, Jackson Street,
and Roanoke Avenue) accounted for 39 of the 66 accidents. The intersection with Jackson
Street had 12 accidents during the period analyzed. The intersection with Roanoke Avenue
had nine accidents, West Tenth Street seven, Franklin Street six, and Henry Street five.
There were no reported accidents at the railroad crossing (near Monroe Street).
F. THOROUGHFARE PLAN
The 1992 Thoroughfare Plan for Roanoke Rapids, Weldon, and Gaston identifies
SR 1426 (Bolling Road/Fifth Street) as a cross-town street (major thoroughfare). Figure 5
shows a portion of the Thoroughfare Plan including SR 1426.
6
The Thoroughfare Plan recommends extending SR 1426 (Zoo Road) to NC 125.
The extension would begin just south of the intersection of SR 1426 and SR 1434 near the
Halifax County Airport (see Figures 1 and IA). It would extend east across NC 48 and end
at NC 125. This would provide a loop road on the south side of Roanoke Rapids. The
recommended extension is south of the western end of the U-1007 widening project. This
extension is beyond the scope of the subject project and is not included in the 1996-2002
T.I.P.
G. BENEFITS TO THE STATE. REGION. AND CON AUNITY
The proposed improvements will allow safer and more efficient travel along
SR 1426 throughout the project area. Safety will be enhanced by increasing through lanes
to standard width and by separating left turning traffic from the through traffic stream.
Each of these improvements will also improve the efficiency of travel by reducing stops and
slow downs due to conflicts between left turning traffic and through traffic.
In addition, the proposed improvements will improve pedestrian access and safety
by providing sidewalk on each side of SR 1426 from Pinecrest Avenue to NC 48 (Roanoke
Avenue).
H. NEARBY AIRPORTS
The Halifax County Airport is approximately 2.4 kilometers (1.5 miles) south of the
intersection of SR 1426 and SR 1400 (see Figures 1 and 1 A). NCDOT does not expect the
project will affect this airport. There are no other airports in the project area.
I. CONCLUSION
For the reasons discussed in this section--improved safety and efficiency, improved
capacity, provision of sidewalks, and improved aesthetics--NCDOT concludes that SR 1426
should be widened as proposed.
III. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
A. GENERAL DESCRIPTION
NCDOT will widen SR 1426 (Bolling Road/Fifth Street) to three lanes with curb
and gutter from SR 1400 (West Tenth Street) to NC 48 (Roanoke Avenue). The length of
this improvement is 3.9 kilometers (2.4 miles). Figures 2A through 2D show the proposed
improvements.
B. COST ESTIMATE
The total estimated cost for the project is $3,304,000. The estimated right of way
cost is $404,000. The estimated construction cost is $2,900,000. This includes $114,000
for sidewalks.
C. PROPOSED TYPICAL SECTION
The proposed typical section is three lanes with curb and gutter. It will be 12
meters (40 feet) wide from face to face of curbs plus a 2.4-meter (8.0-foot) grass berm on
each side (see Figure 6). This typical section will provide two through lanes and a
continuous center left-turn lane. Sidewalks will be included on the berm area on both sides
from the city limits at Pinecrest Avenue to NC 48 (1.9 kilometers/1.2 miles). These
sidewalks will be 1.5 meters (5.0 feet) wide.
Widening to the proposed typical section will be done symmetrically.
D. DESIGN SPEED
The completed project will provide a design speed of approximately 70 km/h (45
mph) from SR 1400 to Pinecrest Avenue (city limits) and 60 km/h (35 mph) from Pinecrest
Avenue to NC 48.
E. RIGHT OF WAY
The proposed widening will require 18.3 meters (60 feet) of right of way. This will
require purchasing additional right of way from Miles Street to the beginning of the curb
and gutter between Waldo Street and Rapids Street (0.4 kilometer/0.3 mile), where the
existing right of way is 15.2 meters (50 feet), and at the intersection of SR 1426 and NC 48,
where more than 18.3 meters (60 feet) of right of way will be necessary to construct the
proposed section plus a right turn lane. The total new right of way will amount to
approximately 0.2 hectare (0.4 acre). Temporary construction easements will be required
throughout most of the project. The total temporary easements will amount to
approximately 2.4 hectares (5.8 acres). Appendix 1 contains a right of way abstract for the
streets in the project area (see pages Al-1 through Al-3).
F. ACCESS CONTROL
The proposed improvements will not require any changes in access control.
Currently there is no control of access along SR 1426 or the intersecting roads.
G. INTERSECTION TREATMENT
In addition to the widening improvements, NCDOT will provide left-turn auxiliary
lanes on all approaches at the intersection of SR 1426 and SR 1400 (west project terminal).
NCDOT will construct a right turn lane on eastbound SR 1426 at the intersection with
NC 48 (east project terminal). NCDOT also proposes to construct a raised concrete island
to channel eastbound Fifth Street traffic onto northbound Cedar Street (see Figure 2D).
Traffic from Fifth Street will be able to access Bolling Road by Rapids Street. The
intersection of Cedar Street and Bolling Road will become a T-intersection (see Figure 2D).
The project proposes no other intersection improvements.
H. BRIDGES AND OTHER DRAINAGE STRUCTURES
There are no bridges along the project. There are two intermittent streams crossing
under SR 1426. One of these crosses through a pipe at Smoot Drive. One crosses through
a 900 millimeter (36 inch) concrete pipe at Cedar Street. One perennial stream crosses
SR 1426 through a two barrel box culvert near Henry Street. The barrels are 1.2 meters x
1.8 meters (4 feet x 6 feet). These structures will be extended for the widening project.
SR 1426 from between Waldo Street and Rapids Street currently includes curb and gutter
and drainage inlets. These will be replaced by the new curb and gutter and drainage inlets.
I. RAILROAD CROSSING TREATMENT
A railroad crosses SR 1426 at grade near Monroe Street. This crossing will require
two cantilever railroad signals with gates.
J. CHANGES IN STATE HIGHWAY SYSTEM
The project will not require any changes in the State Highway System.
K. PERMITS REOUIRED
Conditions for a Nationwide Permit No. 14 (minor road crossings) from the Corps
of Engineers apply to the project. If the project requires a permit No. 14, a 401 Water
Quality Certification will be required from the Division of Environmental Management.
L. MULTIPLE USE OF SPACE
There are no plans to use the right of way for any other purposes except public
utilities and sidewalks. Public utilities will be allowed within the right of way within
certain limitations.
M. BIKEWAYS AND SIDEWALKS
The NCDOT office of Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation reviewed the project
and indicated that there does not appear to be any special need for bicycle
accommodations.
Sidewalk is warranted along both sides of SR 1426 (Bolling Road/Fifth Street)
from Pinecrest Avenue to NC 48. This section of SR 1426 has convenience stores,
churches, and residential development on both sides. There is a park on each side of SR
1426, an industrial plant on the south side, and a proposed school on the south side
(planned to be located at the city limits near Pinecrest Avenue). The present businesses,
development, and parks generate much pedestrian traffic along SR 1426. Several worn
paths along the earth berm on each side of SR 1426 demonstrate pedestrian use. The
proposed school will increase pedestrian traffic when built. The Roanoke Rapids
Comprehensive Development Plan contains policies supporting and encouraging pedestrian
facilities, including sidewalks along SR 1426. Sidewalks would improve safety for
pedestrians currently using SR 1426, as well as those likely to use it in the future.
New sidewalks will be included on the berm area from Pinecrest Avenue to Monroe
Street on the south side of SR 1426 (1,676 meters/5,500 feet) and from Pinecrest Avenue
to Madison Street (1,768 meters/5,800 feet) on the north side. NCDOT will replace the
existing sidewalk on the south side of SR 1426 from Monroe Street to NC 48 and on the
north side of SR 1426 from Madison Street to NC 48. The new and replacement sidewalks
will be 1.5 meters (5.0 feet) wide.
The area of the project including sidewalks is within the city limits of Roanoke
Rapids. NCDOT and the City will enter into a municipal agreement to share the cost of
constructing the new sidewalks. NCDOT will replace the existing sidewalks at no cost to
the city. NCDOT and Roanoake Rapids will share the cost of the new sidewalk at a ratio of
70% NCDOT, 30% Roanoke Rapids. The estimated construction cost of the new
sidewalks is $114,000. Therefore, the estimated NCDOT share is $79,800 and the
estimated Roanoke Rapids share is $34,200. The estimated NCDOT share is 5.5 percent of
the estimated cost of construction within the city limits. This exceeds the 2 percent
threshold outlined in the NCDOT Pedestrian Policy Guidelines (4/20/94). The Planning and
Environmental Branch Manager has coordinated with the Director of Planning and
Programming to approve this funding.
N. NOISE BARRIERS
There are no noise barriers recommended for the project.
0. ANTICIPATED DESIGN EXCEPTIONS
NCDOT expects no design exceptions will be required for the project.
P. OTHER PROPOSED HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENTS IN THE AREA
There are seven other NCDOT Transportation Improvement Program (T.I.P.)
highway projects in the Roanoke Rapids area. Figure 1 A shows these projects.
Project R-2581 proposes to widen US 158 from east of Littleton to NC 125 in
Roanoke Rapids. The project proposes widening to a multilane roadway. The T.I.P.
identifies this project as a future need.
Project U-2419 proposes to widen NC 48 from Roanoke Rapids to Gaston. The
project proposes widening to a multilane curb and gutter roadway. The T.I.P. schedule
for this project includes right of way acquisition beginning in fiscal year 1995 and
construction in fiscal year 1997. NCDOT completed an environmental assessment in
November 1994, held a Public Hearing in March 1995, and completed a Finding of No
Significant Impact in June 1995.
Project U-2720 proposes to extend Old Farm Road from NC 125 to US 158. The
project proposes construction of a five lane road on new location. The T.I.P. schedule for
this project includes right of way acquisition beginning in year 1995 and construction in
fiscal year 1997. NCDOT completed an Environmental Assessment for the project in July
1994, held a public hearing in December 1994, and completed a Finding of No Significant
Impact in April 1995.
Project I-905 proposes safety improvements, pavement rehabilitation, and bridge
rehabilitation, widening, and replacement on I-95 from south of US 158 to the Virginia
state line. The T.I.P. schedule for this project includes right of way acquisition beginning
in fiscal year 1995 and construction in fiscal year 1996.
Project I-2004 proposes to convert the grade separation at NC 125 and 195 into
an interchange. This project is currently under construction.
Project B-2083 proposes to replace Bridge No. 149 on Dixie Street over
Chokoyotte Creek in Roanoke Rapids. The T.I.P. includes planning, design, right of way,
and construction of this project after the year 2002.
Project B-3468 proposes to replace Bridge No. 85 on SR 1426 (Zoo Road) over
Chokoyotte Creek, south of Roanoke Rapids. The T.I.P. schedule for this project
includes right of way acquisition beginning in fiscal year 2001 and construction in fiscal
year 2002.
10
IV. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION
A. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
NCDOT will widen SR 1426 (Bolling Road/Fifth Street) from the existing two lane
section with shoulder and ditches to a three lane section with curb and gutter from SR 1400
(West Tenth Street) to NC 48 (Roanoke Avenue) in Roanoke Rapids (see Figures 1, 1A,
1 B, and 2A through 2D). The proposed typical section will be 12 meters (40 feet) wide
from face to face of curbs. It will provide two through lanes and a continuous center left-
turn lane. It will also provide sidewalk on each side from Pinecrest Avenue to NC 48
(Roanoke Avenue). It will require 18.3 meters (60 feet) of right of way. The completed
project will provide a design speed of approximately 70 km/h (45 mph) from SR 1400 to
Pinecrest Avenue (city limits) and 60 km/h (35 mph) from Pinecrest Avenue to NC 48.
B. DESIGN ALTERNATIVES
At the scoping meeting for this project, NCDOT and other agencies discussed other
build alternatives in addition to the proposed alternative. Based on discussion, the
participants of that meeting eliminated each additional build alternative from further
consideration. The additional build alternatives are as follows:
1. Improving the existing two lanes by widening each to standard width, but adding
no additional lanes or curb and gutter (in locations where it does not currently
exist). This alternative would not substantially reduce right of way impacts. In
addition, since it would not provide a continuous center left turn lane, it would
not greatly improve the safety and efficiency of travel; therefore, it would not
meet the purpose and need of the project. For these reasons, the participants
rejected this alternative.
2. Widening SR 1426 (Bolling Road/Fifth Street) to five lanes from SR 1400 to NC
48. This alternative would result in higher construction costs, increased right of
way impacts, and potential impacts to historic properties and two city parks. As
discussed in Section IV.D., NCDOT expects the proposed three lane road to
operate at an acceptable level of service (LOS D or better) in the design year.
For these reasons, the participants rejected this alternative.
3. Widening to five lanes from SR 1400 to Rapids Street and three lanes from
Rapids Street to NC 48. The participants discussed this alternative because
widening to only three lanes from Rapids Street to NC 48 can be done with
minimal impacts due to the existing wider roadway (varies from 7.4 meters/24
feet near Rapids Street to 9.7 meters/32 feet from Franklin Street to NC 48).
The participants rejected this alternative due to the extra cost of constructing
the five lane section, the increased right of way impacts, and the difficult
transition required to drop from five lanes to three lanes in the vicinity of
intersecting streets.
C. POSTPONEMENT OF PROPOSED ACTION
The existing facility exhibits constrained flow. With the projected design year traffic
volumes, the facility will exhibit gridlock conditions in some areas (see Section II.D.).
Postponement of the project would result in continuing traffic service deterioration as traffic
volumes increase. Therefore, NCDOT does not recommend this alternative.
II
D. DO NOTHING ALTERNATIVE
This alternative would avoid the limited environmental impacts anticipated to result
from construction of the project. However, this alternative would not improve the
substandard lane widths or improve turning conditions in the project area. Therefore, it
would not improve the safety and efficiency of traffic flow along SR 1426. For these
reasons, NCDOT does not recommend the Do Nothing Alternative.
E. ALTERNATIVE MODES OF TRANSPORTATION
No alternative mode of transportation such as mass transit, HOV lanes, or van
pooling or carpooling appears to be a practical alternative. Highway transportation is the
dominant transportation mode in the project area, and the project involves widening an
existing road.
V SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
A. SOCIAL EFFECTS
1. Land Use and Planning
a. Scope of Local Planning` Activities
The proposed improvement is located within both the extraterritorial jurisdiction
and municipal limits of the City of Roanoke Rapids. The City maintains an active planning
program, with its long range land development policies illustrated in the Comprehensive
Development Guide, adopted in 1989. The City also enforces a zoning ordinance and
subdivision regulations throughout the project area.
The city also prepared and adopted a Parks and Recreation Master Plan Update in
1986. The Plan identifies the community's recreation needs and provides
recommendations for improvements to the City's facilities.
b. Existing Land Use
The project area is generally urban, although some agricultural uses exist near the
western end of the project. Development throughout the area is predominantly residential
and becomes increasingly dense toward the central business district (eastern end of
project). Land uses fronting Bolling Road/Fifth Street are varied, with single family
residences the most common.
A commercial node is developing at the intersection of SR 1426 and SR 1400,
with the recent construction of a grocery store, in addition to smaller businesses in the
area. Some farming activities remain, with agricultural fields located between SR 1493
(Woodstore Road) and SR 1523 (Western Drive), as well as in the vicinity of SR 1540
(Elkins Road). Residential uses, including single family subdivisions, a mobile home park,
and small apartment buildings use the remaining land west of the city limits.
Two churches, the Stanley White Presbyterian Church and the Calvary Baptist
Church, are at the intersection of Bolling Road and Ashton Street. Small businesses are
dispersed throughout the project area and include the Village Grocery, an optometrist
office, and convenience stores.
12
One industry, the Bibb Company textile plant, is on Fifth Street at the Seaboard
Coastline railroad crossing. Neighborhoods near the plant are typical of the "mill villages"
found in many North Carolina towns.
Two city parks, Rochelle Park and Melody Park, are at the intersection of Bolling
Road, Fifth Street, and Cedar Street (see Figure 2D). Rochelle Park is on the north side
of Fifth Street between Cedar Street and Vance Street. It is a 2.7 hectare (6.7 acre)
facility containing tennis courts, picnic shelters, and playground equipment. Melody Park
is on the south side of Fifth Street between Cedar Street and Vance Street. It is a 0.5
hectare (1.2 acre) passive recreation park containing picnic facilities. According to the
city's Parks and Recreation Master Plan Update, no further development is planned for
Melody Park. Equipment improvements are scheduled for Rochelle Park. Land and Water
Conservation Funds (LWCF) were used for improvements to the tennis courts at Rochelle
Park, but not for the acquisition of land for either park.
c. Future Land Use
The City's 1989 Comprehensive Development Plan established a series of policy
objectives for the form and location of future development within the Roanoke Rapids
study area. Because the cost of providing public services to new development is an
important consideration, the City designated three key areas with differing growth
potentials. One of the key areas, the "primary growth area," comprises the central portion
of the Roanoke Rapids study area where new development and "in-fill" development are
particularly encouraged. This is the area where most public utilities and other services are
already in place, and is therefore the most economical to serve with public facilities. The
Bolling Road corridor is located within this key area. Some vacant land exists within the
corridor, which would be appropriate for in-fill development.
The Comprehensive Plan provides a series of policy statements on transportation
issues and includes a brief discussion of Bolling Road. The Plan calls for improvements to
the corridor, particularly in the SR 1400 (West Tenth Street) area, although it does not
specify the type of improvements desired. The development of additional pedestrian
facilities and bikeways are specifically encouraged in the Plan. The plan indicates thst
sidewalks would be particularly desirable along the Bolling Road corridor, given the
predominantly residential land use, two parks, and the fact that the corridor terminates in
the central business district.
The Idealized Future Land Development Map included in the Comprehensive Plan
illustrates the possible future course of development for the City, assuming the
demographic projections and other assumptions described in the Plan are accurate. The
Map indicates that a "community commercial retail" node will develop at the intersection
of Bolling Road and West Tenth Street (west project terminal). If residential development
continues in the Bolling Road area, another fire station will be needed in the northwestern
section of the city, and will likely be located on the western end of Bolling Road. An
additional public school will also be required to serve the area, and is also likely to be
located on Bolling Road.
2. Neighborhood Characteristics
Halifax County is in the northeastern section of the state. It is bounded by Bertie,
Martin, Edgecombe, Nash, Warren, and Northampton Counties. The 1990 Bureau of the
Census data indicates the county has a total population of 55,516. The population density
is 76.53 persons per square mile.
13
3. Public Facilities
Public facilities along the proposed project include the Stanley White Presbyterian
and Calvary Baptist churches at Ashton Street and Melody Park and Rochelle Park at
Cedar Street. The proposed improvement will not adversely impact any of these facilities.
4. Relocations
NCDOT anticipates the project will not require relocating any residence or
business. Additional right of way and temporary easements will be needed to complete the
project.
If plans change and the project requires any relocation, NCDOT will ensure that
comparable replacement housing will be available prior to project construction.
Furthermore, the North Carolina Board of Transportation has the following three
programs to minimize the inconvenience of relocation:
* Relocation Assistance
* Relocation Moving Payments, and
* Relocation replacement housing payments or rent supplement.
Appendix 1 includes information on the Division of Highways Relocation
Programs (see pages Al-4 and Al-5).
5. Social Impacts
The proposed project will have a positive social impact on the neighborhood by
providing an improved roadway to move traffic to and from various destinations. By
providing a continuous center left-turn lane and wider travel lanes throughout the project,
safety will be improved. By providing sidewalks from Pinecrest Avenue to NC 48,
pedestrian safety will be improved.
The proposed widening will not disrupt social cohesiveness. It will not interfere
with facilities and services, and it will not relocate any persons without minimizing the
impacts of relocation.
6. Historic and Cultural Resources
a. Historic Architectural Resources
An NCDOT staff architectural historian conducted a Phase II (Abridged) survey
to determine the Area of Potential Effect (APE) of the proposed project and to identify
and evaluate all significant resources within the APE according to the National Register of
Historic Places criteria. The staff historian consulted Halifax County survey files in the
State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) in Raleigh and the National Register and State
Study Lists. The selected limits of the APE were the rear property lines of all properties
adjoining SR 1426 (Bolling Road/Fifth Street). The staff historian then conducted an
intensive survey by car and on foot on 29 July 1994. The survey covered 100% of the
APE to identify those properties that appeared potentially eligible for the National
Register.
The survey found 23 properties over 50 years old within the APE. SHPO has
concurred with NCDOT and FHWA that 21 of these are not eligible for the National
14
Register and not worthy of further evaluation (see pages A4-1 through A44 in Appendix
4).
Based on the results of an architectural survey of Roanoke Rapids by Allison and
David Black (1990), representatives of SHPO concurred that the Roanoke NO Village is
not eligible for the National Register either individually or as a district. In addition,
representatives of SHPO agreed with NCDOT and FHWA that the subject project would
have no effect on the mill village if it were determined eligible (see pages A4-3 and A44
on Appendix 4).
The two remaining properties within the APE are the Roanoke Mills Plant #2 and
Roanoke Mills Plant #2 Office.
Roanoke Mills Plant #2:
The Roanoke Mills Plant #2 (Bibb Company Plant No. 2) is at the southwest
corner of Fifth Street at Jackson Street (see Figure 2D). It is a Vernacular Industrial style
mill built in 1916. The one-story rectangular reinforced concrete building was built on a
north-south orientation paralleling Jackson Street. It was divided into a slasher room, a
warping and spinning room, a spinning and carding room, and an opener/picker room. It
began operations producing yarn for automobile tire fabrics. Triangular "sawtooth"
skylights and large floor-to-ceiling windows on the elongated east and west elevations lit
the building.
In 1919-1920 the owners added a one-story weave room and a two-story finishing
room (both of brick construction) along Fifth Street. This created an L-shaped plan. Also
at this time, owners built a dye house, reservoir, water tower, smokestacks, a three-story
cloth storage building, and a three-bay cotton warehouse.
Since this period, owners have made several additions and modifications to
Roanoke Mills Plant #2: the 1919-1920 finishing room addition was converted to a yarn
dye plant, and additions to its southern elevation created an overall U-shaped plan.
Owners added a one-story office building to the northern elevation on Fifth Street. The
cotton warehouses have been greatly enlarged and the property now extends southward to
include a parking lot (Allison and David Black, "Roanoke Mills Company Plant #2", HX
1047, North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources, Division of Archives and
History).
The many additions and modifications to Roanoke Mills Plant #2 have greatly
injured its integrity of design and materials. Successive additions have converted the
original self-contained mill building into a massive U-shaped complex. Physical changes
to the original building, such as the loss of the "sawtooth" skylights, the floor-to-ceiling
windows on the north and south elevations (which have been filled with brick), and the
original roof (which has been replaced with a shallow-pitch gable roof), have left it
virtually unrecognizable for what it once was: an example of a typical turn-of-the-century
industrial mill.
Background research of this and all other properties in the APE enabled their
consideration within the context of the history of the area. There are no historical events
or persons of any significance associated with this property, and as such it is not eligible
for the National Register of Historic Places under Criteria A or B. This property was also
considered within the architectural context of the county and has been found to be an
average example of a common type. It has lost its integrity of design and materials with
years of successive additions and remodeling and has no special historical or architectural
15
significance; it is therefore not eligible for the National Register under Criterion C as an
individual structure. Neither is it considered eligible for the National Register as a group
or district with the Roanoke Mills Plant #2 Office: these two buildings are not stylistically
related, nor were they built in conjunction with each other. They do not represent a
significant linkage or continuity of structures united historically or aesthetically by plan
and therefore do not qualify for the National Register as a district. The architectural
component of the property is not likely to yield information important in the history of
building technology; therefore, it does not qualify for the National Register under
Criterion D. The SHPO has concurred with this determination (see pages A4-3 and A4-4
of Appendix 4).
Roanoke Mills Plant #2 Office:
The Roanoke Mills Plant #2 Office (Bibb Company Division Office) is at the
southeast corner of Fifth Street at Jackson Street (see Figure 2D). It is a Colonial Revival
style office constructed in 1941 across the street from Roanoke Mills Plant #2. It was
constructed after a flood destroyed the previous office, located on the banks of the
Roanoke River. Both Plant #2 (built in 1916 as the "New Mill") and the 1941 office are
situated several blocks south of the river. The influence of the recent restoration of
Williamsburg on this Colonial Revival design can be seen in the use of such correct details
as Flemish bond brickwork, molded and gauged brick window and door surrounds, and
handblown glass panes in the narrow sash windows.
This building, along with the rest of Roanoke Mills, Patterson Mills, and Rosemary
Mills, was purchased by J. P. Stevens in 1956. In 1988 the Bibb Company purchased all
three mills. The Roanoke Mills Plant #2 Office today serves as its regional headquarters.
This building has survived with no exterior modifications since its construction.
J. P. Stevens slightly altered the interior after 1956 by building walls to subdivide some of
the office space. Otherwise, this building retains a high degree of integrity of design and
materials.
The FHWA and NCDOT have concluded that the Roanoke Mills Plant #2 Office is
eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. SHPO has concurred with
this determination (see Pages A4-3 and A4-4 of Appendix 4). Pages A4-1 and A4-2 of
Appendix 4 are a signed concurrence form stating the project will have no effect on this
property.
In the vicinty of this property NCDOT will widen SR 1426 (Fifth Street) from the
existing two lane section with curb and gutter to a three lane section with curb and gutter.
The proposed typical section will be 12 meters (40 feet) wide from face to face of curbs
(see Figure 6). It will provide two through lanes and a continuous center left-turn lane. It
will also retain or replace at the existing location the existing sidewalk on each side of SR
1426. It will not require any additional right of way or easement on the south side of SR
1426 (fronting the Bibb Company Division Office). The widening may remove part or all of
the existing utility strip between the back of the existing curb and existing sidewalk on the
south side of SR 1426.
b. Archaeoloizical Resources
According to SHPO, there are no known archaeological sites within the project
area. It is unlikely any archaeological resources eligible for inclusion in the National
Register of Historic Places will be affected by the project. SHPO recommends no survey
for archaeological resources (see pages A4-5 and A4-6 of Appendix 4). Based on the
16
SHPO recommendation, the FHWA and NCDOT have determined that a survey is not
necessary unless public input reveals the need for a survey.
B. SECTION 4(b PROPERTIES
Section 4(f) of the 1966 Department of Transportation Act (as amended in Title 49
U.S.C., Section 303, January 1983) states " the Secretary may approve projects requiring
use of publicly owned land of a public park, recreation area, or wildlife/waterfowl refuge,
or land of a historic site of National, State, or local significance (as determined by the
officials having jurisdiction over the park, recreation area, refuge, or site) only if 1) There
is no feasible and Prudent Alternative to Such Use, and 2) The Project Includes all
Possible Planning to Minimize Harm."
There are three Section 4(f) properties in the project area: Melody Park on the
south side of SR 1426 at Cedar Street, Rochelle Park on the north side of SR 1426 at
Cedar Street, and the Bibb Company office building on the southeast corner of the
intersection of SR 1426 and Jackson Street.
No additional right of way will be required from these resources for the proposed
improvements to SR 1426; however, the project will require temporary construction
easements at Melody Park and Rochelle Park. These easements will not last the duration
of construction of the project. There will be no transfer of ownership of the land. The
scope of work in these easements will be minor. The easements will not cause permanent
adverse physical impacts, or interfere with the activities or purposes of either park.
NCDOT will fully restore each easement area to a condition equal to or better than what
existed prior to the project. The City of Roanoke Rapids has jurisdiction over both parks.
There are four trees at Melody Park that the city would like to remain undisturbed during
construction. These trees will be marked on the plan sheets and delineated in the field.
Appendix 4 page A4-7 is a letter from the city documenting their agreement regarding
these conditions. For these reasons, the temporary easements will not constitute a use of
property from either park within the meaning of Section 4(0, and a Section 4(f)
Evaluation is not required.
No additional right of way or temporary or permanent easement will be required at
the Bibb office. Therefore, there will not be a use of this property within the meaning of
Section 4(f).
C. ECONOMIC EFFECTS
North Carolina Preliminary Civilian Labor Estimates data for November 1994
indicates that Halifax County has a total labor force of 24,450 people. Of this total, 23,050
people are employed. This leaves an unemployment total of 1,400 people, or 5.7%
The proposed project will not adversely impact the economy. Businesses along
the proposed project will be enhanced because the proposed improvements will make
these businesses more accessible.
17
D. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
1. Biological Resources
a. Biotic Communities
An NCDOT staff biologist made a site visit on 7 September 1994 to determine
natural resource conditions and to confirm published information available concerning the
site. Information sources used in the pre-field investigation of the study area included:
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangle map (Roanoke Rapids), National Wetland
Inventory (NWI) Map, NCDOT aerial photographs of project area (1:2000), and Soil
Conservation Service (SCS) soil maps of Halifax County. Water resource information was
obtained from publications of the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and
Natural Resources (DEHNR, 1993) and from the Environmental Sensitivity Base Map of
Halifax County, North Carolina. Information concerning the occurrence of federal and state
protected species in the study area was gathered from the Fish and Wildlife Service list of
protected and candidate species (based upon the 28 March 1995 update) and the N.C.
Natural Heritage Program (NHP) database of rare species and unique habitats.
The biologist conducted general field surveys along the project. Plant communities
and their associated wildlife were identified and recorded. Wildlife identification involved
using a variety of observation techniques: active searching and capture, visual observations
(binoculars), and identifying characteristic signs of wildlife (sounds, scat, tracks, and
burrows). Organisms captured during these searches were identified and then released.
Jurisdictional wetland determinations were performed using delineation criteria prescribed
in the "Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual" (Environmental Laboratory,
1987).
The biologist identified three distinct terrestrial communities in the project study
area: (1) urbanized/streetscape community; (2) open field/roadside community, and (3)
piedmont transitional pine forest. Community boundaries are transitional and are referred
to as ecotones. Many faunal species are highly adaptive and may populate the entire range
of the three terrestrial communities discussed.
The urbanized/streetscape community is in municipalities and other areas influenced
by human encroachment. The areas consist of small lots that landowners maintain on a
regular basis.
Dominant canopy trees include loblolly pine, sweetgum, white oak, and willow oak.
These trees have diameters (diameters at breast height) of at least 35.6 centimeters (14.0
inches). Dominant understory and shrub components are dogwood and black cherry. Vine
and herbaceous components consist mainly of poison ivy, morning glory, and fescue. This
landscape setting provides habitat for the existence of many faunal species related to urban
settings. Species such as the northern cardinal, mourning dove, Carolina chickadee, and
house sparrow are found throughout this community. The gray squirrel and eastern
cottontail also find foraging opportunities and shelter in this community. Predators include
the red-tailed hawk, black racer, and common barn-owl.
The open field/roadside community is comprised of fallow agricultural lands and
disturbed right-of-ways adjacent to all roads. Large herbaceous populations are in this
community due to the amount of direct sunlight and frequent controlled mowings.
18
Lespedeza is the dominant floral species in the open fields while fescue dominates
the right-of-ways. Other herbaceous species including barnyard grass, dog-fennel, dallis
grass, and pokeweed are also found commonly in these areas.
Faunal types adapted to open areas surrounded by forest edges thrive in this
community. Species including the eastern fence lizard, eastern cottontail, and eastern
harvest mouse provide foraging opportunities for predators such as the black racer, eastern
cottontail, red fox, red tailed hawk, and American kestrel. Other species of interest include
the mourning dove, eastern bluebird, and eastern kingsnake.
The piedmont transitional pine forest is found along upland flats, rolling terrain, and
occasionally on steeper slopes. Due to fire suppression, this forest is succeeded by
hardwood dominance.
The canopy is composed primarily of loblolly pine with diameters not exceeding
35.6 centimeter (14.0 inches). Opportunistic hardwoods such as red maple, sweetgum,
persimmon, black cherry, and sassafras comprise the understory and shrub layers. Japanese
honeysuckle, Virginia creeper, and seedlings of canopy and understory trees constitute the
vine and herbaceous layers.
Faunal species including the gray squirrel, pine warbler, northern flicker, northern
cardinal, and mourning dove are common in this community. Predators and opportunistic
species such as the black rat snake and barred owl forage on small mammals, reptiles, and
amphibians.
One aquatic community type, the piedmont small perennial stream, will be impacted
by the proposed project. Physical and chemical characteristics of the water body dictate
faunal composition of the aquatic communities. Terrestrial communities adjacent to a water
resource also greatly influence aquatic communities.
The unnamed tributary to the Roanoke River, which crosses the project near Henry
Street, is a small stream with moderate flow. The substrate is composed mainly of pebbles,
sand, and silt-size particles. It provides potentially suitable habitat for many aquatic
organisms. However, with sedimentation, channelization, and nonpoint source pollution, the
stream appears to support little mollusk diversity.
Freshwater fish that may be present in piedmont perennial streams are the eastern
silvery minnow, golden shiner, white shiner, creek chub, and bluegill. However, no
freshwater fish or aquatic invertebrates were observed in the stream
b. Anticipated Impacts to Biotic Communities
Construction of the subject project will have various impacts on the biotic resources
described above. Any construction-related activities in or near these resources will impact
biological functions. This section quantifies and qualifies impacts to the natural resources in
terms of area impacted and ecosystems affected. Temporary and permanent impacts are
considered here as well.
Calculated impacts to terrestrial and aquatic resources reflect the relative abundance
of each community present in the study area. Project construction will result in clearing and
degradation of portions of these communities. Table 2 summarizes potential quantitative
losses to these biotic communities, resulting from project construction. Estimated impacts
are derived using the entire proposed right-of-way width of 18.3 meters (60.0 feet).
19
TART.F. 1 Anticinated Tmnacts to Rintic Communities
Communi Impacts
Urbanized/Streetsca a 1.6 hectares 3.9 acres
Open Field/Roadside 0.6 hectare 1.4 acres
Piedmont Transitional Pine Forest 0.2 hectare 0.5 acre
Total Impacts 2.4 hectares 5.8 acres
Impacts to terrestrial communities result in habitat reduction. Severe impacts to
aquatic communities may result unless stringent application of BMP's are employed.
Potential impacts resulting from culvert and pipe extension include: (1) excessive
sedimentation from fill material and surrounding bare soils during construction, (2) possible
chemical and toxic infiltration from construction activity and increased traffic loads, (3)
channel relocation, and (4) changes in hydraulic regimes.
c. Federally Protected Species
Federal law (under the provisions of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
ammended) requires that any action, likely to adversely affect a species classified as
federally-protected, be subject to review by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS).
Other species may receive additional protection under separate state laws. As of 28 March
1995, the USFWS lists three federally-protected species for Halifax County (see Table 3).
TABLE 3. Federally-Protected Species for Halifax Countv
Scientific Name Common Name Status
Alismidonta heterodon dwarf wedge mussel E
Elli do steinstansana Tar River in mussel E
Picoides borealis red-cockaded woodpecker E
Alimsmidonta heterodon (dwarf wedge mussel) E
Animal Family: Unionidae
Date Listed: 3/14/90
Distribution in N.C.: Franklin, Granville, Halifax, Johnston, Nash, Vance,
Wake, Warren, and Wilson Counties
Known populations of the dwarf wedge mussel in North Carolina are found in the
Neuse River and Tar River Basins. This mussel is sensitive to agricultural, domestic, and
industrial pollutants and requires a stable silt free streambed with well oxygenated water to
survive.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
No suitable habitat exists along the unnamed tributary to the Roanoke River that
crosses the project near Henry Street. An on-site examination along the streambanks and
substrate showed no evidence of naides and little evidence of other aquatic organisms.
Therefore, no impacts are expected to the dwarf-wedge mussel as a result of project
construction.
Elliptio steinstansana (Tar river spinymussel) E
Animal Family: Unionidae
Date Listed: 7/29/85
Distribution in N.C.: Edgecombe, Franklin, Halifax, Nash, Pitt, Vance,
and Warren Counties
20
The Tar River spinymussel is endemic to the Tar River drainage basin, from
Falkland in Pitt County to Spring Hope in Nash County. Populations of the Tar River
spinymussel can be found in streams of the Tar River Drainage Basin and of the Swift Creek
Drainage Sub-Basin.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
No suitable habitat exists along the unnamed tributary near Henry Street. Therefore,
no impacts are expected to the Tar River spinymussel as a result of project construction.
Picoides borealis (red-cockaded woodpecker) E
Animal Family: Picidae
Date Listed: 10/13/70
Distribution in N.C.: Anson, Beaufort, Bertie, Bladen, Brunswick,
Camden, Carteret, Chatham, Columbus, Craven,
Cumberland, Dare, Duplin, Forsyth, Gates, Halifax,
Harnett, Hertford, Hoke, Hyde, Johnston, Jones, Lee,
Lenoir, Montgomery, Moore, Nash, New Hanover,
Northampton, Onslow, Orange, Pamlico, Pender,
Perquimans, Pitt, Richmond, Robeson, Sampson,
Scotland, Tyrrell, Wake, Wayne, and Wilson Counties
The RCW uses open old growth stands of southern pines, particularly longleaf pine
(Pinus palustris), for foraging and nesting habitat. A forested stand must contain at least
50% pine, lack a thick understory, and be contiguous with other stands to be appropriate
habitat for the RCW. These birds nest exclusively in trees that are >60 years old and are
contiguous with pine stands at least 30 years of age. The foraging range of the RCW is up
to 200 hectares (500 acres). This acreage must be contiguous with suitable nesting sites.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Suitable habitat for the RCW does not exist at the project site. Although pines are
present, the stands are neither 50% pine in composition or contiguous with other stands
offering habitat. Therefore, no impacts to the RCW are expected as a result of project
construction.
2. Soils
Halifax County lies in the Piedmont Physiographic Province. It is characterized by
rolling hills and common interstream divides with many small tributaries.
The dominant soil association within the project area is Emporia-Urban Land
complex (Ur). This map unit consists of areas 85 percent of which are covered with
impervious surfaces (streets, buildings, parking lots, railroad yards, and others). The
natural soils were greatly altered by cutting, filling, grading, and shaping during the
processes of urbanization. The original landscape, topography, and drainage pattern have
been changed. Most of the soils have been altered by cutting and filling. Runoff is
excessive on urban land and increases the hazard of flooding in low-lying areas.
The topography of Halifax County consists of rolling upland areas surrounded by
moderate slopes into low bottomland areas.
21
3. Wetlands and Permits
Surface waters and wetlands fall under the broad category of "Waters of the United
States," as defined in Section 33 of the Code of Federal Register (C.F.R.) Part 328.3.
Wetlands are those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a
frequency and duration sufficient to support, and under normal circumstances do support, a
prevalence of vegetation typically adapted to life in saturated conditions. Any action that
proposes to place fill into these areas falls under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (COE) under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344).
Minor alterations to the unnamed tributaries to the Roanoke River will occur as a
result of the project. Although precautions will be taken to prevent sedimentation loss from
the construction site, the observed effects of ongoing disturbances suggest that conditions
will not be changed as a result of the proposed road widening.
Impacts to waters of the United States come under jurisdiction of the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (COE). A Nationwide Permit #14 (minor road crossings) is applicable
to the project. Nationwide permits do not require mitigation according to the
Memorandum of Agreement (MOE) between the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
and the Department of the Army. However, final permit/mitigation decisions will be made
by the Corps of Engineers (COE).
4. Flood Hazard Evaluation
Halifax County and the City of Roanoke Rapids are participants in the National
Flood Insurance Program Figure 7 is a copy of the Flood Insurance Rate Map delineating
the limits of the 100-year floodplain and floodway of the Roanoke River north of the
project. As shown in Figure 7, SR 1426 (Bolling Road/Fifth Street) is well outside the
Roanoke River floodplain. Therefore, there will not be any significant floodplain
involvement associated with this project.
5. Water Resources and Quality
Project U-1007 is within the Roanoke River Basin. Bolling Road is located along
the watershed boundary separating the Roanoke River and Chockoyotte Creek, a sub-basin
of the Roanoke River. One perennial and two intermittent streams, ultimately converging
with the Roanoke River, intersect the project corridor. The intermittent streams cross
SR 1426 (Bolling Road/Fifth Street) near Smoot Drive and Cedar Street. The perennial
stream crosses near Henry Street. The Environmental Sensitivity Base Map reveals that one
of the intermittent tributaries lies 0.8 kilometer (0.5 mile) from Roanoke Rapids Lake, the
water supply reservoir for the City of Roanoke Rapids. The project area lies within the
critical area (CA) of this water supply watershed. The water supply intake is in the vicinity
of the Roanoke Rapids Lake Dam, which is approximately 1.2 kilometers (0.75 mile) north
of SR 1426 (Bolling Road) (beyond the end of Oakwood Avenue). The perennial stream, a
tributary of the Roanoke River, empties into Roanoke Rapids Lake immediately upstream
of the water supply intake.
The biologist observed slow to moderate water flow rates at all the streams due to a
recent rain. Water clarity was excellent and the substrates varied between cobble, pebble,
sand, silt, and refuse including bricks, bottles, tires and concrete.
Streams have been assigned a best usage classification by the Division of
Environmental Management (DEM). The Roanoke River, located approximately 0.8
kilometer (0.5 mile) north of the project, is classified as WS-IV B CA. WS-IV designates
22
waters protected as water supplies which are generally in moderately to highly developed
watersheds; point source discharges of treated wastewater are permitted; local programs to
control nonpoint source and stormwater discharge of pollution are required; suitable for all
Class C uses. Class B designates primary recreation and any other usage specified by the
"C" classification. Class "C" waters are suitable for aquatic life propagation and survival,
fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation, and agriculture. CA designates Critical Area, in
which the NCDOT will use Best Management Practices to protect all surface waters,
especially those that are water supply intakes.
At the scoping meeting, and in subsequent input, the Division of Environmental
Management (DEM) requested that NCDOT install hazardous spill catch basins for the
stream crossings in the project area to serve as sediment traps during construction and
retain any hazardous spills after completion of construction. The Hydrualics Unit will
review the feasibility of including hazardous spill basins during final design.
DEM also indicated a preference for a shoulder and ditch cross section to allow
drainage from the road to filter through the ground. This would not meet the purpose and
need of the project, and it would result in additional right of way impacts; therefore, it is not
recommended.
Special consideration will be given in final design to ensure that appropriate
measures are taken to preserve and maintain the high water quality in the critical intake
area. Erosion and sedimentation control measures appropriate for high quality water areas
will be specified, installed, and properly maintained during project construction.
No High Quality Waters (HQW), Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW), or WS-I/11
waters exist within 1.6 kilometers (1.0 mile) of the project.
The Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN) is managed by DEM
and is part of an ongoing ambient water quality monitoring program which addresses long
term trends in water quality. The program assesses water quality by sampling for selected
benthic macroinvertebrate organisms at fixed monitoring sites. Macroinvertebrates are
sensitive to very subtle changes in water quality; thus, the species richness and overall
biomass reflect water quality. No BMAN ratings are given for the perennial stream
(unnamed tributary to the Roanoke River) that intersects the project study area near Henry
Street.
Point source dischargers located throughout North Carolina are permitted through
the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program. Any discharger is
required to register for a permit. The NPDES lists no dischargers for this stream.
With respect to water resources, extension of two concrete pipes (one at Smoot
Drive and one at Cedar Street) and the culvert (near Henry Street) along with the widening
of Bolling Road pose moderate risks. Anticipated impacts to water resources are: substrate
destabilization, shoreline erosion, reduced water clarity, differences in flow rates, and
temperature fluctuations caused by removal of stream side vegetation. Precautions will be
taken in order to minimize impacts to water resources in the study area, and High Quality
Waters erosion control measures will be strictly enforced during the construction stage of
the project.
6. Farmland
The Farmland Protection Policy Act of 1981 requires all federal agencies or their
representatives to consider the impact of land acquisition and construction projects on
23
prime and important farmland soils. Soils located in urban areas or undeveloped areas
committed to urban development are exempt from the requirements of the Act.
Medium density residential development occupies most of the project area;
therefore, it can be characterized as an urban area. In addition, the City of Roanoke Rapids
Comprehensive Development Plan indicates that the project area is within the City's
"primary growth area," defined as the area where growth is "especially encouraged."
Therefore, no further consideration of potential impacts to farmland soils is required.
7. Highway Traffic and Construction Noise Analysis
a. Background
Traffic noise impacts are determined from the current procedures for the abatement
of highway traffic noise and construction noise, appearing as Part 772 of Title 23 of the
Code of Federal Regulations. If traffic noise impacts are predicted, examination and
evaluation of alternative noise abatement measures for reducing or eliminating the noise
impacts must be considered. See Appendix 2 for traffic noise analysis tables N1-N6 (pages
A2-1 through A2-10).
Table N1 (Appendix 2, page A2-1) gives examples of noise pressure levels. This
table indicates that individuals in urban areas such as Roanoke Rapids are subject to fairly
high noise levels from a variety of sources, including vehicular traffic.
b. Noise Abatement Criteria
In order to determine whether highway noise levels are or are not compatible with
various land uses, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has developed noise
abatement criteria (NAC) and procedures to be used in the planning and design of
highways. These abatement criteria and procedures are set forth in the aforementioned
Federal reference (Title 23 CFR Part 772). A summary of the noise abatement criteria for
various land uses is presented in Table N2 (see Appendix 2, page A2-2). The Leq, or
equivalent sound level, is the level of constant sound that, in a given situation and time
period, has the same energy as does time varying sound. In other words, the fluctuating
sound levels of traffic noise are represented in terms of a steady noise level with the same
energy content.
c. Ambient Noise Levels
Ambient noise measurements were taken in the vicinity of the project to determine
the existing background noise levels. The purpose of this noise level information was to
quantify the existing acoustic environment and to provide a base for assessing the impact of
noise level increases. The existing Leq noise level along SR 1426 (Bolling Road/Fifth
Street) as measured at 15 meters from the roadway ranged from 63.0 to 64.1 dBA. The
ambient measurement sites and measured exterior Leq noise levels are presented in Figure
N2 and Table N3 (see Appendix 2, pages A2-3 and A2-4).
The existing roadway and traffic conditions were used with the most current traffic
noise prediction model in order to calculate existing noise levels for comparison with noise
levels actually measured. The calculated existing noise levels were within 1.4 to 1.9 dBA of
the measured noise levels for the three locations where noise measurements were obtained.
Differences in dBA levels can be attributed to "bunching" of vehicles, low traffic volumes,
and actual vehicle speeds versus the computer's "evenly-spaced" vehicles and single
vehicular speed.
24
d. Procedure for Predicting Future Noise Levels
The procedure used to predict future noise levels in this study was the Noise Barrier
Cost Reduction Procedure, STAMINA 2.0 and OPTIMA (revised March, 1983). The
Barrier Cost Reduction (BCR) procedure is based upon the FHWA Highway Traffic Noise
Prediction Model (FHWA-RD-77-108). The BCR traffic noise prediction model uses the
number and type of vehicles on the planned roadway, their speeds, the physical
characteristics of the road (curves, hills, depressed, elevated, and others), receptor location
and height, and, if applicable, barrier type, barrier ground elevation, and barrier top
elevation.
Only the preliminary design concept was available for use in this noise analysis.
Only those existing natural or man-made barriers were included in setting up the model.
The roadway sections and proposed intersections were assumed to be flat and at-grade.
Thus, this analysis represents the "worst-case" topographical conditions. The noise
predictions made in this report are highway-related noise predictions for the traffic
conditions during the year being analyzed.
Peak hour design and level-of-service (LOS) C volumes were compared, and the
volumes resulting in the noisiest conditions were used with the proposed posted speed
limits. Hence, during all other time periods, the noise levels will be no greater than those
indicated in this report.
The STAMINA 2.0 computer model was utilized in order to determine the number
of land uses (by type) which would be impacted during the peak hour of the design year
2018. A land use is considered to be impacted when exposed to noise levels approaching or
exceeding the FHWA noise abatement criteria and/or predicted to sustain a substantial noise
increase. The basic approach was to select receptor locations such as 7.5, 15, 30, 60, 120,
240, and 480 meters from the center of the near traffic lane (adaptable to both sides of the
roadway). The location of these receptors were determined by the changes in projected
traffic volumes and/or the posted speed limits along the proposed project. The result of this
procedure was a grid of receptor points along the project. Using this grid, noise levels were
calculated for each identified receptor.
The Leq traffic noise exposures associated with this project are listed in Table N4
(see Appendix 2, pages A2-5 to A2-8). Information included in these tables consists of
listings of all receptors in proximity to the project, their ambient and predicted noise levels,
and the estimated noise level increase for each.
The maximum number of receptors in each activity category that are predicted to
become impacted by future traffic noise is shown in Table N5 (see Appendix 2, page A2-9).
These are noted in terms of those receptors expected to experience traffic noise impacts by
approaching or exceeding the FHWA NAC or by a substantial increase in exterior noise
levels. Under Title 23 CFR Part 772, 69 residential receptors were determined to be
impacted by highway traffic noise. Other information included in Table N5 is the maximum
extent of the 72 and 67 dBA noise level contours. This information should assist local
authorities in exercising land use control over the remaining undeveloped lands adjacent to
the roadway within local jurisdiction. For example, with the proper information on noise,
the local authorities can prevent further development of incompatible activities and land
uses with the predicted noise levels of an adjacent highway.
Table N6 (see Appendix 2, page A2-10) indicates the exterior traffic noise level
increases for the identified receptors in each roadway section. Predicted noise level
increases for this project range from +2 to +5 dBA. When real-life noises are heard, it is
25
possible to barely detect noise level changes of 2-3 dBA. A 5 dBA change is more readily
noticeable. A 10 dBA change is judged by most people as a doubling or a halving of the
loudness of the sound.
e. Traffic Noise Impact Analysis
Traffic noise impacts occur when the predicted traffic noise levels either: [a]
approach or exceed the FHWA noise abatement criteria (with "approach" meaning within 1
dBA of the Table N2 value), or [b] substantially exceed the existing noise levels. The
NCDOT definition of substantial increase is shown in the lower portion of Table N2 (see
Appendix 2, page A2-2). Consideration for noise abatement measures must be given to
receptors which fall in either category. Based on these criteria, there are 69 impacted
receptors in the project area.
f. Do Nothing Alternative
A no build analysis is not warranted in this project. Since this project proposes to
widen the existing two lane facility to a three lane facility, traffic volumes are not expected
to change substantially. This is because the number of directional flow lanes will be the
same before and after implementation of this project. Noise levels for the no build scenario
are expected to be approximately equal to those after project completion.
g. Construction Noise
The major construction elements of this project are expected to be earth removal,
hauling, grading, and paving. General construction noise impacts, such as temporary speech
interference for passers-by and those individuals living or working near the project, can be
expected, in particular from paving operations and earth moving equipment during grading
operations. However, considering the relatively short-term nature of construction noise and
the limitation of construction to daytime hours, these impacts are not expected to be
substantial. The transmission loss characteristics of nearby natural elements and man-made
structures are believed to be sufficient to moderate the effects of intrusive construction
noise.
h. Conclusion
For a noise barrier to provide sufficient noise reduction, it must be high enough and
long enough to shield the receptor from significant sections of the roadway. There is
substantial development along the project, with many openings for intersecting streets and
driveways. Because of this, there is not sufficient spacing between access points to provide
effective noise barriers. In addition, noise barriers would reduce sight distance at the
intersections and driveway connections.
Based on these preliminary studies, traffic noise abatement is not recommended, and
no noise abatement measures are proposed. This evaluation completes the highway traffic
noise requirements of Title 23 CFR Part 772, and unless a major project change develops,
no additional noise reports will be submitted for this project.
8. Air Quality Analysis
a. Background
Air pollution originates from various sources. Emissions from industrial and internal
combustion engines are the most prevalent sources. Other origins of common outdoor air
26
pollution are solid waste disposal and any form of fire. The impact resulting from highway
construction ranges from intensifying existing air pollution problems to improving the
ambient air conditions. The traffic is the center of concern when determining the impact of
a new highway facility or the improvement of an old highway facility. Motor vehicles emit
carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxide (NO), hydrocarbons (HC), particulate matter, sulfur
dioxide (SO2), and lead (Pb) (listed in order of decreasing emission rate). Automobiles are
considered to be the major source of CO in the project area. For this reason, most of the
analysis presented is concerned with determining expected carbon monoxide levels in the
vicinity of the project due to traffic flow.
In order to determine the ambient CO concentration for the receptor closest to the
highway project, two concentration components must be used: local and background. The
local concentration is defined as the CO emissions from cars operating on highways in the
near vicinity (i.e., distances within 100 meters) of the receptor location. The background
concentration is defined by the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and
Natural Resources as "the concentration of a pollutant at a point that is the result of
emissions outside the local vicinity; that is, the concentration at the upwind edge of the local
sources."
In this study, the local concentration was determined by the NCDOT Traffic
Noise/Air Quality Staff using line source computer modeling and the background
concentration was obtained from the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health
and Natural Resources (NCDEHNR). Once the two concentration components were
resolved, they were added together to determine the ambient CO concentration for the
receptor in question and to compare to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS)•
A3-2)Appendix 3 contains the air quality analysis tables Al and A2 (see pages A3-1 and
.
b. Hydrocarbons and Nitrogen Oxides
Automobiles are regarded as sources of hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides.
Hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides emitted from cars are carried into the atmosphere where
they react with sunlight to form ozone and nitrogen dioxide. Area-wide automotive
emissions of HC and NO are expected to decrease in the future due to the continued
installation and maintenance of pollution control devices on new cars. Hence, the ambient
ozone and nitrogen dioxide levels in the atmosphere should continue to decrease as a result
of the improvements on automobile emissions.
c. Particulate Matter
Automobiles are not regarded as significant sources of particulate matter and sulfur
dioxide. Nationwide, highway sources account for less than 7 percent of particulate matter
emissions and less than 2 percent of sulfur dioxide emissions. Particulate matter and sulfur
dioxide emissions are predominantly the result of non-highway sources (e.g., industrial,
commercial, and agricultural). Because emissions of particulate matter and sulfur dioxide
from automobiles are very low, there is no reason to suspect that traffic on the project will
cause air quality standards for particulate matter and sulfur dioxide to be exceeded.
d. Lead
Automobiles without catalytic converters can burn regular gasoline. The burning of
regular gasoline emits lead as a result of regular gasoline containing tetraethyl lead, which is
27
added by refineries to increase the octane rating of the fuel. Newer cars with catalytic
converters burn unleaded gasoline, eliminating lead emissions. Also, the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has required the reduction in the lead content of
leaded gasoline. The overall average lead content of gasoline in 1974 was 0.5 grams per
liter. By 1989, this composite average had dropped to 0.0003 grams per liter. In the
future, lead emissions are expected to decrease as more cars use unleaded fuels and as the
lead content of leaded gasoline is reduced. The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 make
the sale, supply, or transport of leaded gasoline or lead additives unlawful after
31 December 1995. Because of these reasons, it is not expected that traffic on the
proposed project will cause the NAAQS for lead to be exceeded.
e. Carbon Monoxide
A microscale air quality analysis was performed to determine future CO
concentrations resulting from the proposed highway improvements. "CAL3QHC - A
Modeling Methodology For Predicting Pollutant Concentrations Near Roadway
Intersections" was used to predict the CO concentration at the nearest sensitive receptor to
the project.
Inputs into the mathematical model to estimate hourly CO concentrations consisted
of a level roadway under normal conditions with predicted traffic volumes, vehicle emission
factors, and worst-case meteorological parameters. The traffic volumes are based on the
annual average daily traffic projections. The traffic volume used for the CAL3QHC model
was the highest volume within the project limits. Carbon monoxide vehicle emission factors
were calculated for the year 1998 and the design year 2018 using the EPA publication
"Mobile Source Emission Factors" and the MOBILESA mobile source emissions computer
model.
The background CO concentration for the project area was estimated to be 1.9 parts
per million (ppm). Consultation with the Air Quality Section, Division of Environmental
Management, North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
indicated that an ambient CO concentration of 1.9 ppm is suitable for most suburban/rural
areas.
The worst-case air quality receptor was determined to be receptor #39 at a distance
of 10 m from the proposed and existing centerlines of the roadway. The "build" one-hour
CO concentrations for the nearest sensitive receptor for the years 1998 and 2018 are shown
in Table 4.
TABLE 4. One Hour CO Concentrations PP
Nearest Sensitive Receptor Build
1998 2018
R-39 2.5 2.5
Comparison of the predicted CO concentrations with the NAAQS (maximum
permitted for 1-hour averaging period = 35 ppm; 8-hour averaging period = 9 ppm)
indicates no violation of these standards. Since the results of the worst-case 1- hour CO
analysis is less than 9 ppm, it can be concluded that the 8-hour CO level does not exceed
the standard. See Tables Al and A2 for input data and output (Appendix 3, pages A34
and A3-2).
28
f. Burning
During construction of the proposed project, all materials resulting from clearing
and grubbing, demolition, or other operations will be removed from the project, burned, or
otherwise disposed of by the contractor. Any burning will be done in accordance with
applicable local laws and ordinances and regulations of the North Carolina SIP for air
quality in compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520. Care will be taken to insure that burning
will be done at the greatest practical distance from dwellings and not when atmospheric
conditions are such as to create a hazard to the public. Burning will only be used under
constant surveillance. During construction, measures will be taken to reduce the dust
generated by construction when the control of dust is necessary for the protection and
comfort of motorists or area residents. This evaluation completes the assessment
requirements for air quality of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments and the NEPA process,
and no additional reports are necessary.
g. Conclusion
The project is within the jurisdiction for air quality of the Raleigh Regional Office of
the N.C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. Halifax County has
been determined to be in compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards.
Because the proposed project is located in an attainment area, the provisions of the
24 November 1993 Transportation regulation provisions (40 CFR Parts 51 and 93) are not
currently applicable. This project is not anticipated to create any adverse effect on the air
quality of this attainment area.
9. Stream Modification
There will be no stream modifications on this project.
10. Hazardous Materials
A field reconnaissance survey identified five underground storage tank (UST)
facilities within the project limits. These tanks were installed between April 1964 and
March 1991.
The Geotechnical Unit reviewed reports of preliminary site assessments of four
these facilities. There was evidence of a release of petroleum hydrocarbons at one site, the
Blue Flame Mini Mart No. 6/Citgo Station, located on the north side of SR 1426 (Fifth
Street) across from Henry Street (see Figure 2D). Preliminary site assessments from the
other three sites did not indicate evidence of hazardous materials. These sites are the Pine
Cone Grocery, located in the southeast quadrant of the SR 1426/SR 1400 intersection; New
Dixie Mart #12, located on the south side of SR 1426 across from Western Drive; and
Roanoke Yarn Dye Plant #2, located on the south side of SR 1426 at Jackson Street.
Consultants were denied access to one other site in the project area; therefore, they did not
perform a preliminary assessment.
Once proposed right of way is determined and construction plans are available,
Planning and Environmental will request further assessments for the Blue Flame Mini Mart
and, as needed, for the site for which access was denied. These assessments will be
forwarded to the Groundwater Section of the N.C. Division of Environmental Management.
Based on the field reconnaissance and the files of the Division of Solid Waste
Management, Solid and Hazardous Waste Sections and the Superfund Section, no
29
additional pollution sources are expected to affect this project. No landfills, dumpsites, or
Superfund sites are known to exist within the project limits.
11. Geotechnical Impacts
The project lies at the border of the Eastern Slate Belt and Atlantic Coastal Plain
physiographic provinces. The area is level to sloping, with a relief along the project of
approximately 15 meters (50 feet). Streamflow in the area is generally northeastward,
toward Roanoke Rapids Lake and the Little River. Two intermittent streams and one
perennial stream cross the project. The perennial stream, a tributary of the Roanoke River,
empties into Roanoke Rapids Lake immediately upstream of the water supply intake.
The project corridor is underlain primarily by fluvial gravels, sands, and clays from
Tertiary terrace deposits. There is some contribution to bedrock from metamorphosed
quartz diorite intrusives. These intrusives are foliated to massive and locally porphyritic.
The unconsolidated materials are primarily metaquartzites within a sandy clay matrix. Areas
of iron-cemented sandstone are common. The depth to bedrock is greater than 1.5 meters
(4.9 feet) in the project area.
Soils within the project area are from the Norfolk-Orangeburg association. These
soils are well drained and are located in nearly level to sloping interstream divides. They are
fine to medium grained sandy silts and silty sands with various amounts of clay and organic
material. The subsoil is a friable to moderately plastic sandy clay.
Engineering properties of these soils indicate slight erosion and equipment hazard
limitations. Shallow excavations and pond/reservoir areas are adversely affected by wetness
and seepage. The soil and terrain are favorable to the construction of terraces and
diversions and are well suited for grass waterways. Soil permeability is moderate to rapid,
decreasing with depth. The depth of the apparent seasonal high water table is from 1.2 to
greater than 1.8 meters (3.9 to 5.9 feet) throughout the area. Soil reactivity, measured in
pH, is very strongly acid, pH 4.5 to 6.0. The risk of corrosion to uncoated steel is moderate
to high and to concrete is high. AASHTO soil classifications are A-2, A-4, and A-6.
Due to the sandy nature of the soil in this area and the presence of the water supply
lake downstream of the project, significant erosion control measures will be necessary
throughout the duration of the project. High Quality Waters erosion control measures will
be implemented throughout construction of the project.
The only groundwater occurrences within the project are the three streams
discussed previously. Flooding of Roanoke Rapids Lake has not been reported in recent
times and should not be a concern during construction.
12. Construction Impacts
To minimize potential adverse effects caused by construction, the following
measures, along with those already mentioned, will be implemented during the construction
phase:
a. Waste and debris shall be disposed of in areas that are outside of the right-of-
way and provided by the Contractor, unless otherwise required by the plans or
special provision by the Engineer. Disposal of waste and debris in active public
waste or disposal areas will not be permitted without prior approval by the
Engineer. Such approval will not be permitted when, in the opinion of the
Engineer, it will result in excessive siltation or pollution.
30
b. Borrow pits and all ditches will be drained insofar as possible to alleviate
breeding areas for mosquitoes.
c. Care will be taken not to block existing drainage ditches.
d. An extensive rodent control program will be established if structures are to be
removed or demolished.
Telephone, water, sewer, gas, and electric utilities exist along the project. The
Department of Transportation will hold a preconstruction conference between
the Department, the Contractor, representatives of the involved utility
companies, and local officials. Methods to coordinate utility adjustments will be
discussed at this conference. The contractor will prepare a work schedule that
minimizes possible damage to these utilities and interruption of service.
f. During construction of the proposed project, all materials resulting from clearing
and grubbing, demolition, or other operations will be removed from the project
and burned or otherwise disposed of by the Contractor. Any burning done will
be done in accordance with applicable local laws and ordinances and regulations
of the North Carolina State Implementation Plan for air quality. Care will be
taken to insure burning will be done at the greatest distance practicable from
dwellings and not when atmospheric conditions are such as to create a hazard to
the public. Burning will be performed under constant surveillance.
g. An erosion control schedule will be developed by the contractor before starting
work. The schedule will show the time relationship between phases of the work
that must be coordinated to reduce erosion and describe construction practices
and temporary erosion control measures that will be used to minimize erosion.
In conjunction with this schedule, the contractor will be required to follow those
provisions of the plans and specifications pertaining to erosion and siltation.
These contract provisions are in accordance with the strict erosion control
measures outlined in the Department of Transportation's FHPM 6-7-3-1 and 23
CFR 650B. Temporary erosion control measures such as berms, dikes, dams, silt
basin, and others will be used as needed.
h. Prior to the approval of any borrow source developed for the use on this project,
the contractor shall obtain a certification from the State Historic Preservation
Officer of the State Department of Cultural Resources certifying that the
removal of the material from the borrow source will have no effect on any
known district, site, building, structure, or object that is listed on the National
Register of Historic Places. A copy of this certification shall be furnished to the
Engineer prior to performing any work on the proposed borrow source.
i. Measures will be taken in allaying the dust generated by construction when the
control of dust is necessary for the protection and comfort of motorists or area
residents.
j. Traffic service in the immediate project area may be briefly disrupted during
construction. Efforts will be made to ensure the transportation needs of the
public will be met during and after construction.
31
VI. COMMENTS AND COORDINATION
A. COMMENTS RECEIVED FROM FEDERAL. STATE. AND LOCAL AGENCIES
The project has been coordinated with appropriate federal, state, and local agencies.
NCDOT received comments from the following agencies:
U. S. Department of the Interior--Fish and Wildlife Service
N. C. Department of Administration—State Clearinghouse
N. C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources-Division of
Environmental Management, Raleigh Regional Office, Division of Forest
Resources, Office of Policy Development, and Wildlife Resources
Commission,
N. C.Department of Cultural Resources--State Historic Preservation Officer
N. C.Department of Public Instruction
City of Roanoke Rapids--City Manager, City Planner, City Schools Superintendent
Appendix 4 includes copies of these comments (see pages A4-1 through A4-25).
B. CITIZENS INFORMATIONAL WORKSHOP
The Division of Highways held an informal, Citizens Informational Workshop for
the project on 23 August 1994. This workshop was at the Lloyd Andrews Meeting Hall in
Roanoke Rapids. Representatives of the NCDOT Division 4 Office, Division 4 Right of
Way Office, Planning and Environmental Branch, and Roadway Design Unit were available
to explain the project, answer questions, and receive comments. Approximately 30 people
attended the meeting. Appendix 5 (see page A5-1) contains a copy of the news release
advertising the workshop.
During the workshop, the Division of Highways displayed an aerial photograph of
the project area showing proposed improvements. The Division of Highways supplied each
participant with an information packet containing general project information, a vicinity
map, and a comment sheet. Appendix 5 contains a copy of this packet (see pages A5-2
through A5-7). Each participant had the opportunity to review the aerial photograph and
ask questions or give comments.
The proposed design at the time of the workshop was essentially the same as the
recommended improvement. NCDOT has added turn lanes to the design on each
approach to the intersection of SR 1426 and SR 1400 (West Tenth Street), a right turn
lane at the intersection of SR 1426 and NC 48 (Roanoke Avenue), and a raised concrete
barrier on east-bound Fifth Street just west of the existing junction with SR 1426.
Most of the participants favored improvements along SR 1426. Some of the local
citizens noted their great concern about the safety of this road. Other citizens raised
concerns about how the project would affect their property, property access, and parking.
C. PUBLIC HEARING
A Public Hearing will be held following circulation of this report to provide more
detailed project information to local citizens and receive additional comments on the
project.
RWF

`I
1?, { ;I ?
? ? ? '?
i
' `,
i ?,

;
i
?
? t ? _

I
? ?` ?
# i.
} 1 '' ? ,
;-
' ?i ? 1'
i
j
1I i= j

? ^-
I. 1
?: .
S
1 ?
1
-
?I ???
I
? ? '??
t ? ? ; I
I
?`-
?; I
'i

.. X11
??
'+
ii
' II
?' II I i

9.

1
I .I
i' ? - !
' I ?
?
?
' !
i ?.

_
`
t
; 4
r
!i?
? ? ? ?, k - i.
i
_it
f
i
, i ? ?'.. -
I
i
t

I 1
l ? l

II
I

_
?.

I
,t
12
i 6 158 A?, ,
I Littleton aao a RRa-id
t 3 heasvlll , ?
r 4 1
Airlie s
G?-? 4B ' Halilae? eano
NORTH CAROLINA ' a
Brinkleyville Brys
' l Haethsvil a X301 2 y Tillery
% 2Noniet r H A' L I F ' s
? s ^R\in? gwOod
.4 r s Sort Hill
l:nV1*w Enheld 5 10 258
7
Seotbnd Neck Le
RAPIDS
I
I
U-1007
r ?sX e,lll? ? ?? ?,r1¦A?? 1 g
2.0 f ROANOKE
1400 RAPIDS
424 ?• / \ V POP. 15,939
io ROSEMARY 125
/ (UNINC.) \ N
? l
2 , n s. 9 ?
7 158 I 4 1 R??40
y 1432 f W ^ 14
0
2.0
\
168 % Halifax County ?,,
?- Airport 25 ? %
(d
1_429 rL' / A. a
/ N
8
143 S 1434 ?•wvlll• /
- 903 ?
10 ` 1730 ' North Carolina Department Of
1627 `' O I Transportation
1671 Planning & Environmental Branch
N f 4
N ROANOKE RAPIDS
1210 903 SR 1426 FROM SR 1400 TO NC 48
HALIFAX COUNTY
P N U-1007
0 km 1.6 km 3.2
11 i _ I Figure 1
0 miles 1.0 miles 2.0
1 1 r I I r: l ? I i
o N ---------
01 o
o AO p9 '?
y48 GASTON
F'.
_ - - -_--t - --?: _ _? U-2419
-.. ,
'IDS - LAKE ,
-•
?''• U-1007
`1400 - r:• , Cb Q
cl Bolling?..: ROANOKE :;.
? i RAPIDS
'z B-3468 POP 14 O
??`? , ;:.:.:, _ 702
_ ROSEMARY 95 i '.
(..
14 60 ?(UNIN ) 125 1
1 \P0 P.1,828 i!' l d. I j
tlm??? ?.: r - _ , - III,
a s B-2083 -?
1435^ 4 ^/?,P
'527 158 ,._R-258 ?;r1kA 0qo VReq 1\
2 r(':::• ##441 -.11. •?1?4?? 7 I-905
1528 A x[816 F
IALIFAX COUNTY AIRPORT 01
p
EXT.
1549 - 44111550 i :.:. `?? . /.. ---?•? PQ
i 125 'i::'w1 AP 2.2
1 ? Halifax gPt? ?y,? • C?? •;: •. 1 3
1474 Airport County BDY. v? U-2720, 58
F. S.
`t'•'•. ?•
1548 ELDO i
P ? w 1681 Q ? (UNINC.) ?. .i ,.:? I :',•••:' l W ?
?? 1 03 ti S `? h POP. Creek ?' 1 ji/, l .mac
1433 1682 1,80 WELD
b POP. 1,E
\?? 1508 Adams 1494 ?.? 2 j 01,
1.1
1600
3 5 Rheasville- 1.7 1692
4 1719 1627 a 1698 1.600 f 1623
4 173? '
1666 - 1626 1733
b f I-2004 --
1665 v b 1731
??P 171 Days
k 1. 1 Crossroads 172O
1.1
A 1625 6 1624 a i
1730 \ q_1712 O? 1621
J 1627 O
b
4 ??? S r e> 1622
rJ
FqS 1694
P b f,??
14.
1671
600? North Carolina Department Of
' Transportation
168 Planning & Environmental Branch
lfll/:sf ? .g
ROANOKE RAPIDS
?.6 5 5 903 SR 1426 FROM SR 1400 TO NC 48
1600 Pierces HALIFAX COUNTY
Crossroads 2 T.I. . NO. U-1007
1615 1600 •8 0 km 1.6 Ian 3.2
'
1616 i a Vigure lA
g 3 0 miles 1.0 miles 2.0

a
WQ
y
O
J
1L
U
Z rt
r
m
O ? rnnrl
I -?
elm
A
1 1-
(Y.n.
J O a U
r_zro
r'
U
ul
J J
z°
3
O \\ U
O ?.? IU
3 ?
?r?y\
W \ (J \
ll Iw r'
?l ?aU
O

fn
>
p U ZI a
n] W w
I-
I ,
I

1
I

I
'
Z Z
:D :D
i
O O
r
I
r
1
r
Z
01
~
Y
d
`
a
L c ,
`
W
>
2 lU U
N
?U)mr

II. (,)
V I U U: I-- Y- ?/
a
-, 4. a a a
? U -, U O J C] V)
z
WOU
Z
d H ,p
I
ate-
2=_.1
J U1 W
J ( n.
a ur,u
LO
N
w
0
q Z `D N
( r ??b -? ?: ? g VQl O
vi \ a a q f'? 1p?
rn 8
Y ( U ? ? ? ? ti ? Y
rt _I L ?? ? e
-- U o Z O a ?i Q
zf-la LA
OD
It
OI
O
111'
U) n:
l
1 u
5t. ? o
\N
ST.
]: I
O
MkVE5
OPK?"?? ? 4~i ORE?N
r
o.
a >'
00
? Q r
> U
? c? PS?y ()V%
- r'r \
??
j?
-I
N P, c• '? LIM ?
0)
G\ K) ..
'00
??
,00
o?? ? i
V+^ ?
s Sao ? ?
luj
ILI
W Z a: 4,rlu
(t (.) al .9pbry
T. r
S ?Ll
__- ro? ??n ?1r.r s
3
J 41
Y N
z (?L
a I V
? N h
C
/ ql U
U
-' HDNVNO
° ? tC
0 f,
wac
?m/
(Nou 7H
O OD
0 a
z I -
r "Alb,
onK? nN
cr• ? ?t
In a.
N 1
I.- aj
H
0
o
U
o" 0
U W
CJ (L `
ii :r. ulr„r?f
(n
q ii w n?
? > ¦.( Ire
. Q (tzJ -f
? ? N
Q7 ?I
rc I
3`(Q v ,' J
w n m Q rr, -?
Wr4$ -J-1
O 3P ? .?"?? 01I W 7. U
_j I-
Y?od`t ~`?-? - FD(L
du Q? ... __\ I 0 a
JUIn
r--1 fts`oE ,
[XT. IIWnS111N,0 rO,
y..ua r .

it ?..,{..,
W
H
0
?o
M
-r
1-1
Z
N
`f
a
Ow
w Q
H
T
Q? U
as

t? ? H
*w

? H
O
N
c?
T
O
H
G7
a
.?,
WPM
R
1 1,03
_ O
V? H
_ ww
rr W
Vy
F 1
c
x
i.
t
4
t
s
F
.Q!
M
W
H
w
H
A
a
a
a
V
O
oa
N
"F
c?
r?
H W
C/1 W
W
? W
a.
2

?a
A
w
.? U
c
MAN*
i
t ._I
Ti i
M? { pf
r ? rt
J - :. rl
. Yy?y? taj ?t-- i V ?
t ? W
i
? .A 4

f
I
T
w
M
w
W

Hamilton St. =

to of
OS E wd_- 60 co .- E.r
' U

J ~

Z
NC 48 f? CT
= w

Pm
09 60
(1,3)
v

•°o
C?
°
0
E r a.
n G v

Jackson St o N
r ?
-
.
(0'0)

OS 60
u d N
CD
w
°
N
cc-

Franklin St.
m f?
1400 ? t

OS E 60
wd
f,
N
O
E °
n .- O
6
OD
0
Vance St.
)nom J t
.11 r
(0'0) v N
SSE wd 60 •r
•°o
°
E °
c n
P
O
O
Cedar St. 500 J L
(0,C)
SS E wd 60 M -.
N
J
1 ? ^ I
I lD ?°0 ? I
I I
L,
C' C 1) l9

B00
(:00
600
400
20 Pm :? 80
(0,0)
N r1
I I vii N
t
? N ? O t'l
En c
I Ln I `
I CO
26?b
o?
?O
55
O\
.o
N ? J 19
? o
O
fJ
.?1
?4 N \
e . 55
9
? O06
Oov
U
'N
ON
rep M^
?N
O iW bn
? q
0, 17?
U
N
f-t
CT
C?? o
.o
O?
N

O
F C O
3 a.
> CL 0 a
-C
-U1

D
O
0
0 J
L \ 0
Z v C C v
O O w N V)
LU = F O -
E
C
c v _ o O
F-
W _ 0 0 Q
J o w a) a CD F-
r_ O
> 0 > > Z
1 E z r
I! II I! ^ n- (? O
?

G w
0 = O
0
0 0 o Z
P'?e
O
VI
00
do
° FO
CD
U
I, W
ti
a°
a
z
(TI
W w
.J t :rte
a?1 F
u, N
0
•o
C.
° E
N n r
r?
P
0
-7j
4400
C
O
M
Q
Hamill
NC
Jacks(
Franklin St.
Vance St.
Cedar St.
0
N
? CJ
n J
1600 N ? t
10.01
OS E rud 60 to -r
0
E r!
a
0
1800
800
600
20 Pm ->- 60
(0,o(
M
N ?
I vii U1
I N I m ? N
I ? I l0
--- --- Ln
u?
N ?
1800 J t-?
R `1
(o'o) M
SS E wd 60
•°o
_ o
G G Lp
P
O
N m
M
goo NJ <,
(o'o)
SS F wd 60 p
C? G r?
Q ?1
I I ?'O e9
a
I 7 ?Q
I R ? I
N

o\
h?
o ?
a
i- ?
(? w
Lr) o
P,?e
°a
°
O°NO
L '
in
r,j
S5
p?>
?o\
.o
ov
.c M
? ov C
E
N

Q C
3
O
0a
0
>
U
- Q)
CL
°
o
,. -C w

0
`
o O vi
Y
?
n `n "
0 -!
Q
Z D C = CL a o
C v

LU 0
= _
° 0
?-
0
E N
(3 r- O N u
` E
n _
r
Q
N O

J
'N
U
U
?
m 0
N . 06 I-
O
U 1

U = Q)
II II II a U o

O > p FU
O = O
o U U Z
e
OCR
Q?
hh
09
60
U
'N
Q
ItR)
H? ?.4
q N
o brp 9 ?a?? ?
?? o w b,p
Lo
N ? ?;Wq
op 0 ? ? `?
O
0
N
O
r
CID F-4
V
W
ti
O
a
z
r? r
- u?
0
•o
Cv
E
CC, a v
z
a
0
680Q
O
M
'let
V
CD
W
0
U-
Z
O
U
wW
w cn
Fm w
mr Fm
Fm D
?L 0
LL o
?z
oa
am
o?
orm ?
C) U
Z W
J Z
OJ
m .
ND
W
Cf)
oC O
cn a
O
oC
a
W
a
ca
U
cr-
w
H
W U-7
?
J d1
J U
o ?D
1n N
c
W S`
F- W
LL W
W W LL
CV
}
Q
LL
O
F-
FE
cn
cc
w
W
2
Ci
co
p
w
W
LL
0
1D
cn
m
W W
F- W
W LL
N
CO ?
Cl)
F
W
W
U-
04
cn
cc p
W W
?- W
W LL
N
tC r'
? v
cn -
WMW
W ~ W LUW e m LL
s
CV
a
U
W
W -?
2U
-i CIO
J U
o `D
Lv
LL
N
N LL
W
t11 w
m LL
co ov ri
w
Lli
V
m
41

-010

LLI

N?

Q

..r w

W O
i `
\
t .
0,"4 EXT

--??
-- -
?VOSH39j
3 3
15
? - _ N0IJNIFIS':

14 0

y
I: O S - -- = - -

- ---1 `n , - 133u,
S

O -- -'- `r

-L 3 -- _

LLI NOSIOYSy
133H1S ?- -- "-
30HNOvi

-
-

--n
_ --__ -
-
-?
---- ?
--- r
133HIS --_-_ ....
30HNOw
w 1 3-
S
?
NllaNyH? _
137H1S - -

i336 s
3JVYi?
13 3

_ 33HLS _---._ _--•

Id-a
so
3ty 31?--
?O'== --3rdY_S
a'-p0 1S
NO
Sll.tit 2

\\ 0 j
\ I
=L
I _
t
?o
t\
i
.-
/ LLJ
? 133H_S -.---
S
d. ? - S --- lOIH H

ba ?.
?VO
SL

\ ? u _S

O'l

pR 2
-
?? ,-s - -
` ?S nydO

I
?S SO SS
?_,-' amp '- -

O

i
WA a.,
0
N - ?ti .'

APPENDIX 1
Right of Way Abstract and
Relocation Information

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT, 7ION
JAMES B. HUNT. JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS R. SAMUEL HUNT III
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
P. O. Box 3165
Wilson, North Carolina 27,895
September 1, 1994
STATE PROJECT: 8.2300601
COUNTY: Halifax
F. A. PROJECT: STP-1426(1)
I. D. NUMBER: U-1007 ?
DESCRIPTION: Right of Way Abstract for Bolling Road/Fifth
Street from SR 1400 to NC 48 in Roanoke
Rapids
MEMORANDUM TO: Wayne Fedora
Planning & Environmental
FROM: H. G. Pittman
Division Right of Way Agent
The following is a right of way abstract for Bolling
Road/Fifth Street and intersecting Streets between SR 1400
and NC 48 in Roanoke Rapids.
1. Bolling Road/Fifth Street - 60' right of way from
NC 48 to end of curb and gutter between Rapids Street
and Waldo Street. The right of way is reduced to 50'
from the end of curb and gutter between Rapids Street
and Waldo Street to Miles Street. The right of way is
then increased back to 60' from Miles Street along the
rest of the length of Bolling Road to SR 1400.
2. Jack--on Street - 60' right of way.
3. Madison Street - 60' right of way.
4. Monroe Street - 60' right of way.
5. Henry Street - 60' right of way.
6. Franklin Street - 60' right of way.
7. Vance Street - 60' right of way.
8. Cedar Street - 60' right of way.

Al-1 G
Page 2
September 1, 1994
9. Rapids Street - 60' on the south side of Bolling
Street and 35' on the north side of Bolling Street.
10.. Waldo Street 7.40' right of way.
11. Wilson Street - 60' right of way.
12. Jewell Street - 40' right of way.
13. Cleveland Street - 40' right of way.
14. Whitak ers Street - 40' right of way.
15. Harris Street - 50' right of way.
16. Miles Street - 40' right of way.
17. Oakley Avenue - 40' right of way.
18. Walnut Street - 50' right of way.
19. Maple Street - 50' right of way.
20. Ashton Street - 50' right of way.
21. Oakwood Street - 50' right of way.
22. Pinecrest Street - 50' right of way.
23. Robinson Drive (SP. 1552)'- 60' right of way.
24. Simmons Road (SR 1438) - 50' right of way.
25. Elkins Road (SR 1540) 0 50' right of way.
26. Strauther Drive (SR 1437) - 50' right of way.
27. Johnston Street (SR 1501) - 60' right of way.
28. Smoot Drive - 80' right of way.
A02
Page 3
September 1, 1994
29. Morgan Drive - no right of way (private street).
30. Westwood (SR 1539) - 60' right of way.
31. Go-van Drive - 60' right of way.
32. Western Drive - 60' right of way.
33. Woodstore Road (SR 1493) - 40' right of way.
HGP: rfh

Al-3
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS RELOCATION PROGRAMS
It is the policy of the NCDOT to ensure that comparable replacement
housing will be available prior to construction of state and
federally-assisted projects. Furthermore, the North Carolina Board of
Transportation has the following three programs to minimize the
inconvenience of relocation:
* Relocation Assistance,
* Relocation Moving Payments, and
* Relocation Replacement Housing Payments or Rent Supplement.
With the Relocation Assistance Program, experienced NCDOT staff will be
available to assist displacees with information such as availability and
prices of homes, apartments, or businesses for sale or rent and financing
or other housing programs. The Relocation Moving Payments Program, in
general, provides for payment of actual moving expenses encountered in
relocation. Where displacement will force an owner or tenant to purchase
or rent property of higher cost or to lose a favorable financing arrange-
ment (in cases of ownership), the Relocation Replacement Housing Payments
or Rent Supplement Program will compensate up to $22,500 to owners who are
eligible and qualify and up to $5,250 to tenants who are eligible and
qualify.
The relocation program for the proposed action will be conducted in
accordance with the Federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real
Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (Public Law 91-646), and/or the
North Carolina Relocation Assistance Act (GS-133-5 through 133-18). The
program is designed to provide assistance to displaced persons in reloca-
ting to a replacement site in which to live or do business. At least one
relocation officer is assigned to each highway project for this purpose.
The relocation officer will determine the needs of displaced families,
individuals, businesses, non-profit organizations, and farm operations for
relocation assistance advisory services without regard to race, color,
religion, sex, or national origin. The NCDOT will schedule its work to
allow ample time, prior to displacement, for negotiations and possession
of replacement housing which meets decent, safe, and sanitary standards.
The displacees are given at least a 90-day written notice after NCDOT pur-
chases the property. Relocation of displaced persons will be offered in
areas not generally less desirable in regard to public utilities and
commercial facilities. Rent and sale prices of replacement property will
be within the financial means of the families and individuals displaced
and will be reasonably accessible to their places of employment. The
relocation officer will also assist owners of -displaced businesses,
non-profit organizations, and farm operations in searching for and moving
to replacement property.
All tenant and owner residential occupants who may be displaced will
receive an explanation regarding all available options, such as (1)
purchase of replacement housing, (2) rental of replacement housing, either
A1-4
private or public, or (3) moving existing owner-occupant housing to
another site (if possible). The relocation officer will also supply
information concerning other state or federal programs offering assistance
to displaced persons and will provide other advisory services as needed in
order to minimize hardships to displaced persons in adjusting to a new
location.
The Moving Expense Payments Program is designed to compensate the dis-
placee for the costs of moving personal property from homes, businesses,
non-profit organizations, and farm operations acquired for a highway
project. Under the Replacement Program for Owners, NCDOT will participate
in reasonable incidental purchase payments for replacement dwellings such
as attorney's fees, surveys, appraisals, and other closing costs and, if
applicable, make a payment for any increased interest expenses for
replacement dwellings. Reimbursement to owner-occupants for replacement
housing payments, increased interest payments, and incidental purchase
expenses may not exceed $22,500 (combined total), except under the Last
Resort Housing provision.
A displaced tenant may be eligible to receive a payment, not to exceed
$5,250, to rent a replacement dwelling or to make a down payment, includ-
ing incidental expenses, on the purchase of a replacement dwelling. The
down payment is based upon what the state determines is required when the
rent supplement exceeds $5250.
It is a policy of the state that no person will be displaced by the
NCDOT's state or federally-assisted construction projects unless and until
comparable replacement housing has been offered or provided for each
displacee within a reasonable period of time prior to displacement. No
relocation payment received will be considered as income for the purposes
of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 or for the purposes of determining
eligibility or the extent of eligibility of any person for assistance
under the Social Security Act or any other federal law.
Last Resort Housing is a program used when comparable replacement housing
is not available, or when it is unavailable within the displacee's finan-
cial means, and the replacement payment exceeds the federal/state legal
limitation. The purpose of the program is to allow broad latitudes in
methods of implementation by the state so that decent, safe, and sanitary
replacement housing can be provided. It is not felt that this program
will be necessary on the project, since there appear to be adequate
opportunities for relocation within the area.
Al-5
APPENDIX 2
Traffic Noise Analysis
Tables and Figures
TABLE N1
HEARING: SOUNDS BOMBARDING US DAILY
140 Shotgun blast, jet 30 m away at takeoff PAIN
Motor test chamber HUMAN EAR PAIN THRESHOLD
130
Firecrackers
120 Severe thunder, pneumatic jackhammer
Hockey crowd
Amplified rock music UNCOMFORTABLY LOUD
110
Textile loom
100 Subway train, elevated train, farm tractor
Power lawn mower, newspaper press
Heavy city traffic, noisy factory LOUD
90
D Diesel truck 65 kmh 15 m away
E 80 Crowded restaurant, garbage disposal
C Average factory, vacuum cleaner
I Passenger car 80 kmh 15 m away MODERATELY LOUD
B 70
E Quiet typewriter
L 60 Singing birds, window air-conditioner
S Quiet automobile
Normal conversation, average office QUIET
50
Household refrigerator
Quiet office VERY QUIET
40
Average home
30 Dripping faucet
Whisper 1.5 m away
20 Light rainfall, rustle of leaves
AVERAGE PERSON'S THRESHOLD OF HEARING
Whisper JUST AUDIBLE
10
0 THRESHOLD FOR ACUTE HEARING
Sources: World Book, Rand McNally Atlas of the Human Body,
Encyclopedia Americana, "Industrial Noise and Hearing
Conversation" by J. B. Olishifski and E. R. Harford
(Researched by N. Jane Hunt and published in the Chicago
Tribune in an illustrated graphic by Tom Heinz.)
A24
TABLE N2
NOISE ABATEMENT CRITERIA
Hourly A-Weighted Sound Level - decibels (dBA)
Activity
Category Leq(h) Description of Activity Category
A 57 Lands on which serenity and quiet are of extraordinary significance and serve an important public
(Exterior) need and where the preservation of those qualities is essential if the area is to continue to
serve its intended purpose.
B 67 Picnic areas, recreation areas, playgrounds, active sports areas, parks, residences, motels,
(Exterior) hotels, schools, churches, libraries, and hospitals.
C 72 Developed lands, properties, or activities not included in Categories A or B above.
(Exterior)
D -- Undeveloped lands
E 52 Residences, motels, hotels, public meeting rooms, schools, churches, libraries, hospitals, and
(Interior) auditoriums.
Source: Title 23 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 772, U. S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway
Administration
DEFINITION OF SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE
Hourly A-Weighted Sound Level - decibels (dBA)
Existing Noise Level Increase in dBA from Existing Noise
in Leq(h) Levels to Future Noise Levels
< 50 > 15
> 50 > 10
Source: North Carolina Department of Transportation Noise Abatement Guidelines`
A2-2
E -
FIGURE N2
AMBIENT NOISE MEASUREMENT SITES
r
SR 1426 (Bolling Rd) from SR 1400
(West Tenth St) to NC 43 (Roanoke Ave)
Halifax Co., Project 1 3.2300601 Tip rr U-1007
ROANOKE
RAPIDS LAKE
I L
tan ??-• `
o• o'
t?.
11A
Jw a ,
BEGIN PROJECT I wt
lau ?..?
is l R last
111]
ROSEMARY tau
(UNMC
ug POP. 1,828
L
ao
`41 ROANOKE RAPIDS
ro?. 14,704
END PROJECT
lt.
14aa 1l1G flat !AU
I?C r•
PAP
=I Lea
?: CO
Im
FFM
A2-3
TABLE N3
AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS
(Leq)
SR 1426 (Bolling Rd) from SR 1400
(West Tenth St) to NC 48 (Roanoke Ave)
Halifax Co., Project N 8.2300601 TIP k U-1007
SITE LOCATION
NOISE
LEVEL
DESCRIPTION (dBA)
1 SR 1426 (Bolling Rd) at Grassy Area 63
Whitaker St
2 Rochelle Park on 5th St at Grassy Area 64
Vance St
3 West 5th St at Jackson St Paved Area 64
Note: The numbered noise level sites were measured at 15 meters from
the center of the nearest lane of traffic. The lettered noise level
sites are for areas where traffic noise was not the predominant noise
source.
A2-4
TABLE N4 1/4
Leq TRAFFIC NOISE EXPOSURES
SR 1426 (Bolling Rd.) from SR 1400 to NC 48
Halifax County, State Project N 8.2300601, TIP K U-1007
AMBIENT NEAREST NOISE
REC EPTOR INFORMATION NEAREST ROADWAY NOISE PROPOSED ROADWAY PREDICTED NOISE LEVELS LEVEL
ID'# LAND USE CATEGORY NAME DISTANCE (m) LEVEL NAME DISTANCE (m) -L- -Y- MAXIMUM INCREASE
SR.1 426 from SR 1400 (W. 10th Steet) to Cedar Street
1 Business C SR 1426 123.0 R 45 SR 1426 123.0 R - - 50 + 5
2 Business C " 18.0 L 62 " 18.0 L - - 67 + 5
3 Business C " 43.0 R 56 " 43.0 R - - 60 + 4
4 Residence B " 21.0 L 61 " 21.0 L - - * 66 + 5
5 Residence B " 27.0 R 59 " 27.0 R - - 64 + 5
G Residence B " 11.0 R 64 " 11.0 R - - " 69 + 5
6A Residence B " 27.0 R 59 " 27.0 R - - 64 + 5
7 Residence B " 20.0 R 61 20.0 R - - " 66 + 5
7A Residence B 39.0 R 56 " 39.0 R - - 61 + 5
8 Residence B " 17.0 R 62 " 17.0 R - - " 67 + 5
8A Residence B 32.0 R 58 " 32.0 R - - 63 + 5
9 Residence B " 24.0 R 60 " 24.0 R - - 65 + 5
9A Residence B " 37.0 R 57 " 37.0 R - - 61 + 4
9B Residence B " 34.0 R 58 " 34.0 R - - 62 + 4
10 Residence B 21.0 R 61 " 21.0 R - - * 66 + 5
11 Residence B " 22.0 L 61 " 22.0 L - - 65 + 4
12 Residence B 21.0 L 61 21.0 L - - " 66 + 5
13 Residence B 21.0 L 61 " 21.0 L - - * 66 + 5
14 Residence B " 31.0 L 58 " 31.0 L - - 63 + 5
15 Residence B " 28.0 L 59 " 28.0 L - - 64 + 5
16 Residence B 29.0 L 59 " 29.0 L - - 63 + 4
17 Residence B " 24.0 L 60 " 24.0 L - - 65 + 5
18 Residence B " 24.0 L 60 " 24.0 L - - 65 + 5
19 Residence B " 24.0 L 60 " 24.0 L - - 65 + 5
20 Residence B " 35.0 L 57 " 35.0 L - - 62 + 5
21 Residence B " 26.0 R 59 " 26.0 R - - 64 + 5
22 Residence B 27.0 R 59 " 27.0 R - - 64 + 5
23 Residence B " 27.0 R 59 " 27.0 R - - 64 + 5
24 Residence B " 27.0 R 59 " 27.0 R - - 64 + 5
25. Residence a " 21.0 R 61 " 21.0 R - - " 66 + 5
26 Residence B " 36.0 L 57 " 36.0 L - - 62 + 5
27 Residence B " 25.0 L 60 " 25.0 L - - 64 + 4
28 Residence B 22.0 L 61 " 22.0 L - 65 + d
29 Residence B " 28.0 L 59 " 28.0 L - - 64 + 5
30 Residence B " 34.0 L 58 " 14.0 L - - 62 + 4
31 Residence B 30.0 L 59 " 30.0 L - - 63. 4
32 Residence B " 35.0 L 57 " 35.0 L - 5? 5
NOTE: Distances are from center of the existing or proposed roadways. -L--> Proposed roadway's noise level contribution.
All nose levels are hourly A-weighted noise levels. -Y--> Noise level from other contrite. _'ng roadways.
Category E noise levels shown as exterior/interior (58/48). * -> Traffic noise impact (per 23 CFR Part 772).
A2-5
TABLE N4 2/4
Leq TRAFFIC NOISE EXPOSURES
SR 1426 (Bolling Rd.) from SR 1400 to NC 48
Halifax County, State Project N 8.2300601, TIP M U-1007
AMBIENT NEAREST NOISE
RECEPTOR INFORMATION NEAREST ROADWAY NOISE PROPOSED ROADWAY PREDICTED NOISE LEVELS LEVEL
ID M LAND USE CATEGORY NAME DISTANCE (m) LEVEL NAME DISTANCE (m) -L- -Y- MAXIMUM INCREASE
SR 1426 from SR 1400 (W. 10th Steet) to Cedar Street (cont'd)
33 Residence B SR 1426 35.0 L 57 SR 1426 35.0 L - - 62 + 5
34 Residence B " 52.0 L 54 52.0 L - - 58 + 4
35 Residence B " 26.0 L 59 " 26.0 L - - 64 + 5
36 Residence B " 21.0 L 61 21.0 L - - " 66 + 5
37 Residence B " 20.0 L 61 20.0 L - - It 66 + 5
38 Residence B " 15.0 L 63 " 15.0 L - - * 67 + 4
39 Residence B " 10.0 R 65 " 10.0 R - - * 69 + 4
40 Residence B 22.0 R 61 " 22.0 R - - 65 + 4
41 Residence B " 22.0 R 61 " 22.0 R - - 65 + 4
42 Residence B " 24.0 R 60 " 24.0 R - - 65 + 5
43 Residence B " 23.0 R 60 " 23.0 R - - 65 + 5
44 Residence B " 19.0 R 62 19.0 R - - * 66 + 4
45 Residence B " 21.0 R 61 " 21.0 R - - * 66 + 5
46 Residence B " 16.0 R 63 " 16.0 R - - * 67 + 4
47 Residence B " 16.0 R 63 " 16.0 R - - * 67 + 4
48 Residence B " 14.0 L 63 " 14.0 L - - * 68 + 5
49 Residence B " 17.0 L 62 " 17.0 L - - * 67 + 5
50 Residence B " 19.0 L 62 " 19.0 L - - " 66 + 4
51 Residence B " 20.0 L 61 20.0 L - - * 66 + 5
52 Residence B " 25.0 R 60 " 25.0 R - - 64 + 4
53 Residence B " 26.0 R 59 26.0 R - - 64 + 5
54 Residence B " 24.0 R 60 " 24.0 R - - 65 + 5
55 Church E " 38.0 R 57/<40 " 38.0 R - - 61/41 + 4
56 Residence B It 19.0 L 62 " 19.0 L - - " 66 + 4
57 Residence B " 19.0 L 62 " 19.0 L - - It 66 + 4
56 Residence B " 17.0 L 62 " 17.0 L - - * 67 + 5

59
Residence
B
"
14.0
L
63 „
14.0
L
- - * 68
+
5
60 Residence B " 16.0 L 63 " 16.0 L - - * 67 + 4
61 Church E " 14.0 R 63/<40 " 14.0 R - - 68/43 + 5
62 Residence B " 25.0 R 60 " 25.0 R - - 64 + 4
63 Residence B It 25.0 R 60 " 25.0 R - - 64 + 4
64 Residence B " 27.0 R 59 " 27.0 R - - 64 + 5
65 Residence B " 26.0 R 59 " 26.0 R - - 64 + 5
66 Residence B " 17.0 R 62 " '17.0 R - - * 67 + 5
67 Residence B 19.0 R 62 " 19.0 R - - * 66 + 4
68 Business C " 22.0 R 61 " 22.0 R - - 65 - 4
69 Residence B It 17.0 L 62 " 17.0 L - - " 67 + 5
NC E : Distances are from center of the existing or proposed roadwa ys. -L --> Proposed roadway's noise lave: contribution.
All noise levels are hourly A-weighted noise levels. -Y -=> Noise level from other contrib-iting roadways.
Category E r=ise levels shown as exterior/interior (58/48). * -> Traffic noise impact (per 23 CPR Part 772).
A2-6
TABLE N4 3/4
Leq TRAFFIC NOISE EXPOSURES
SR 1426 (Bolling Rd.) from SR 1400 to NC 48
Halifax County, State Project N 8.2300601, TIP Y U-1007
AMBIENT NEAREST NOISE
RECEPTOR INFORMATION NEAREST ROADWAY NOISE PROPOSED ROADWAY PREDICTED NOISE LEVELS LEVEL
ID N LAND USE CATEGORY NAME DISTANCE (m) LEVEL NAME DISTANCE (m) -L- -Y- MAXIMUM INCREASE
SR 1426 from SR 1400 (W. 10th Steet) to Cedar Street (cont'd)
70 Residence B SR 1426 17.0 L 62 SR 1426 17.0 L - - * 67 + 5
71 Residence B " 25.0 L 60 " 25.0 L - - 64 + 4
72 Residence B 17.0 L 62 17.0 L - - * 67 + 5
73 Residence B 17.0 L 62 17.0 L - - * 67 + 5
74 Residence B " 16.0 L 63 " 16.0 L - - * 67 + 4
75 Residence B 16.0 L 63 16.0 L - - * 67 + 4
76 Residence B 16.0 L 63 " 16.0 L - - * 67 + 4
77 Residence B 14.0 L 63 " 14.0 L - - * 68 + 5
78 Residence B 16.0 L 63 " 16.0 L - - * 67 + 4
79 Residence B 16.0 L 62 " 18.0 L - - * 67 + 5
80 Residence B 17.0 L 62 " 17.0 L - - * 67 + 5
81 Residence B 18.0 L 62 " 18.0 L - - * 67 + 5
82 Residence B 20.0 L 61 " 20.0 L - - * 66 + 5
83 Residence B " 18.0 L 62 " 18.0 L - - * 67 + 5
84 Residence B 27.0 R 59 " 27.0 R - - 64 + 5
85 Residence B " 28.0 R 59 " 28.0 R - - 64 + 5
86 Residence B " 28.0 R 59 " 28.0 R - - 64 + 5
87 Residence B 27.0 R 59 27.0 R - - 64 + 5
88 Residence B " 22.0 R 61 22.0 R - - 65 + 4
89 Residence B " 14.0 R 63 " 14.0 R - - * 68 + 5
90 Residence B " 17.0 R 64 " 17.0 R - - * 67 + 3
91 Residence B " 22.0 R 62 " 22.0 R - - 65 + 3
92 Residence B 17.0 R 64 " 17.0 R - - * 67 + 3
93 Residence B " 14.0 L 64 " 14.0 L - - * 68 + 4
94 Residence B " 17.0 L 64 17.0 L - - * 67 + 3
95 Residence B 19.0 L 63 19.0 L - - * 66 + 3
96 Residence B 19.0 L 63 19.0 L - - * 66 + 3
97 Residence B 20.0 R 62 " 20.0 R - - * 66 + 4
98 Residence B 25.0 R 61 25.0 R - - 64 + 3
98A Residence B 24.0 R 61 " 24.0 R - - 65 + 4
99 Residence B " 21.0 L 62 " 21.0 L - - * 66 + 4
100 Residence B 20.0 L 62 20.0 L - - * 66 + 4
101 Residence B` " 16.0 L 64 " 16.0 L - - * 67 + 3
102 Residence B 16.0 L 64 " 16.0 L - - * 67 + 3
103 Residence B 15.0 L 64 " 15.0 L - - * 67 + 3
NOTE: Distan- are from center of t':e e..ist'-^ nr prooosed roa?.rays. -L-=> °--posed roadwa_,'s noise level cc.-ribution.
All noise levels are hourly A-weighted noise levels. -Y--> Noise level frc11 other contributing roadways.
Category E noise levels shown as exterior/interior (58/48). * -> Traffic noise impact (per 23 CFR Part 772).
A2-7
TABLE H4 4/4
Leq TRAFFIC NOISE EXPOSURES
SR 1426 (Bolling Rd.) from SR 1400 to NC 48
Halifax County, State Project N 6.2300601, TIP N U-1007
AMBIENT NEAREST NOISE
RECEPTOR INFORMATION NEAREST ROADWAY NOISE PROPOSED ROADWAY PREDICTED NOISE LEVELS LEVEL
ID N LAND USE CATEGORY NAME DISTANCE (m) LEVEL NAME DISTANCE (m) -L- -Y- MAXIMUM INCREASE
SR 1426 from Cedar Street to Vance Street
104 Residence B SR 1426 18.0 L 63 SR 1426 18.0 L
105 Residence B " 17.0 L 64 " 17.0 L
106 Residence B " 11.0 R 66 " 11.0 R
107 Residence B " 17.0 R 64 " 17.0 R
SR 1426 from Vance Street to Jackson Street
106 Residence B SR 1426 33.0 R 59 SR 1426 33.0 R
109 Residence B •' 33.0 R 59 " 33.0 R
110 Residence B " 26.0 R 61 " 26.0 R
111 Residence B " 14.0 L 64 " 14.0 L
112 Residence B " 17.0 L 63 " 17.0 L
113 Residence B " 11.0 L 65 " 11.0 L
114 Residence B " 19.0 L 63 " 19.0 L
115 Business C " 26.0 L 61 " 26.0 L
116 Business C 18.0 L 63 18.0 L
117 Business C " 45.0 L 56 " 45.0 L
118 Business C " 13.0 R 65 " 13.0 R
119 Business C " 18.0 R 63 " 18.0 R
120 Business C " 13.0 R 65 " 13.0 R
121 Residence B 11.0 R 65 " 11.0 R
122 Residence B 13.0 L 65 " 13.0 L
122A Residence B " 25.0 L 61 " 25.0 L
123 Residence B 13.0 L 65 " 13.0 L
123A Residence B " 25.0 L 61 " 25.0 L
124 Residence B 12.0 L 65 12.0 L
124A Residence B 21.0 L 62 " 21.0 L
125 Residence B " 20.0 L 62 " 20.0 L
SR 1426 from Jackson Street to NC 48
126 Business C SR 1426 14.0 L 64 SR 1426 14.0 L
127 Residence B " 21.0 L 62 " 21.0 L
128 Residence B 15.0 L 64 " 15.0 L
129 Church ` E " 12.0 L 65/40 " 12.0 L
- - * 66 + 3
- - * 66 + 2
* 69 + 3
* 66 + 2
63 + 4
63 + 4
- - 64 + 3
* 68 + 4
_ - * 67 + 4
- - * 69 + 4
- - * 67 + 4
- _ 64 + 3
_ - 67 + 4
_ _ 60 + 4
_ _ 68 + 3
_ - 67 + 4
- - 68 + 3
* 69 + 4
- - * 68 + 3
- - 65 + 4
68 + 3
- - 65 + 4
69 + 4
66 + 4
_ - * 66 + 4
- - 67 + 3
- - 65 + 3
- - " 67 + 3
- - 68/43 + 3
NOTE; ..istar.ces are from center of _..e existing or proposed roadways. -L-_> ?=-posed roadwa;i's nc_se level contribution.
All noise levels are hourly A-weighted noise levels. -Y--> Noise level frcm other contributing roadways.
Category E noise levels shown as exterior/ interior (58/48). * - Traffic noise impact (per 23 CPR Part 772).
A2-8
TABLE N5
FHWA NOISE ABATEMENT CRITERIA SUMMARY
SR 1426 (Bolling Rd.) from SR 1400 to NC 48
Halifax County, State Project N 8.2300601, TIP N U-1007
Description
1. From SR 1400 to Cedar Street
2. From Cedar Street to Vance Street
3. From Vance Street to Jackson Street
4. From Jackson Street to NC 48
Maximum Predicted Contour Approximate Number of Impacted
Leq Noise Levels Distances Receptors According to
dBA (Maximum) Title 23 CFR Part 772
15m 30m 60m 72 dBA 67 dBA A B C D E
67 62 57 <llm 19m 0 54 0 0 0
66 62 56 <llm 16m 0 4 0 0 0
67 63 57 <11m 19m 0 10 0 0 0
66 61 56 <11m 15m 0 1 0 0 0
TOTALS 0 69 0 0 0
NOTE : 1. 15m, 30:; +nd 60m distances are measured from center of nearest travel lane.
2. 72 dBA 57 dBA contour distances are measured from center of proposed roaz!:ay.
A2-9
Section
1. From SR 1400 to Cedar
Street.
2. From Cedar Street to
Vance Street.
3. From Vance Street to
Jackson Street.
4. From Jackson Street to
NC 48.
TOTALS
TABLE N6
TRAFFIC NOISE LEVEL INCREASE SUMMARY
SR 1426 (Bolling Rd.) from SR 1400 to NC 48
Halifax County, State Project M 8.2300601, TIP # U-1007
RECEPTOR EXTERIOR NOISE LEVEL INCREASES Substantial Impacts Due
Noise Level to Both
<.0 1-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-24 >- 25 Increases(1) Criteria(2)

0 4B 61 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 77 61 0 0 0 0 0 0
(1) As defined by or.' a substantial Increase (See bottom of Table N2).
(2) As defined by be criteria in Table N2.
A2-10
APPENDIX 3
Air Quality Analysis Tables
TABLE Al
CAL3QHC: LINE SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL - MARCH, 1990 VERSION PAGE 1
JOB: U-1007: SR 1426; Halifax County RUN: BUILD, 3-LN, YR - 1998
DATE: 01/03/1995 TIME: 15:49:46.35
SITE & METEOROLOGICAL VARIABLES
VS - .0 CM/S VD a .0 CM/S ZO - 108. CM
U - 1.0 M/S CLAS . 5 (E) ATIM a 60. MINUTES MIXH - 400. M AMB - 1.9 PPM
LINK DESCRIPTION LINK COORDINATES (M) LENGTH BRG TYPE VPH EF H W V/C QUEUE
X1 Y1 X2 Y2 (M) (DEC) (G/MI) (M) (M) (VEH)
1. Far Lane Link 7.2 -600.0
2. Near Lane Link .0 800.0
RECEPTOR LOCATIONS
7.2 800.0 I 1600. 360. AG 369. 15.6 .0 9.6
.0 -800.0 1600. 180. AG 369. 15.6 .0 9.6
COORDINATES (M)
RECEPTOR X Y 2
1. R39, 10m R CL, RES -6.4 .0 1.8
JOB: U-1007: SR 1426; Halifax County
MODEL RESULTS
REMAR}:S : In search of the angle corresponding to
the maximum concentration, only the first
angle, of the angles with same maximum
concentrations, is indicated as maximum.
WIND ANGLE RANGE: 0.-360.
WIND CONCENTRATION
ANGLE (PPM)
(DEGR) REC1
MAX 2.5
DEGR. 0
RUN: BUILD, 3-LN, YR - 1998
A3-1
TABLE A2
CAL3QHC: LINE SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL - MARCH, 1990 VERSION
JOB: U-1007: SR 1426; Halifax County RQN: BUILD, 3-LN, YR - 2018
DATE: 01/03/1995 TIHE: 15:51:20.49
SITE 6 METEOROLOGICAL VARIABLES
VS - .0 CM/S VD - .0 CM/S ZO - 108. CM
U = 1.0 M/S CLAS = 5 (E) ATIM = 60. MINUTES MIXH 400. M AMB = 1.9 PPM
LINK DESCRIPTION I LINK COORDINATES (M)
X1 Y1 X2 Y2
PAGE 2
LENGTH BRG TYPE VPH EF H W V/C QUEUE
(M) (DEG) (G/MI) (M) (M) (VEH)
1. Far Lane Link 7.2 -800.0 7.2 800.0 1600. 360. AG 513. 10.6 .0 9.6
2. Near Lane Link .0 800.0 .0 -800.0 1600. 180. AG 513. 10.6 .0 9.6
RECEPTOR LOCATIONS
COORDINATES (M)
RECEPTOR X Y Z
1. R39, 10m R CL, RES -6.4 .0 1.8
JOB: U-1007: SR 1426; Halifax County RUN: BUILD, 3-LN, YR - 2018
MODEL RESULTS
REMARKS : In search of the angle corresponding to
the maximum concentration, only the first
angle, of the angles with same maximum
concentrations, is indicated as maximum.
WIND ANGLE RANGE: 0.-360.
WIND CONCENTRATION
ANGLE (PPM)
(DEGR) REC1
MAX 2.5
DEGR. 2
A3-2
APPENDIX 4
Comments Received From
Federal, State, and Local
Agencies
k
T1P U - i cy-) Federal Aid S? - 14 2 County A-
CONCURRENCE FORItii
FOR
ASSESSTIVLENT OF EFFECTS
Brief Project Description
s.2 14 ?. G C3o LL1 M Cr R-fl ? ? STM S? • rr? S2 Ilan (L,/. ! o,
N C 4'a c iZo,c- ,; o ILG A-.r,- .
On 4 /z -7 AI , representatives of the
North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
Federal Highway Administration (FHwA)
North Carolina. State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)
Other
reviewed the subject project-and agreed
there are no effects on the National Register-listed property within the project's area of potential
effect and listed on the reverse.
there are no effects on the National Register-eligible properties located within the project's area +
or potential effect and listed on the reverse.
there is an effect on the National Register-listed property/properties within the project's area of
potential effect. The property/properties and the effect(s) are listed on the reverse.
there is an effect on the National Register-eligible properry/properties within the project's area of
potential effect. The properryiprooerues and effect(s) are listed on the reverse.
S isned:
41?1
Rehr ,e6-1 ive, NCDOT Date
S
FHwA,'foV-V Division Administrator, or other Federal Agency to
Reoresentative; SHPO
State Historic Preservation Officer
(oPer)
? z-t X15
Dace
Date
S
A44
TIP # (A - I iT0 --7 Federal Aid # • S T P County
f-(etc. iF?-k M
Properties within area of potential effect for which there is no effect. Indicate if property is National
Register-listed (NR) or determined eligible (DE).
boa-N0 L-c;- ,A tLL,s ??A-NjT *2- OFF 1645

Properties within area of potential effect for which there is an effect. Indicate property status (NR or DE)
and describe effect.
._,-•

initialed: NCDOT FHwA _ SHPO

A4-2
J d
z
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
April 6, 1995
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Historic Structures Survey Report for SR
from SR 1400 to NC 48, Halifax County, -1007,
Federal Aid Project No. STP-1426(1), State roject
No. 8.2300601, ER 95-8559
Dear Mr. Graf:
Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
?cEry?
APR 1 1 1995
2 DIVISION OF
i4IGHWAYS ?Q
.
??RON! I\.1
Thank you for your letter of March 2, 1995, transmitting the historic structures
survey report by Scott Owen concerning the above project.
For purposes of compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act, we concur that the following property is eligible for the National Register of
Historic Places under the criterion cited:
Roanoke Mills Plant #2 Office (property #3). Criterion C--This professionally
designed office building is an excellent example of the Colonial Revival style,
and retains a high degree of integrity. We believe the sidewalk provides a
distinct, visual demarkation between the street and the historic property,
and concur with the boundaries proposed in the report.
The following properties are determined not eligible for listing in the National
Register of Historic Places:
Roanoke Mills Plant #2 (property #6). This mill complex lacks integrity of
design and materials because it has been severely altered.
Properties #7-23. These properties lack special historical or architectural
significance.
Our notes from the December 8, 1994 meeting regarding this project differ from
the meeting summary included in the report. At that meeting, we agreed that
properties located west of the railroad tracks (properties #7-23) did not appear to
be eligible and would not need further evaluation in the report. We did not offer
an opinion about the eligibility of properties #1, 2, 4, or 5.
109 East Jones Street - Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807 A4-3
Nicholas L. Graf
April 6, 1995, Page 2
We did state that the project would have no effect on the Roanoke Mills Village
Historic District (property #5) if it were determined eligible. For the purposes of
this project we need photographs of each house in the mill village that fronts on
SR 1426 and a few additional representative photos from the rest of the mill
-village. Because the area of potential effect for the Mill Village is limited, the
boundaries beyond SR 1426 do not need additional work. However, with only one
photograph of representative housing for a multi-block area we cannot make a
final evaluation of the village as a whole.
The report in general meets our office's guidelines and those of the Secretary of
the Interior.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
Sincerely, 4)
David Brook

Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
cc. H. F. Vick
B. Church
A4-4
?. sari
v IK
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
Jags B. Hunt, Jr., Govemor
Betty Ray McCain. Secetary
June 8, 1994
MEMORANDUM
Division of
William S.
TO: H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways,
Department of Transpor ation
FROM: David Brook 4t? Deputy State ,-Preservation Officer
SUBJECT: Widening SR 1426 (Bolling Road) from SR 1400
(West Tenth Street) to NC 48 (Roanoke Avenue),
Halifax County, U-1007, 8.2300601, STP-1426(1),
94-E-4220-0840 -
C E

JUN 10 1994
V
yes and History
t, Jr., Director
We have received information concerning the above project from the State
Clearinghouse.
Henry Taves conducted a comprehensive survey of historic architectural resources
in Halifax County in 1987. Allison and David Black conducted a comprehensive
survey of Roanoke Rapids in 1990. We have conducted a search of our maps and
files and have located the following structures of historical or architectural
importance within the general area of the project:
Roanoke Mills Company Plant No. 2 (HX 1047)
Roanoke Mills Company Plant No. 2 Mill Village (HX 1104)
Houses: 401-425 Jackson Street (HX 1091)
Houses: 510-522 Jackson Street (HX 1088)
J. M. Jackson House (HX 1039)
Roanoke Mills Company Plant No. 2 Office (HX 1046)
Councill-Coburn House (HX 1026)
R. L. Towe House (HX 1027)
A. E. Akers House (HX 1028)
109 Ew Jo= Stmt • Raleigh. North Caroiiaa 2760,-2W-/
A4-5
H. F. Vick
June 8, 1994, Page 2
Hancock-Anderson-Wilson House (HX 1029)
First Presbyterian Church (HX 965)
Maps showing the locations of the above properties were provided to the project
engineer at the March 1994 scoping meeting.
There are no known archaeological sites within the proposed project area. Based
on our present knowledge of the area, it is unlikely that any archaeological
resources which may be eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic
Places will be affected by the project construction. We, therefore, recommend
that no archaeological investigation be conducted in connection with this project.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
DB:slw
cc: N. Graf
B. Church
T. Padgett
State Clearinghouse
A4-6
CITY OF ROANOKE RAPIDS
r 1%
P. O. BOX 38 • ROANOKE RAPIDS, NC 27870 • [phone]
August 3, 1995
Mr. Wayne Fedora, P. E.
Project Planning Engineer
North Carolina Department of Transportation
PO Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611-5201
SUBJECT: Temporary Easements for T.I.P. Project No. U-1007
(SR 1426/Bolling Road widening)
Dear Mr. Fedora:
I am writing in response to your letter dated July 7, 1995
regarding the above referenced project. The City of Roanoke
Rapids does agree that the impact of the temporary construction
easements at Rochelle Park and Melody Park are minimal. However,
we prefer that the trees in Melody Park inside and adjacent to
the easement not be disturbed during construction without the
expressed approval of the City in advance. It is our
understanding the encroachment upon the easement is temporary and
the easement will be restored to its pre-construction condition
at the completion of the project. The City continues to support
the timely completion of this project.
Should you have any questions or need additional
information, please feel free to call me at [phone].
Sincerely yours,
Charles B. Archer, AICP
Planning Director
cc: Rick Benton, City Manager
Chris Wicker, Recreation Director
CBA
W:\WP60\CHARLES\D0T\B0LLING
A4-7
CITY OF ROANOKE RAPIDS
P. O. BOX 38 • ROANOKE RAPIDS, NC 27870 • [phone]
November 16, 1994
Mr. Wayne Fedora
Planning & Environmental Branch
NC DOT
PO Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611-5201
Subject: Bolling Road widening, TIP # 1007
Dear Mr. Fedora:
Enclosed is a report assessing the need for sidewalks along
the Bolling Road widening project. The findings of the report
indicate that there is a need for sidewalks throughout the entire
length of the project. The City of Roanoke Rapids is interested in
participating in providing sidewalks along this project consistent
with NC DOT's Pedestrian Policy dated April 20, 1994. It is my
understanding that NC DOT will be responsible for 70% of the cost
of constructing new sidewalks and the City will be responsible for
30% of the costs.
At your earliest convenience, please provide me with cost
estimates for the new sidewalk construction. We would dike to
incorporate the City's share of this project into our budget
process in 1995. Please keep in mind that the City cyan participate
in providing sidewalks only inside the corporate limits which ends
approximately 90 feet west of Pinecrest Avenue.
Should you have any questions regarding the report or need
additional information, please feel free to call me at (919) 535-
6844.
Sincerely yours,
Charles B. Archer, AICP
Planning Director
CBA
cc: Victor Denton, City Manager
Patsy King, AICP, Planner I
A4-8

.. J
H 9 sae
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Ecological Services
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
June 24, 1994
Mr. H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
N.C. Department of Transportation
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Attention: Ted Devens
¦
AMI17N=100
?GEiVF? ?
wwX944 j
zJ
22 DIVISIGN OF ??
HIGHWAYS ?,
4 F^/VlRON??A
Subject: Scoping Comments for Roanoke Rapids, SR 1426
(Bolling Road/Fifth Street) from SR 1400 to NC 48,
Halifax County, TIP No. U-1007
Dear Mr. Vick:
This responds to your letter of April 29, 1994, requesting
comments on the subject project. These comments are provided
in accordance with provisions of the Fish and Wildlife
Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661 et
seq.) and Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543).
The Service's review of any environmental document would be
greatly facilitated if it contained the following information:
1) A description of the fishery and wildlife resources
within existing and required additional right-of-way
and any areas, such as borrow areas, which may be
affected directly or indirectly by the proposed
improvements.
2) Acreage of branches, creeks, streams, rivers or
wetlands to be filled.
3) Linear feet of any water courses relocated.
4) Acreage of upland habitats, by cover type, which would
be eliminated.
5) Techniques which will be employed for designing and
constructing any relocated stream channels or for
creating replacement wetlands.
A4-9
1
6) Mitigation measures which will be employed to avoid,
eliminate, reduce or compensate for habitat value
losses associated with any of the proposed activity.
7) Assessments of the expected secondary and cumulative
impacts of the proposed project on fish and wildlife
resources.
8) An assessment of potential impacts to Federally-listed
species.
The attached revised listing for Halifax County identifies the
Federally-listed endangered (E) and/or threatened (T) and/or
Candidate (C) species which may occur in the area of influence
of this action. The legal responsibilities of the U.S.
Department of Transportation, the Federal agency involved in
this project, under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended, were detailed in material sent to your office
previously. If you require another copy of this material,
please contact us at 919/856-4520.
If the proposed project will be removing pine trees greater
than or equal to 30 years of age in pine or pine/hardwood
habitat, surveys should be conducted for active red-cockaded
woodpecker cavity trees in appropriate habitat within a 1/2
mile radius of the project boundaries. If red-cockaded
woodpeckers are observed within any of the project areas or
active cavity trees are found, the project has the potential to
adversely affect the red-cockaded woodpecker, and you should
contact this office for further information.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide these comments to you
and encourage your consideration of them. Please continue to
advise us of the progress of this project.
Sincerely yours, /
L.K. Mike Gantt
Field Supervisor
cc: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Attachments
A410

REVISED MARCH 30, 1994
Halifax County
Red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis) - E
Tar spinymussel (Elliptio steinstansana) - E
Dwarf wedge mussel (Alasmidonta heterodon) - E
There are species which, although not now listed or officially proposed for
listing as endangered or threatened, are under status review by the Service.
These "Candidate" (C1 and C2) species are not legally protected under the
Act, and are not subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7,
until they are formally proposed or listed as threatened or endangered. We
are providing the below list of candidate species which may occur within the
project area for the purpose of giving you advance notification. These
species may be listed in the future, at which time they will be protected
under the Act. In the meantime, we would appreciate anything you might do
for them.
Bachman's sparrow (Aimophila aetivalis) - C2
Cerulean warbler (Dendroica cerulea) - C2
Albemarle crayfish (Procambarus medialis) - C2
Carolina trillium (Trillium pusillum var. pusillum) - C2
Atlantic pigtoe (mussel) (Fusconaia masoni) - C2
Dwarf stinging nettle (Urtica chamaedrvoides) - C2
A4-11
1
CITY OF ROANOKE RAPIDS e??' `O
P. O. BOX 38 • ROANOKE RAPIDS, NC 27870 • [phone]
JUN 1 5 1994 =
June 13, 1994
2y DIVISIG"4 C.
Mr. H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager r;,?H1GH'vVAY
Planning and Environmental Branch, NC DOT NVIRONNIE
P O Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611-5201
Subject: SR 1426 (Bolling Road) widening project from SR 1400 to NC
48.
Dear Mr. Vick:
I am writing in response to your letter dated April 29, 1994 to
Mayor Allan Welch regarding the above referenced project. The City
of Roanoke Rapids is eager to see this project completed.
Your letter requested that we provide any information that might be
helpful in evaluating potential environmental impacts of the
project and any local permits that may be required. A portion of
the project passes through the city's water supply watershed
critical and protected areas. As you know the state's Water Supply
Watershed Protection Act adopted in 1989 requires NC DOT to use
BMP's as described in NC DOT document "Water Supply Watershed Best
Management Practices". The project does not encroach upon any
recognized or regulated floodplains (See FIRM panel # 370117 0005
B).
The project as proposed is consistent with the City's Comprehensive
Development Plan adopted in 1989 and Thoroughfare Plan adopted in
1992. There are no local permits required by the city for the
project.
If you need additional information or if my office may be of
further assistance, please feel free to write me at the address
shown above or call me at [phone].
Sincerely yours,
Charles B. Archer, AICP
Planning Director
cc: Victor H. Denton, City Manager
A4-12

Jags B. Hunt, Jr., Govemor
Betty Ray McCain, Se=taty
June 8, 1994
MEMORANDUM

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
Division of
William S.
TO: H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways.,
Department of Transpo ation rr-
FROM: David Brook
Deputy State Wise is Preservation Officer
SUBJECT: Widening SR 1426 (Bolling Road) from SR 1400
(West Tenth S,tree#- - NC 48 (Roanoke Avenue),
Halifax County., U-1007;8.2300601, STP-1426(1),
94-E-4220-0840- -
T
-_ I
C
O
JUN 10 1994
r
K"
res. and History
X. Jr., Director
We have received information concerning the above project from the State
Clearinghouse.
Henry Taves conducted a comprehensive survey of historic architectural resources
in Halifax County in 1987. Allison and David Black conducted a comprehensive
survey of Roanoke Rapids in 1990. We have conducted a search of our maps and
files and have located the following structures of historical or architectural
importance within the general area of the project:
Roanoke Mills Company Plant No. 2 (HX 1047)
Roanoke Mills Company Plant No. 2 Mill Village (HX 1104)
Houses: 401-425 Jackson Street (HX 1091)
Houses: 510-522 Jackson Street (HX 1088)
J. M. Jackson House (HX 1039)
Roanoke Mills Company Plant No. 2 Office (HX 1046)
Councill-Coburn House (HX 1026)
R. L. Towe House (HX 1027)
A. E. Akers House (HX 1028)
109 Fist Jones Street - Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807 A4-13
H. F. Vick
June 8, 1994, Page 2
Hancock-Anderson-Wilson House (HX 1029)
First Presbyterian Church (HX 965)
Maps showing the locations of the above properties were provided to the project
engineer at the March 1994 scoping meeting.
There are no known archaeological sites within the proposed project area. Based
on our present knowledge of the area, it is unlikely that any archaeological
resources which may be eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic
Places will be affected by the project construction. We, therefore, recommend
that no archaeological investigation be conducted in connection with this project.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thah you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
DB:slw
cc: N. Graf
B. Church
T. Padgett
State Clearinghouse
A4-14
® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee
Office of Policy Development, DEHNR
FROM: David Cox, Highway Projects Coor inator,
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: May 23, 1994
SUBJECT: Request for information from the N. C. Department
of Transportation (NCDOT) regarding fish and
wildlife concerns for Roanoke Rapids, SR 1426
(Bolling Road/Fifth Street) from SR 1400 to NC 48,
Halifax County, North Carolina, TIP No. U-1007,
SCH Project No. 94-0840.
This memorandum responds to a request from Mr. H.
Franklin Vick of the NCDOT for our concerns regarding
impacts on fish and wildlife resources resulting from the
subject project. Biologists on the staff of the N. C.
Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) have reviewed the
proposed improvements, and our comments are provided in
accordance with provisions of the National Environmental
Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(c)) and the Fish and Wildlife
Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-
667d).
NCDOT proposes to widen SR 1426 (Bolling Road/Fifth
Street) from 2-lanes to a 3-lane curb and gutter facility
from SR 1400 (West Tenth Street) to NC 48 (Roanoke Avenue)
in Roanoke Rapids.
This project is in an urbanized area with little
remaining wildlife habitat. The project crosses two
intermittent drainages with no wetland impacts expected.
At this time NCWRC has no specific recommendations or
concerns regarding this project. However, to help
facilitate document preparation and the review process, our
general informational needs are outlined below:
A4-15
Memo Page 2 May 23, 1994
1. Description of fishery and wildlife resources
within the project area, including a listing of
federally or state designated threatened,
endangered, or special concern species. Potential
borrow areas to be used for project construction
should be included in the inventories. A listing
of designated plant species can be developed ,
through consultation with:
The Natural Heritage Program
N. C. Division of Parks and Recreation
P. 0. Box 27687
Raleigh, N. C. 27611
[phone]
and,
Cecil C. Frost, Coordinator
NCDA Plant Conservation Program
P. O. Box 27647
Raleigh, N. C. 27611
[phone]
In addition, the NCWRC's Nongame and Endangered
Species Program maintains databases for locations
of vertebrate wildlife species. While there is no
charge for the list, a service charge for computer
time is involved. Additional information may be
obtained from:
Randy Wilson, Manager
Nongame and Endangered Species Section
N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission
512 N. Salisbury Street
Raleigh, N. C. 27604-1188
[phone].
2. Description of any streams or wetlands affected by
the project. The need for channelizing or
relocating portions of streams crossed and the
extent of such activities.
3. Cover type maps showing wetland acreages impacted
by the project. Wetland acreages should include
all project-related areas that may undergo
hydrologic change as a result of ditching, other
drainage, or filling for project construction.
Wetland identification may be accomplished through
coordination with the U. S. Army Corps of
Engineers (COE). If the COE is not consulted, the
A4-16
Memo
Page 3
May 23, 1994
person delineating wetlands should be identified
and criteria listed.
4. Cover type maps showing acreages of upland
wildlife habitat impacted by the proposed project.
Potential borrow sites should be included.
5. The extent to which the project will result in
loss, degradation, or fragmentation of wildlife
habitat (wetlands or uplands).
6. Mitigation for avoiding, minimizing or
compensating for direct and indirect degradation
in habitat quality as well as quantitative losses.
7. A cumulative impact assessment section which
analyzes the environmental effects of highway
construction and quantifies the contribution of
this individual project to environmental
degradation.
8. A discussion of the probable impacts on natural
resources which will result from secondary
development facilitated by the improved road
access.
9. If construction of this facility is to be
coordinated with other state, municipal, or
private development projects, a description of
these projects should be included in the
environmental document, and all project sponsors
should be identified.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide input in the
early planning stages for this project. If we can further
assist your office, please contact David Cox, Highway
Projects Coordinator, at [phone].
CC: Mike Scruggs, District 3 Wildlife Biologist
Wayne Jones, District 3 Fisheries Biologist
Randy Wilson, Nongame/Endangered Species Program Mgr.
David Dell, U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Raleigh
A4-17
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources / • •
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Governor
p E H N FR
Jonathan B. -Howes, , Secretary A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
May 31, 1994
MEMORANDUM
s
TO: Melba McGee, Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental
Affairs
FROM: Monica Swihart, Water Quality Planning
SUBJECT: Project Review #94-0840; Scoping Comments - NC DOT
Proposed Improvements to SR 1426 in Roanoke Rapids, TIP
No. U-1007
The Water Quality Section of the Division of Environmental
Management requests that the following topics be discussed in the
environmental documents prepared on the subject project:
A. Identify the streams potentially impacted by the project. The
stream classifications should be current.
B. Identify the linear feet of stream channelizations/
relocations. If the original stream banks were vegetated, it
is requested that the channelized/relocated stream banks be
revegetated.
C. Number of stream crossings.
D. Will permanent spill catch basins be utilized? DEM requests
that these catch basins be placed at all water supply stream
crossings. Identify the responsible party for maintenance.
E. Identify the stormwater controls (permanent and temporary) to
be employed.
F. Please ensure that sediment and erosion and control measures
are not placed in wetlands.
G. Wetland Impacts
1) Identify the federal manual used for identifying and
delineating jurisdictional wetlands.
2) Have wetlands been avoided as much as possible?
3) Have wetland impacts been minimized?
4) Discuss wetland impacts by plant communities affected.
5) Discuss the quality of wetlands impacted.
6) Summarize the total wetland impacts.
7) List the 401 General Certification numbers requested from
DEM.
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer pcper
A4-18
Melba McGee
May 31, 1994
Page 2
H. Will borrow locations be in wetlands? Borrow/waste areas
should avoid wetlands to the maximum extent practicable.
Prior to approval of any borrow/waste site in a wetland, the
contractor shall obtain a 401 Certification from DEM.
I. Did NCDOT utilize the existing road alignments as much as
possible? Why not (if applicable)?
J. To what extent can traffic congestion management techniques
alleviate the traffic problems in the study area?
K. Please provide a conceptual mitigation plan to help the
environmental review. The mitigation plan may state the
following:
1. Compensatory mitigation will be considered only after
wetland impacts have been avoided and minimized to the
maximum extent possible.
2. On-site, in-kind mitigation is the preferred method of
mitigation. In-kind mitigation within the same watershed
is preferred over out-of-kind mitigation.
3. Mitigation should be in the following order:
restoration, creation, enhancement, and lastly banking.
Written concurrence of 401 Water Quality Certification may be
required for this project. Applications requesting coverage under
our General Certification 14 or General Permit 31 will require
written concurrence. Please be aware that 401 Certification may be
denied if wetland impacts have not been avoided and minimized to
the maximum extent practicable.
10617er.mem
cc: Eric Galamb
A4-19
4
r
State of North Carolina Reviewing WA>_etGH REGIONAL OFFICE
Oipartment of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Project Number: Due Date:
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW -PROJECT COMMENTS -!p4x,.. v0 'J0,40
After review of this project it has been determined that the EHNR permit(s) and/or approvals indicated may need to be obtained in
order for this project to comply with North Carolina Law.
Questions regarding these permits should be addressed to the Regional Office indicated on the reverse of the form.
All applications, information and guidelines relative to these plans and permits are available from the same Normal Process
Time
Regional Office. (statutory time
SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES Or REQUIREMENTS limit)
PERMITS
Application 90 days before begin construction or award of 30 days
treatment
wastewater
operate
construct b
Permit construction contracts on-site inspection. Post-application
s. "war
sewer
extensions, b
system
facilities, technical conference usual (90 days)
systems not discharging into state surface waters.
90120 days
NPDES • permit to discharge into surface water and/or Application 180 days before begin activity. On-site inspection.
Additionally. obtain permit to
rence usual
f
permit to operate and construct wastewater facilities .
e
Pre-application con
construct wastewater treatment facility-granted after NPDES Reply (NIA)
discharging into state surface waters. time. 30 days after receipt of plans or issue of NPDES
permit-whichever is later.
30 days

Pre-application technical conference usually necessary (NIA)
1 Water Use Permit
7 clays
bs received and permit issued
Complete application
n o t 115 days/
Well Construction Permit a
o
prior to the
rian property 55 days
Application copy must be served on each adjacent ripa
owner. On-site inspection. Pre-application conference usual. Filling (90 says/
Dredge and Fill Permit may require Easement to Fill from N.C. Department of
Administration and Federal Dredge and Fill Permit.
60 days
Permit to construct 3 operate Air Pollution Abatement NIA (90 days)
J facilities and/or Emission Sources as per 15A NCAC 21H.06
Any open burning associated with subject proposal
must be in compliance with 15A NCAC 2D.0520.
Demolition or renovations of structures containing 60 days
asbestos material must be in compliance with 15A NIA
] NCAC 2D.0525 which requires notification and removal
prior to demolition. Contact Asbestos Control Group (9C days/
919.733.0820
Complex Source Permit required under 15A NC-ACC 20.0800.
The Seriimr:,iaUOn Pollution Control Act of 1973 must be properly addressed for any land disturbing activity An erosion 8 setlimentauo
Plan filed with proper Regional Office (Land Quality Sect I at least 30
to be disturbed
20 d
ysi
control plan will be required if one or more acres
of S30 for the first ac
A f .
re and 52000 for each additional acre or art must accom anv me plan a
ee
da s before be inn,n activit .
l Act of 1973 must be addressed with respect to the referrenced Local Ordinance:
t
C (30 clays)
ro
on
The Sedimentation Pollution
I On-site ;nspeetion usual. Surety bond filed wan EHNR. Bond amount 3G clays
varies with type mine and number of acres of affected land Any area (60 daysl
Mining Permit mined Crosier than one acrc must be permiled The appropriate bond
must be received oeSore the permit can be issued

On-site lr. wction by N.C. Division Forest Resources if permit 1 day
Wray
North Carolina Burning permit excrecs 4 days
Spacial Ground Clearance Burning Permit - 22 On-site inspection by N.D. Division Forest Resourcoa required "it more

activities are involved. Inspections
r
n
l
1 day
IN, A)
? counties in coastal N .C. with organic soils i
g
ea
than "ve sires of ground c
should be requested n least ten days before actual burn is planned "
90120 days
IVA (N/A)
L^J Oil Refining Facilities
11 permit required, appli;,:,ion 60 days before "gm construction 30 days
Applicant must hire N.C. quaiihed engineer to: prepare plans
Q Dam Safety Petmil inspect cuns:rucnon. certny construction is a::_ording to EHNR approv
ed plans. May also require aermit under niosquih) rontrol program And _
I60 (JAYS)
a 40A permit from Corps o' Engineers An inspection of site is neces
L3ry to ve•iry Hazard Ciassrfication. A minimum fee of S200.00 must ac
company the apphcaltron. An additional processing fee based on a
percents a or the total project cost will be required upon completion
Continued on reve,se
n ,u:
A4-20
Normal Process
Time
•
(statutory ti
le
PERMITS SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REQUIREMENTS limn)
000 with EHNR running to Stale of N.C.
bond of $5
File suret 10 days
© Permit to dri:::x,:i?•....•r oil or pas well ,
y
conditional that
be plugged according drill IE Noperator shall, upon R rules and regulations.
abandonment.
(NIA)
Q Geophysicai txploration Permit Application filed with EHNR at least 10 days prior to issue of permit
standard application form.
N 10 days
(N/Ai
o
Application by letter.
Stale Lakes Construction Permit Application fee based on structure size is charged. Must include 15.20 clays
? descriptions 6 drawings of structure b proof of ownership IN/Al
of riparian property.
60 tlavs
l
? 401 Water Quality Certification NIA (130
clays)
55 days
ED CAMA Permit for MAJOR development 5250.00 fee must accompany application (150 days)
22 clays
? CAMA Permit for MINOR development $50.00 fee must accompany application (25 days)
Several geodetic monuments are located in or near the project area. If any monuments need to be moved or destroyed. please notify
? N.C. Geodetic Survey, Box 27687. Raleigh, N.C. 27611
? Abandonment of any wells, if required, must be in accordance with Title 15A, Subchapter 2C.0100.
? Notification of the proper regional office is requested if "orphan" underground storage tanks (LISTS) are discovered during any excavation operation
45 days
? Compliance with 15A NCAC 2M.1000 (Coastal Stormwaler Rules) is required.
I INIAI
• Other comments (attach additional pages as necessary, being certain to cite comment authority).
LQS SI?L?t'-,-??a?n,.:! rha.?? fr?-?s??>J C?x??+•?? wws i Gc c.'t-,./?s>sn
1
t/-.1t:'t -D ?rt S ???.C7 fi"'p (-{..?"--- r ??7`^1
1
; ??o !? .5??e. t.1M ??.I d JT
om i3 i'Z C? J C'• N ?- Ok-3 ! c;,
.
? ;
??.tT\...1 ,,.
?
r
n
?
11
S v i71R'fi ? f C?`? 'n'"'F?'?f42- S ?W`tl;.l:? r? % /•-1??A/t. %2..V t C•!i3 ?fp

REGIONAL OFFICES
Questions regarding these permits should be addressed to the Regional Office marked below.
? Asheville Regional Office ? Fayetteville Regional Office
59 Woodfin Place Suite 714 Wachovia Building
Asheville, NC 28801 Fayetteville, NC 28301
[phone] [phone]
? Mooresville Regional Office
919 North Main Street, P.O. Box 950
Mooresville, NC 28115
[phone]
? Washington Regional Office
.1424 Carolina Avenue
Washington. NC 27889
[phone]
? Winston-Salem Regional Office
8025 North Point Blvd.
Suite 100 , -
Winston Salem. NC 27106
(919) 8967007
? Raleigh Regional Office
3800 Barrett Drive. Suite 101
Raleigh, NC 27609.
[phone]
? Wilmington Regional Office
127 Cardinal Drive Exicnston
Wilmington, NC 28405
(919) 3953900
A4-21
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Forest Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
Stanford M. Adams, Director
Griffiths Forestry Center
2411 Old US 70 West
Clayton, North Carolina 27520
May 23, 1994
MEMORANDUM
F-WA
?EHNFi
H I 11 I? 1 I I I H
yan_n,
TO: Melba McGee, Policy Development
FROM: Don H. Robbins, Staff Forester 4&?
SUBJECT: DOT EA/Scoping for Proposed Improvements to Roanoke Rapids, SR 1426 (TIP
#U-1007) in Halifax County
PROJECT: #94-0840
DUE DATE: 5-31-94
To better determine the impact to forestry in the area of the proposed project, the combined
Environmental Assessment should contain the following information concerning the proposed
project:
1. The total forest land acreage by types that would be taken out of forest productiQP as a
result of new right-of-way purchases.
2. The productivity of the forest soils as indicated by the soil series that would be involved
within the proposed project.
3. The impact upon existing greenways within the area of the proposed project.
4. The provisions that the contractor will take to sell any merchantable timber that is to be
removed. This practice is encouraged to minimize the need for piling and burning during
construction. If any burning is needed, the contractor should comply with all laws and
regulations pertaining to debris burning.
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611.7687 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Eaual Opportunity Athrmaiwe Action Employer 50 o recyCIEc 10% post-Consumer pacer
A4-22
Melba McGee
Project #94-0840
Page 2
5. The provisions that the contractor will take during the construction phase to prevent
erosion, sedimentation and construction damage to forest land outside the right-of-way
and construction limits. Trees outside the construction limits should be protected from
construction activities to avoid:
a. Skinning of tree trunks by machinery.
b. Soil compaction and root exposure or injury by heavy equipment.
C. Adding layers of fill dirt over the root systems of trees, a practice that impairs
root aeration.
d. Accidental spilling of petroleum products or other damaging substances over the
root systems of trees.
We would hope that the project would have the least impact to forest and related resources in
that area.
DHR:la
pc: Warren Boyette - CO
File
A4-23

OA DIKE RAPED S
R GRADED SCHOOL DISTRICT
lichael F. Williams
aperintendent
May 9, 1994
Dr. Charles H. Weaver, Assistant State
Superintendent Auxiliary Services
Department of Public Instruction
301 North Wilmington Street, Education Bldg.
Raleigh, NC 27601-2825
Nita Cochrane
Assistant Superintendent
ro?
K 1 O tl
RE: Roanoke Rapids, SR 1426 (Bolling Road/Fifth Street from SR
1400 to NC 48, Halifax County, Federal Aid Project No. STP
1426(1), State Project No. 8.2300601, TIP No. U-1007
Dear Dr. Weaver:
Thank you for the opportunity to respond regarding this proposed project.
The Roanoke Rapids Graded School District plans to construct a new
elementary school of 800 students on a site which has as its main access the
road involved in this project. The site contains 25 acres and is located between
Bolling Road and West Tenth Street at the Roanoke Rapids City Limits. It appears
that any planned improvements to this road should take into consideration the
location of a school on this site and the resulting traffic demands.
Both I and our architect, Katherine Russ of Boney Architects, welcome an
opportunity to discuss our plans with either you or representatives of the
Department of Transportation. Please contact us.
Sincerely,
MFW/fa
Copy: Katherine Russ
Michael F. Willliams
superintendent
536 HAMILTON STREET, ROANOKE RAPIDS, NORTH CAROLINA 27870-9990 [phone]
A4-24
r-1
CITY OF ROANOKE RAPIDS
P. O. BOX 38 • ROANOKE RAPIDS, NC 27870 • [phone]
May 4, 1994
Mr. H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning & Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
N. C. Department of Transportation
P. O. Box 25201
Raleigh, N. C. 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Vick:
In reference to your April 29 letter to Mayor Welch regarding the
Bolling Road Project, I have asked our City Planner Charles Archer
to respond to your query by the target date of June 20, 1994.
If I can be of any further assistance to you on this matter, please
don't hesitate to call me at [phone].
sincerely yours, ;
Vi40)vH. Denton
city Manager
VHD/lv
cc: Wayne Fedora, Project Planning Engineer
N. C. Department of Transportation
R. Allan Welch, Mayor
City of Roanoke Rapids
Charles B. Archer, AICP, Planning Director
City of Roanoke Rapids
A4-25
CITY OF ROANOKE RAPIDS
r-1%
P. O. BOX 38 • ROANOKE RAPIDS, NC 27870 • [phone]
April 13, 1994
Mr. Calvin Leggett
Director of Planning and Programming
North Carolina Department of Transportation
P. O. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Re: Bolling Road/E. 5th Street TIP Project
Dear Mr. Leggett:
I am very pleased to advise that our City Council has agreed to have the Bolling Road/E. 5th
Street TIP Project amended so that the eastern terminus of the project will be at 5th Street and
Roanoke Avenue. To stop the improvement short of Roanoke Avenue would only create major
traffic problems on a section of this street where traffic volumes and turning movements are
probably at their peak.
If we can be of any assistance to you on moving this project forward, please don't hesitate to
give me a call at [phone].
Sincerely yours,
for H. Denton
City Manager
VHD/lv
cc: Wayne Fedora, Project Planning Engineer
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Charles B. Archer, AICP, Planning Director
City of Roanoke Rapids
J. Richard Parnell, Put;lic Works Director/City Engineer
City of Roanoke Rapids
A4-26
APPENDIX 5
Citizens Informational
Workshop News Release
and Information Handout
NOTICE OF A CITIZENS INFORMATIONAL WORKSHOP
FOR WIDENING BOLLING ROAD/FIFTH STREET (SR 1426)
FROM WEST TENTH STREET (SR 1400) TO ROANOKE AVENUE (NC 48)
Project 8.2300601 U-1007 Halifax County
A citizens informational workshop will be held on
Tuesday, August 23, 1994 in the Lloyd Andrews Meeting Hall
located at 700 Jackson Street in Roanoke Rapids. This will
be an informal open house workshop held between the hours of
3:30 p.m. and 7:30 p.m. Those wishing to.attend may do so at
their convenience during these hours.
The purpose of this informational workshop is to present
information, answer questions,.and receive comments during
the early design stages of the proposed widening of Bolling
Road. The proposed project consists of constructing a
multi-lane roadway with curb and gutter from West Tenth
Street to Roanoke Avenue. Additional right of way will be
required for this project.
Representatives of the Department of Transportation will
be available to discuss the proposed project with those
attending. Anyone desiring additional information about the
workshop may contact Mr. Wayne Fedora, North Carolina
Department of Transportation, Planning and Environmental
Branch, P. 0. Box 25201, Raleigh, NC 27611 or by telephone at
[phone].
NCDOT will provide reasonable accommodations, auxiliary
aids, and services for any qualified disabled person
interested in attending the workshop. To request this
assistance you may call Mr. Fedora at the above number
NO LATER THAN seven days prior to the date of the workshop.
A5-1
.A
North Carolina Department of T?ransportation
Planning and Environmental Branch
SR 1426 (ROLLING ROAD /FIFTH STREET)
FROM SR 1400 (WEST TENTH STREET)
TO NC 48 (ROANOKE AVENUE)
T. I. P. NUMBER U - 1007
AUGUST 23, 1994

Citizens Informational workshop
ZI CC=
A5-2
ROANOKE RAPIDS, HALIFAX COUNTY
CITIZEN INFORMATIONAL WORKSHOP
SR 1426 (Bolling Road/Fifth Street)
From SR 1400 (West Tenth Street) to
NC 43 (Roanoke Avenue)
Roanoke Rapids, Halifax County
Federal Aid Number STP-1426(1)
State Project Number 8.2300601
TIP No. U-1007
CITIZEN INFORMATIONAL WORKSHOP
The North Carolina Department of Transportation Division
of Highways is holding this workshop to present the proposed
widening of SR 1426 (Bolling Road/Fifth Street) in Roanoke
Rapids, Halifax County (Figure 1). The project begins at SR
1400 (West Tenth Street) and ends at NC 43 (Roanoke Avenue).
The Division of Highways appreciates comments and suggestions
concerning the proposed replacement and will consider these
during the project study.
The Division of Highways recognizes individuals living
close to a proposed project want to be informed of the
possible effects of the project on their homes and
businesses. Exact information is not available at this stage
of the planning process. The Division of Highways will
complete additional planning studies and design work before
establishing the actual alignment and right of way limits.
Please address written comments or requests for additional
information to:
Mr. H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways--NCDOT
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The 1995-2001 North Carolina Department of Transportation
(NCDOT) Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) calls for
widening SR 1426 to a multi-lane curb and gutter facility.
NCDOT proposes to widen to three lanes with curb and gutter
as shown in Figure 2.
'S
CURRENT SCHEDULE
The Division of Highways has scheduled right of way
acquisition to begin in fiscal year 1996 and construction in
fiscal year 1993. These schedules are subject to the
availability of sufficient highway funds.
A5-3
EXISTING FACILITY
Len_th: ",i lome.ters ( 3. 4 milts)
Roadway Width: Near West Tenth: 6.2 meters (20 feet)
Near Robinson: 6.4 meters (21 feet)
Near Rapids: 7.4 meters (24 feet)
Near Franklin: 9.7 meters (32 feet)
Near Roanoke: 9.7 meters (32 feet)
Travel Lane Width: Varies from 3.1 meters (10 feet) at
West Tenth to 4.3 meters (14 feet) at
Franklin
Number of Lanes: Two (Three at Roanoke)
Right of Way Width: approximately 12.2 meters (40 feet)
Access Control: None
Curves: There are several horizontal and
vertical curves along the project.
One horizontal curve is at the skewed
intersection of Bolling Road and Fifth
Street. One vertical curve is at the
railroad crossing at Monroe Street
Terrain: Rolling
Speed Limit: 70 km/h (45 mph) outside city limits
60 km/h (35 mph) inside city limits
Traffic Volumes: Near SR West Tenth Street:.
1994: 3,200 VPD
2018: 5,200 VPD (projected)
Near Rapids Street:
1994: 5,400 VPD
2018: 8,400 VPD (projected)
Near Roanoke Avenue:
1994: 8,200 VPD
2018: 12,400 VPD (projected)
T.J.P. COST ESTIMATES: (West Tenth Street to Rapids Street)
Construction: $ 2,700,000
Right of Way: $ 2,475,000
Total: $ 5,175,000
A5-4
HALIFAX COUNTY
a
b
? e
/ Ache 48 I Halifax .\
e
dnl Mrn 1
r• RO'f Brmkleyvdle 1 9
4
Heatlisvdle ?M 301 t5 5
7"°""'ef 5 H A' L I F
?\ 5 Ringwood 4 .6 S Si
Glenview aal 0 Enfield 10
^^eltnea
P.
Brranto,
lery
IS
I
Hill
256
5
Scotland Neck
Lewin
Ila

im 1 1 J_\\? ?'r
17],
°, pq
1777 ?? 1
F. 1

-, t? '?
ti 1 1 17.0 1
17)7 O4 ?

J
??
?^ ?

1701 rJ
c 'let o r
jW7

=ua?.JL
rv
1

v

boiling
O ,7 Od

l.S7Z 1477
1
:..

OANOKE RAPIDS
1,01 11 1431

.:f
39 r
POP. 14.702
i 1 .Z _
n In
^ .19
0 .
J1 x._11 ,i
11112
4n .
-71
ll
11113
ROSEMARY
(UNINC,)
POP. 1,828 I u17-
1.f.
R
L12
1417
0;;:
PROJECT T LIMITS
. -g °
17, . u y;?z11 ?• $
If./ 1478
A`
f1
I.
a
'A ?1
W
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTIMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
ROANOKE RAPIDS
SR 1426 (BOLLING ROAD)
FROM SR 1400 TO NC 48
T. I. P. U - 1007
0 kilometers 1.24
FIG. 1
A5-5
w
m
O
C.
OZ
a0
F- U
LU LU
w Cl)
CC m
?w
U- C)
LL p
?z
am
Om
mM
0 U
Zw
J z
.J
O?
m
?M
co
N
T
cn

w
co
CD
06
U
Q0
W
im 0
06
U
CV
Figure 2
AS-6
Ilk
COMMENT SHEET
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS TO SR 1436 (BOLLING ROAD/FIFTH STREET)
TRANSPORTATION: IMPROVEMENT PROJECT U-1007
ROANOKE RAPIDS, HALIFAX COUNTY
23 August 1994
(You do not have to answer every question, but please take
some time to give us your comments and questions regarding
this project and the workshop. You may continue on the back
of these sheets if necessary.)
NAME:
ADDRESS:
COMMENTS AND/OR QUESTIONS REGARDING PROJECT U-1007:
WAS THE PROJECT ADEQUATELY EXPLAINED TO YOU?
DID NCDOT REPRESENTATIVES GIVE CLEAR AND UNDERSTANDABLE
EXPLANATIONS?
WERE THEY COURTEOUS AND HELPFUL?
COMMENTS
,f
A5-7
WERE DISPLAY MAPS EASY TO READ AND UNDERSTAND?
COMMENTS
PLEASE SUGGEST WAYS WE MAY BETTER PRESENT PROPOSED PROJECTS
AND ADDRESS CITIZEN'S CONCERNS IN FUTURE INFORMATIONAL
WORKSHOPS
HOW DID YOU HEAR ABOUT THIS WORKSHOP?
DO YOU FEEL NCDOT ADEQUATELY PUBLICIZED THIS WORKSHOP?
COMMENTS
THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS RELATE TO GENERAL TRANSPORTATION
ISSUES IN YOUR AREA
WHAT DO YOU THINK IS THE MOST PRESSING TRANSPORTATION NEED IN
YOUR AREA? _
WHICH ROAD IN YOUR AREA DO YOU THINK NEEDS IMPROVEMENT THE
MOST?
HOW DO YOU RATE'THE CONDITION OF THE ROADS IN YOUR AREA?
EXCELLENT GOOD FAIR POOR
STATEMENTS RELATIVE TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT MAY ALSO BE
MAILED TO:
Mr. H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611

A5-8
NCWRC,HCP,FRLLS LRKE TEL:[phone] Jun 04'96 14:52 No.005 P.02
® Nord, Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604,1188,919-733,3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mclbst Mc6ee
Office of Legislative and Intorgovernmental Affairs
FROM: David Cox, Highway Project Coo for
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: June 3, 1996
SUBJECT: North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) Finding of No Significant
Impact (FONSI) for SR 1426 (Bolling Road/Fifth Street) improvements, from SR 1400
(Wc.st Tenth Street) to NC 48 (Roanoke Avenue), Flallf} x County, North Carolina. TIP
No. U-1007, SC14 Project No. 96-0715.
Staff biologists with the N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission have reviewed the subjecrliONSI
and are familiar with habitat values in the project area. The purpose of this review was to assess project
impacts to fish and wildlife resources. Our comments are provided in accordance with certain provisions
of the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(c)) and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination
Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C, 661-667d).
NCDOT prc)poses to widen existing SR 1426 from two-lanes to a three-lane, curb and gutter section
from SR 1400 to NC 48. The project length is approximately 2.4 miles. No wetland impacts are
anticipated.
We have reviewed the additional information provided in the FONS1 and support NCDOT in the
decision to improve an existing facility. At this time, we concur with the subject document. We request
that NCDOT continue efforts to minimize impacts to the streams by using sedimentation and erosion
control standards for High Quality Waters (HQW) and enforcing NCDOT Best. Management Practices.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this FONSI. If we can be of any further assistance
please call me at [phone].
cc: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Raleigh
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources • Legislative & Intergovernmental Affairs James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor ID E
mom mm
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
H N R
Henry M. Lancaster II, Director
MEMORANDUM
C'
TO: Chrys Baggett 0c f 3 01995
FROM: Melba McGee NNVgRc?WNI/IL SCrcrvCFg
RE: 96-0232 EA for SR 1426 Widening, Halifax County
DATE: October 23,1995
The Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources has reviewed the proposed
project.
The Division of Environmental Management does not concur with this document because
NCDOT has not committed to use hazardous spill catch basins. The NCDOT is encouraged to
continue coordinating with the Division of Environmental Management prior to circulating the
final document. This will help avoid unnecessary delays during the permit process..
Thank you for the opportunity to respond.
cr--, cv'c?-
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone]
An Eaual Opportunity Affirmative Action Emolover 50% recvcled/ 10% post-cnnsumar nnnr
NC DEM WQ ENVSCI Fax:[phone]
State of-North Cdrolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B, Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., RE., director
Oct 3 '95 13:45 P.02i03
UEHNR
October 3, 1995
MEMORANDUM
To: Melba McGee
Through: John Domey i?
From: Eric Galamb !
? i
Subject: EA for SR 1426 Widening
Halifax County I
State Project DOT No. 8. 300601, TIP #U-1007
EHNR # 96-0232, DEM No. 11076
The subject document has been reviewed by this office. The Division of
Environmental Management Is responsible for the Issuance of the Section 401 Water
Quality Certification for activities which impact of waters of the state including
wetlands. The document states that n 'Including wetlands will be impacted but three
streams will be Impacted. The following comments are based on a review of the EA
document: i
A) DEM acknowledges that DOT v
measures since the Roanoke R
area. During the March 1994 s
that -DOT. use .hazardous spill cl
DEM met with DOT in May 199
basins. It was decided that the
within, a 1/2 mile of the water st
location of the basins be stated
that the Hydraulics Unit will revi
during final design. DEM will ni
installed at the FONSI stage as
and concurrence with a FONSI.
utilize hi ?h qualityy soil and: erosion control
er at this location is in a water supply critical
)ping meeting for this project; DEM requested
ch basins to protect the existing water use.
to develop a policy for hazardous spill catch
asins would be installed for streams that are
ply critical area. DEM also requested -that. the
1 the environmental documents. DOT states
N the feasibility of Installing the catch basins
:d to know whether the catch basins will be
tat information is important to DEM's review
DEM does not.concur with the docume t due to the unresolved water issue described
above. DOT is reminded that endorse ent of an EA by DEM would not preclude the
denial of a 401 Certification upon appli ation if wetland or water impacts have not
been avoided and minimized to the mgimum extent practicable.
Questions regarding the 401 Certification should be directed to Eric Galamb (733-
1786) in DEM's Water Quality Environmental Sciences Branch.
cc: Wayne Fedora, DOT
Raleigh COE
Monica Swihart .
sr1426.ea
P.O. Box 29535, Rdeigh. North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal opportunMy Affirmative Action Employer 5096 recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
tdCWRC,HCP,FRLLS LRKE TEL:[phone] Oct 10'95 7:46 No-002 P.04
Memorandum 2 October 9, 1995
existing roadways avoids new stream and wetland crossings, does
not further fragment wildlife habitat, and does not promote
secondary development.
NCtdRC,HCP,FRLLS LRKE TEL:[phone]
Oct 10'95
7:46 PJo. 002 P.03
02 North Carolina Wilc life Resources Commission 0z
517 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604.1188, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba Mcgee
Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs
FROM: David Cox, Highway Project Co ' ator /
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: October 9, 1995
SUBJECT: North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
Environmental Assessment (EA) for SR 1426 (Bolling
Road/Fifth Street) improvements, from SR 1400 (West
Tenth Street) to NC 48 (Roanoke Avenue), Halifax
County, North Carolina. TIP No. U-1007, SCH Project
No. 96-0232.
Staff biologists with the N. C. Wildlife Resources commission
have reviewed the subject EA and are familiar with habitat values
in the project area. The purpose of this review was to assess
project impacts to fish and wildlife resources. Our comments are
provided in accordance with certain provisions of the National
Environmental Policy Act (42 U,S.C. 4332(2)(c)) and the Fish and
Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C.
661-667d).
NCDOT proposes to widen existing SR 1426 from two-lanes to a
three-lane, curb and gutter section from SR 1400 to NC 48. The
project length is approximately 2.4 miles. No wetland impacts
are anticipated.
We support NCDOT in the decision to improve existing
facilities rather that to construct new roadways. Improving
.
NCWRC,HCP,FRLLS LAKE TEL:[phone] Oct 10'95 7:46 No.002 P.04
Memorandum 2 October. 9, 1995
existing roadways avoids new stream and wetland crossings, does
not further fragment wildlife habitat, and does not promote
secondary development.
We feel the EA adequately addresses impacts to wildlife and
fisheries resources. Surface water impacts will likely be
authorized under a nationwide 11404" permit.
Due to the limited scope
commitments outlined in the
anticipate concurrence with
Significant Impact (FONSI).
efforts to minimize impacts
and enforce NCDOT Best Mana<
of the project and the environmental
document, we concur with this EA and
the upcoming Finding of No
We request that NCDOT continue
to the streams crossed by the project
lement Practices.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this EA"I- If we
can be of any further assistance please call me at (919) 528-
9886.
CC: Howard Hall, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Raleigh
RECEIVED
0CT111995
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
")A sinu
NOTICE OF AN OPEN-HOUSE PUBLIC HEARING
ON THE WIDENING OF BOLLING ROAD/FIFTH STREET (SR 1426)
FROM WEST TENTH STREET (SR 1400) TO ROANOKE AVENUE (NC 48)
Project 8.2300601 U-1007 Halifax County
The North Carolina Department of Transportation will
hold the above open-house public hearing on Thursday,
November 9, 1995 between the hours of 5:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m.
in the Lloyd Andrews Meeting Hall located at 700 Jackson
Street in Roanoke Rapids. Interested individuals may attend
this hearing at their convenience between the above stated
hours. Division of Highways personnel will be available to
provide information, answer questions, and take comments
regarding this project.
The proposed project consists of constructing a
multi-lane roadway with curb and gutter from West Tenth
Street to Roanoke Avenue. The existing two-lane section will
be widened to a three-lane roadway with curb and gutter.
Sidewalks are proposed on each side of the project from
Pinecrest Avenue to Roanoke Avenue. The length of the
project is 2.4 miles. Additional right of way will be
required for this project.
Plans setting forth the location and design and a copy
of the environmental document - Environmental Assessment -
are available for public review in the Public Library located
at 319 Roanoke Avenue in Roanoke Rapids.
Anyone desiring additional information may write to:
Mr. L. L. Hendricks, P.O. Box 25201, Raleigh, NC 27611 or
telephone [phone].
NCDOT will provide auxiliary aids and services to
disabled persons who wish to participate in the hearing. To
receive special services, please call Mr. Hendricks at the
above number to give adequate notice prior to the date of the
hearing.

STA?Z
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTA `-"
JAMES B. HUNT, JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GovtANoik RO. BOX 25201, RALEIGEL, N.C. 27611-5201
February 17, 1994
MEMORANDUM TO: Mr. Eric Galamb
DEM - DEHNR, 6th Floor
FROM: H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
R. SAMUEL. HUNT II
SCCRLTARY
SUBJECT: Review of Scoping Sheet for Widening of SR 1426
(Bolling Road) from SR 1400 to Rapids Street, Roanoke
Rapids, Federal Aid No. STP-1426(1), State Project
No. 8.2300601, T.I.P. No. U-1007
Attached for your review and comments are the scoping sheets for the
subject project (See attached map for project location). The purpose of
these sheets and the related review procedure is to have an early "meeting
of the minds" as to the scope of work that should be performed and thereby
enable us to better implement the project. A scoping meeting for this
project is scheduled for March 16, 1994 at 10:00 A. M. in the Planning and
Environmental Branch Conference Room (Room 434). You may provide us with
your comments at the meeting or mail them to us prior to that date.
Thank you for your assistance in this part
If there are any questions about the meeting or
call Wayne Fedora, Project Planning Engineer, at
WF/plr
Attachment

of our planning process.
the scoping sheets, please
733-7842.
VCAL

?,a a

, .
V 4

b- tc,

?3{ass

PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
DATE 02/15/94
REVISION DATE
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT STAGE
PROGRAMMING
PLANNING X
DESIGN
TIP U-100-
STATE PROJECT 5.2300601
F. A. PROJECT STP-1426(1)
DIVISION FOUR
COUNTY HALIFAX
MUNICIPALITY ROANOKE RAPIDS
ROUTE SR 1426 (BOLLING ROADI
FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION COLLECTOR
LENGTH 2.7 km (1.7 MI)
QUAD SHEET ROANOKE RAPIDS
PURPOSE OF PROJECT: TO IMPROVE TRAFFIC OPERATIONS. AND
SAFETY ALONG SR 1426 (BOLLING ROAD).
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT (INCLUDING SPECIFIC LIMITS) AND MAJOR
ELEMENTS OF WORK: _ THE PROJECT EXTENDS ALONG SR 1426
(BO.LLI_NGROAD) FROM SR 1.400 (WEST TENTH STREU_ TC? RAP_IDS___ _
STREET 2-. KM). _ EXTENDING THE PROJECT EASTWARD_ TO_ tic' 4-', (1 . 2_ KM) _ SHOULD BE CONSIDERED. SR 1426 WILL BE WIDENED TO A
MULTI-LANE CURB AND UUTTERSECTION. THIS WILL PROVIDE MORE
EFFECTIVE _ CONTROL OF_-DRIVEWAY _ENTRANC ESAND MPR_OVLTHE
APPEARANCE OF THE AREA.
TYPE OF ENV I RONMETAL DO(-'i'MF.NT TO BE PREPARED: ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY SCHEDULE:

EA JAN Q4 - MAR 95
FONSI MAY 1)5 - SEP 95
WILL THERE BE SPECIAL FUNDING PARTICIPATION BY MUNICIPALITY.
DEVELOPERS. OR OTHERS? YES NO _Y
IF YES, BY WHOM AND AMOUNT: --
S _ OR
HOW AND WHEN WILL THIS BE PAID?
Page 1
PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
TYPE OF ACCESS CONTROL: FULL PARTIAL NONE X_
NUMBER OF INTERCHANGES GRADE SEPARARTIONS _
STREAM CROSSINGS 1
TYPICAL SECTION: EXISTING TWO LANES WITH SHOULDER AV" DITCH
PROPOSED THREE TO FIFE LAVE CURB AND GUTTER.
TRAFFIC (ADT): NEAR BOLLING ROAD AND WEST TENTH STREET:
CURRENT (1991)_2900__ DESIGN YEAR (201S) 5300
TTST % DUALS %
NEAR FIFTH STREET AT ROANOKE AVENUE:
CURRENT (1991) 7600 DESIGN YEAR (2018) 13-00
TTST % DUALS
DESIGN STANDARDS APPLICABLE: AASHTO X 3R
DESIGN SPEED: 65-80 KM/H (40-50 MPH)
CURRENT COST ESTIMATE:
CONSTRUCTION COST (INCLUDING ENGINEERING
AND CONTINGENCIES)... S2,700.000
RIGHT OF WAY (INCLUDING RELOCATION.
UTILITIES, AND ACQUISITION).. x475,000
FORCE ACCOUNT ITEMS ......................... o ,
PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING ..................... S
TOTAL PLANNING COST ESTIMATE......... 5 5.175,000
TIP COST ESTIMATE:
CONSTRUCTION ................................ S__;_700._000
RIGHT OF WAY ................................ 12.4-5.090
PRIOR YEARS ................................. i- '[)0.000
TOTAL ....................................... t D._3-5.000
Page 2
PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
LIST ANY SPECIAL FEATURES, SUCH AS RAILROAD INVOLVEMENT.
WHICH COULD AFFECT COST, SCHEDULE. OR PROJECT:
ITEMS REQUIRED (X) COMMENTS COST
ESTIMATED COSTS OF IMPROVEMENTS:
X PAVEMENT
X SURFACE .................................. . ?_--_-?.000
BASE ...................................... .$ -
MILLING & RECYCLING ...................... S ,
TURNOUTS ................................. $__' -
SHOULDERS
PAVED .................................... . ,
EARTHEN .................................. $
X EARTHWORK ................................... $ 3"0.000
SUBSURFACE ITEMS $
X SUBGRADE AND STABILIZATION .................. $ 153,650
X DRAINAGE (LIST ANY SPECIAL ITEMS)............ $ 255,000
SUB-DRAINAGE ................................ $ -
STRUCTURES:
BRIDGE REHABILITATION ....................
NEW BRIDGE ............................... . $_ ,
WIDEN BRIDGE ............................. S ,
REMOVE BRIDGE ............................ $ ,
NEW CULVERT .............................. S --
CULVERT EXTENSION ........................ $
RETAINING WALLS .......................... 5 ,
NOISE WALLS .............................. $ ,
OTHER MISC. STRUCTURES ................... $
X CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER .750 mm.(26")........ $ 16.000
CONCRETE SIDEWALK ........................... $ ,
GUARDRAIL ................................... $ ,
FENCING:
W.W . .................................... $ ,
C.L. .............................. $ ,
X EROSION CONTROL ............................. $ 36,000
LANDSCAPING ................................. $ ,
LIGHTING .............................. . $___' '--
X TRAFFIC CONTROL ............................. $ 51,000
SIGNING:
NEW ..................................... 5
UPGRADING ............................... $ ,
X TRAFFIC SIGNALS:
NEW ..................................
X REVISED ................................. $ 14,000
X RR SIGNALS:
X NEW ..................................... $ 1'0,000
REVISED ................................. $ ,
WITH OR WITHOUT ARMS .................... $ .- ,
Page 3
PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
IF 3R:
DRAINAGE SAFETY ENHANCEMENT .............. S
ROADSIDE SAFETY ENHANCEMENT .............. 5
REALIGNMENT FOR SAFETY UPGRADE........... S
N PAVEMENT MARKINGS:
-- PAINT .................................... $ _
??- THERMOPLASTIC ............................ ..- 30.600
RAISED PAVEMENT MARKERS .................. S ,
- DELINEATORS ................................. $ --
X OTHER (CLEARING. GRUBBING. MISC. & MOB.)..... S 466.-50
CONTRACT COST (SUBTOTAL): S ?.350,000
---------------------------------------------------
ENGINEERING AND CONTINGENCIES ................... S 350.000
PF. COSTS ........................................
FORCE ACCOUNT ................................... $
SUBTOTAL: $- 2.700.000
--------------------------------------------------
RIGHT OF WAY :
WILL CONTAIN WITHIN EXISTING R/W^ YES NO
EXISTING WIDTH
NEW R/W NEEDED ESTIMATED COST S
EASEMENTS: Type Width
ESTIMATED COST S
Utilities ................................... $ RIGHT OF WAY SUBTOTAL: S2.4 5.000
--------------------------------------------------
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST: -$,5 175,000 lf"'\'
PREPARED BY: RICHARD WAYNE FEDORA DATE: 2/ 1 4 94
I /l o
Page 4
PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
*THE ABOVE. SCOPING HAS BEEN REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY:
INIT DATE
HIGHWAY DESIGN BOARD OF TRANS MEMB
ROADWAY MGR PROGRAM & POLICY
STRUCTURE _ CHIEF ENGINEER - OPER
GEOTECHNICAL SECONDARY ROADS OFF.
HYDRAULIC'S CONSTRUCTION BRANCH
DESIGN DEP. ADMINISTRATOR -
SERVICES PRECONSTRUCTION
LOCATION & ROADSIDE
SURVEYS ENVIRONMENTAL
PHOTOGRAMMETRY MAINTENANCE BRANCH
RIGHT OF WAY BRIDGE- MAINTENANCE
R/W UTILITIES _ STATEWIDE PLANNING
DEHNR DIVISION ENGINEER
FHWA _ BICYCLE COORDINATOR
COUNTY MANAGER PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT OF PROJECT
CULT. RES. MANAGEMENT
PRELIMINARY TRAFFIC
EST. ENG. ALG 1/31/94 ENGINEERING
PLANNING &
ENVIRONMENTAL CITY/MUNICIPALITY
OTHERS
INIT DATE
(SCOPING SHEET FOR LOCAL OFFICIALS WILL BE SENT TO THE
DIVISION ENGINEER FOR HANDLING.)
COMMENTS OR REMARKS:
*IF YOU DO NOT AGREE WITH THE PROPOSED PROJECT OR SLOPING.
NOTE YOUR PROPOSED REVISIONS BELOW, AND INITIAL AND DATE
AFTER COMMENTS.
Page 5

Yom! J ?-:
11r-' ? // 1175 /
? `7.. •. ?' ?l ? `` - - ?? tom. ?Ca?? ?\.v. - ?? .'>
i/0
.. _-: nu l/ 111 / =xri?SL/n (il
210
a11426
?? • . • c I ?; p `?yy' err'; Lo-a'? ?? • l Il?j:.
J lU -.

Plaglt
p '? (/` `' 11??bb F
0 in
PL ANN 1 NG L 1 M ITS
ll II
JRosemaiy /--
???
148
Gum ? I II:
ChaVel j •/ - I? •I ? •1?. ?? •_'li`'?._?? C /? 11 .? •L?-.r•.
.H M? III / 'II:I ? If ?
.II• ??.? .II I II •? I_ oil L!\ ? ? •
?u?n. •u. ° ??5H1. .z/v . .,,Ili: ?? ??' 1J
.61
n /
II '
204
C?l? i
pJl? ? 1 ? ?I I ? ??
0

l

IPSO
]
fun t

N

.:
r;@
s\? N ! h
' 6
< .e
HALI FAX COUNTY *N
7

,u "\ I 'RAPIDS ; -LAKE
' -
? - ?::
- ::
I O j \ \
b TlleYno LI ,
I

leyp PAS w
Bal
S1e1"IB
• >
? PLANNING LIMITS ??p

t ,
]A
fleaesll
.f f9Y
\J e
u • ? ?
31?
.0 ii
Br•uwr. J
.ood. 13Y1
Lv
t
11 1
e c;
D ' a.]
7 ? 9

_
/ 9113
e
Il Lon a• )• ltt(t </?
1.6 __ e 1
1 di - 49
9 '? cAllrsBUllc
1 79 90?. 1.171

11 1
'?
L12t
v x-549 ?
is
173
7
rl J
\ _ 13? -
?
\
.I • Mo1Haa C?? _ dt .7
A9 }

o (UN
9
1407 Lle2 141
7 1.
1. Cre.Aa Y
WE
_ M LDON

L42 e_,
J 1?. 1. ? t O
Ade.y 9o91.e..

01
Mabn 6
u? 5 Kneoa9ille 1.1 1
7.0
I.I5 CrpHN 1 •0 U32 .11.71' `•,??. 0
S 72
iza 114!4\\ I{iJ
7'!1

7
x!'40 ? i s 941 !!7 p G ay .? c 13 _
1i4 " Do
-6 IJ? 1` 14LO - 'Q 1)]0 ?. \a 141] 81717. 'ems 1
1.0
?/.S
? J a 147) •_- P?
ti h
'S'. 7+7
1

1.1 142

]J q
1210 >> t :'.
'. a% 13)1
RCS 4e ~ JO ? r
1 1 ? _ow
? 1499 ® i

re10 a?? • e
- U Ali

4 Aurelian
SPrirpa _
-l Andengy 7.e _
Crqu.ooda low 900
Pier ?)
7! 1? J
V
t?ti
y1
110 for
CrO°rooda
2 v 4 0
? 1
U - l 1L'!
?
/ A?
?? - _ _
1700 • '0 - `
? ?
• G?k
m \ HAl9AX t
1171
Oe ,? 1091 1 .?. 10 Lou 1 11 -
.? U 1 909.757 / O
u7
\I c
,
1010 -
lewb 3 Y'
Crouroada 13)7 14!3 -
__ ?r?'iF C
O
o .e 95 6.
1.3 lel

a
1411 J.0 ,?

r N E
E
C

'
e 1419 M
1W
1.0
ftc .8 (7ad??
11
...
\e

-0
I 0 .
13 1611 _

10' -AS
56
1 ::

p"de

1
gyp

lOQe
.. - 1612
__
1

6 PAS 7.1 r .'
p
?
_ 90] 16.07 1471 .?P9pp(( ,S
l ? `6 7 Helllo, / l
?
AS
°)1>
1)10
n 496
k
_ 100 r
':>.`.
t
561
"
- T 1.. 907 ` 6
1601 100, 1119
t

1.D
e ?R
'? IppS

1701 A
?

"0' 1)00
361
1
!

1700
413 1
0
1.1 110
IS
1
30 s
1111
eoe a 19V
ti
PAS l0 .? I210 - - -
1e ._ I092 ti 9 PAS - -
561 y f 1.1 1 Beo9erdam 1204 r
1271 ' y 1210?' .J 9
.- HeoMarille?
U 1236 1203
Wayman Bo. a 6?
.? - ? 1;1e 7 -
2.7 1206 1212 1200 1713 M' w 120.
002 1210 Eden Mel.
Ch X77
q? .
JO 10 F. ?e
L 1
120) 120) 1
1716 e F 1901
'r?J I.mn _ 1711 \\\LLL 1209 j
1217 .5 171 .5 °
r/ 1
] 1211 ? 1091 '?? 1
OamV
loe-
Ie
1192
,7

HALIFAX COUNTY
I

? ' 8
/ 111111e 48 I Halifax
8
doc Mrs ?
It. Pork Rnnklevvdle
most sv,lle
Hollister SH A I L I F
Rmawood 1 e z s
SO
r ° 1 Enfield 10
Glenvlew
^^711ea
1333
JM
3 `.. 1
0 lilt o ry 1471 Ire
_???? L12Z ,1:
149p 1107
1?
1o n
1771 .1t
1440 'Q( J.
11X71 # 1°1
ROSEMARY
1UNINC.)
POP. 1,e2e PLANNING LIMITS
late I.a
14e7 O7 V ! NI ?4+
p i
.0 471 ° '1I?C l] 4 '
4 14.
07
X16 iii 1470 1439 II 1449 1477 1
?
144! 1441
11 1lii ?II 1447
O
fA1 1,
.1 lu° ]e Se
.ro
05 $A1
+00 ?, " .77 n
1444
,I
14?
ROANOKE RAPIDS
POP. 14,702
HIII
Neck
L
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
ROANOKE RAPIDS
SR 1426 (BOLLING ROAD)
FROM SR 1400 TO NC 48
T. I. P. U - 1007
I 0 kilometers 1.24 1 FIG. 1 B I
I
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
TRANSMITTAL SLIP DATE
2f r+9 4
TO: REF. NO. OR ROOM. SLOG.
E--,c ?dlavn? -D E M
FROM: REP. NO. OR ROOM. SLD6.
K. VtCL
ACTION
? NOTE AND FILE ? PER OUR CONVERSATION
? NOTE AND RETURN TO ME ? PER YOUR REQUEST
? RETURN WITH MORE DETAILS FOR YOUR APPROVAL
?
? NOTE AND SEE ME ASOUT THIS .,
D / FOR YOUR INFORMATION
? PLEASE ANSWER ? FOR YOUR COMMENTS
? PREPARE REPLY FOR MY SIGNATURE ? SIGNATURE
? TARE APPROPRIATE ACTION ? INVESTIGATE AND REPORT
COMMENTS:
Scop-i.n_':_Muc_L__ nX--_OUt I i_He -- U-- i 007
1. 1 ca5 .i h i 1 1 t y Study
A. ' ump1uLcd in K;';
R, SLatc', MoqL fuMA _ ,IllPv 1. :c cl_,. j-.
and gutter ( IO.`' I pLar /A .5 c1 iicr in ,I?_?,_ )
I',y L'; Ling CoilCl i l l QIl'' L
Tie-"
1. ?iypiLaI SULK 01I
( pl
Al y
1. T 11th S t . to [.l i it w ni 0.2 Il l 120.3 1 u p -- r p
?. Rohinqun to A1',.IW 0.4 M HI t) up-up
. WPM to Ror,noku nl (_? . P) F-1,
1. None vucordw
2. Approx. 12.2 m W Q) "'; t L. h M l Cii
D. IA b1.;tte1.
T IOM kap&4 to pCii1'lt!{-_l'
Ka L . roaK o . . il'' ,
1, A!_- ._raCiw n rnn , 1 . I t I'.,
?%1• n 1.oc.'
1c. i 1 :12 arl 1 and L 1 on . , I W - Pr, 1 i
1'., 1aili li ips 60 w (i(ll i lII; ,Inc N`'_'-,lurn
C . A , 1 I a y G 1 o c u r A 0 ; c . 1 1 11 ; a ' I 0
D. R i uu l l 1me ''dill i --Ma i 1 4. ano 111 n,?
?', 1{117h (`ollij%Ctl:}' ti l tit NIl<_'_ .i;.. ., niI
f v. Mc i ocy Park
1. (.ocatud it Bo1 1 inp/I i fth "Hn I'udai
. c i t y owncu
City Limit-,
1. 1 ocaLCl pit 'ion I A; auO , lnccr
?. hpccli Limit chtnvu- rrom 72.0 kah (:.- mph to
5P.3 kWh 115 MPU
.. 1?1? I'?LI ,?_'`
? 1??i? ?; l )) I l ? I III ? l 1. - ? C? U I? ?> U `? l."5 ? t7 1? ?_' I °_. Il ?, l l? l j? t?
t', ..
`D??' ? 3
?, ? ', ? ?. ? ? . ? n ; . ,
_' ?? !11 _ ? ?l llh ? ? it .I :I ?'}?; 'iUl'1 ?I 11 l? 1?0-1 [ll)?_C +l'Clll l tl ;)l:
?? i1 ??.,. ? I('lI_ fit);';, ?,Ullti (;''.?L' l7C Ifll`?I'C)
[ ? i
,. ,
... ' .. ?.
?, ?.

May 31, 1994
TO: Melba McGee, Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental
Affairs t
FROM: Monica Swihart, Water Quality Planning
SUBJECT: Project Review #94-0840; Scoping Comments - NC DOT
Proposed Improvements to SR 1426 in Roanoke Rapids, TIP
No. U-1007
The Water Quality Section of the Division of Environmental
Management requests that the following topics be discussed in the
environmental documents prepared on the subject project:
A. Identify the streams potentially impacted by the project. The
stream classifications should be current.
B. Identify the linear feet of stream channelizations/
relocations. If the original stream banks were vegetated, it
is requested that the channel ized/relocated stream banks be
revegetated.
C. Number of stream crossings.
D. Will permanent spill catch basins be utilized? DEM requests
that these catch basins be placed at all water supply stream
crossings. Identify the responsible party for maintenance.
E. Identify the stormwater controls (permanent and temporary) to
be employed.
F. Please ensure that sediment and erosion and control measures
are not placed in wetlands.
G. Wetland Impacts
1) Identify the federal manual used for identifying and
delineating jurisdictional wetlands.
2) Have wetlands been avoided as much as possible?
3) Have wetland impacts been minimized?
4) Discuss wetland impacts by plant communities affected.
5) Discuss the quality of wetlands impacted.
6) Summarize the total wetland impacts.
7) List the 401 General Certification numbers requested from
DEM.
Melba McGee
May 31, 1994
Page 2
H. Will borrow locations be in wetlands? Borrow/waste areas
should avoid wetlands to the maximum extent practicable.
Prior to approval of any borrow/waste site in a wetland, the
contractor shall obtain a 401 Certification from DEM.
I. Did NCDOT utilize the existing road alignments as much as
possible? Why not (if applicable)?
J. To what extent can traffic congestion management techniques
alleviate the traffic problems in the study area?
K. Please provide a conceptual mitigation plan to help the
environmental review. The mitigation plan may state the
following:
1. Compensatory mitigation will be considered only after
wetland impacts have been avoided and minimized to the
maximum extent possible.
2. On-site, in-kind mitigation is the preferred method of
mitigation. In-kind mitigation within the same watershed
is preferred over out-of-kind mitigation.
3. Mitigation should be in the following order:
restoration, creation, enhancement, and lastly banking.
Written concurrence of 401 Water Quality Certification may be
required for this project. Applications requesting coverage under
our General Certification 14 or General Permit 31 will require
written concurrence. Please be aware that 401 Certification may be
denied if wetland impacts have not been avoided and minimized to
the maximum extent practicable.
10617er.mem
cc: Eric Galamb
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

TRANSMITTAL SLIP DATE

4
1
8
9
TO: REF. NO. OR ROOM, BLDG.
E-,- ? c G a1 aAm b -pTiE,: K
FROM: REP. NO. OR ROOM, BLDG.
J ??E
aN?ne e o«
1
ACTION
? NOTE AND FILE ? PER OUR CONVERSATION
? NOTE AND RETURN TO ME ? PER YOUR REQUEST
? RETURN WITH MORE DETAILS ? FOR YOUR APPROVAL
? NOTE AND SEE ME ABOUT THIS El FoR YOUR INFORMATION
? PLEASE ANSWER ? FOR YOUR COMMENTS
? PREPARE REPLY FOR MY SIGNATURE ? SIGNATURE
? TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION ? INVESTIGATE AND REPORT
COMMENTS:

MAR d U
wEn:Flr;?.,.,,
WATER U;;?.? 1994
y d?STAZEo
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT, JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS R. SAMUEL. HUNT I I I
GoVI'RNOR F.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201 SE:CRIIARY
March 28, 1994
MEMORANDUM TO: Mr. Eric Galamb
DEM - DEHNR, 6th Floor
FROM: Wayne Fedora
Planning and Environmental Branch
SUBJECT: Scoping Minutes for Widening SR 1426 (Bolling Road/Fifth
Street) from SR 1400 (West Tenth Street) NC 48 (Roanoke
Avenue) in Roanoke Rapids, Federal Aid No. STP-1426(1),
State Project No. 8.2300601, T.I.P. No. U-1007
The Planning and Environmental Branch held a scoping meeting on 16 March
1994 to initiate the subject project.
The following is a list of those who attended:
David Cox NCWRC
Brian Williford Hydraulics
Steve Burris Geotechnical
M. M. Countie Geotechnical
Robin Stancil DCR-SHPO
Eric Galamb DEM
Ray Moore Structure Design
Leroy Smith Roadway Design
Dean Sarvis Roadway Design
Jimmy Norris Roadway Design
Tom Tarleton Location and Surveys
Danny Rogers Program Development
Tom Kunstling Traffic Control
Al Grandy Signal and Geometrics
Jack Matthews Photogrammetry
Charles Archer City of Roanoke Rapids
Don Sellers Right of Way
Wayne Fedora Planning and Environmental
Lubin Prevatt Planning and Environmental
John Williams Planning and Environmental
The participants discussed alternates for widening Bolling Road and
concurred that one alternate is feasible. This alternate is to widen Bolling
Road to three lanes with curb and gutter from SR 1400 (West Tenth Street) to
NC 48 (Roanoke Avenue). The proposed typical section is 12.0 meters (40
feet) wide from face to face of curbs.
a
March 28, 1994
Page 2
The current T.I.P. limits for the project extend from West Tenth Street
to Rapids Street. Mr. Fedora will consult with the Program Development
Branch to extend the eastern limit approximately 1.2 kilometers (0.74 miles)
to Roanoke Avenue. Planning will proceed for the entire length from West
Tenth Street to Roanoke Avenue. If extending from Rapids Street to Roanoke
Avenue is not approved, the planning document will be adjusted to end the
analysis at Rapids Street.
The Roadway Design Unit will prepare a cost estimate for the chosen
alternate.
In terms of historic architectural resources, the eastern section of the
project (near Jackson Street and Roanoke Avenue) is adjacent to an historic
district and several individual historic properties. NCDOT architectural
historians will need to consult the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)
survey records for these properties. The SHPO does not recommend any
archaeological survey for the project.
Mr. Galamb indicated that the project is located within a water supply
critical area. He also indicated an intermittent stream near Oakwood Avenue
flows to the water supply intake. He will comment later on another
intermittent stream near Monroe Street. Mr. Galamb does not recommend curb
and gutter. DEM may deny a permit if NCDOT proposes curb and gutter.
However, he indicated he would consider a hazardous spill detention basin, or
measures within the gutter to shut off spills. Mr. Fedora will consult with
Mr. Galamb, Mr. Archer, Mr. Smith, and Mr. Williford on the location and
application of these measures. Mr. Galamb also requested consideration of a
mass transit option.
Mr. Cox stated NCWRC has no specific concerns for this project. He
recommends using Best Management Practices in the intermittent streams.
Mr. Burris and Mr. Countie indicated there is an Underground Storage
Tank (UST) near the existing road near Monroe Street. Another UST is located
near Miles Street. The Bibb Company, located at Jackson Street, also has
USTs. There have been no reported groundwater incidents.
Mr. Fedora will consult with Mr. Archer about provision of sidewalks
along the project within the city limits of Roanoke Rapids.
Right of way acquisition is scheduled for 15 March 1996, and letting is
scheduled for 20 January 1998.
WF/plr
Attachments

r

PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
DATE 02/15/94
REVISION DATE 03/22/94
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT STAGE
PROGRAMMING
PLANNING X
DESIGN
TIP # U-1007
STATE PROJECT 8.2300601
F. A. PROJECT STP-1426(1)
DIVISION FOUR
COUNTY HALIFAX
MUNICIPALITY ROANOKE RAPIDS
ROUTE SR 1426 (BOLLING ROAD)
FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION COLLECTOR
LENGTH 3.9 km (2.4 MI)
QUAD SHEET ROANOKE RAPIDS
PURPOSE OF PROJECT: TO IMPROVE TRAFFIC OPERATIONS. AND
SAFETY ALONG SR 1426 (BOLLING ROAD)
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT (INCLUDING SPECIFIC LIMITS) AND MAJOR
ELEMENTS OF WORK: THE PROJECT EXTENDS ALONG SR 1426
(BOLLING ROAD) FROM SR 1400 (WEST TENTH STREET) TO ROANOKE
AVENUE (3.9 KM). SR 1426 WILL BE WIDENED TO A THREE-LANE
CURB AND GUTTER SECTION. THIS WILL PROVIDE HIGHER TRAFFIC
CAPACITY, MORE EFFECTIVE CONTROL OF DRIVEWAY ENTRANCES, AND
IMPROVE THE APPEARANCE OF THE AREA.
TYPE OF ENVIRONMETAL DOCUMENT TO BE PREPARED: EA/FONSI
ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY SCHEDULE: EA JAN 94 - MAR 95
FONSI MAY 95 - SEP 95
WILL THERE BE SPECIAL FUNDING PARTICIPATION BY MUNICIPALITY,
DEVELOPERS, OR OTHERS? YES NO X
IF YES, BY WHOM AND AMOUNT:
$ OR ro
HOW AND WHEN WILL THIS BE PAID?
Page 1
I
PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
TYPE OF ACCESS CONTROL: FULL PARTIAL NONE X
NUMBER OF INTERCHANGES GRADE SEPARARTIONS
STREAM CROSSINGS 2
TYPICAL SECTION: EXISTING TWO LANES WITH SHOULDER AND DITCH
PROPOSED THREE LANE CURB AND GUTTER
TRAFFIC (ADT): NEAR BOLLING ROAD AND WEST TENTH STREET:
CURRENT (1994) 3200 DESIGN YEAR (2018) 5200
TTST 3 % DUALS 2 %
NEAR FIFTH STREET AND ROANOKE AVENUE:
CURRENT (1991) 8200 DESIGN YEAR (2018) 12400
TTST 3 % DUALS 2 %
DESIGN STANDARDS APPLICABLE: AASHTO X 3R
DESIGN SPEED: 65-80 KM/H (40-50 MPH)
CURRENT COST ESTIMATE:
CONSTRUCTION COST (INCLUDING ENGINEERING
AND CONTINGENCIES)... $ 2,766,000
RIGHT OF WAY (INCLUDING RELOCATION,
UTILITIES, AND ACQUISITION).. $ 2,475,000
FORCE ACCOUNT ITEMS ......................... $ ,
PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING ..................... $ ,
TOTAL PLANNING COST ESTIMATE......... $ 5,241,000
TIP COST ESTIMATE:
CONSTRUCTION ................................ $ 2,700,000
RIGHT OF WAY ................................ $ 2,475,000
PRIOR YEARS ................................. $ ,200,000
TOTAL ....................................... $ 5,375,000
Page 2
PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
LIST ANY SPECIAL FEATURES, SUCH AS RAILROAD INVOLVEMENT.
WHICH COULD AFFECT COST, SCHEDULE, OR PROJECT:
ITEMS REQUIRED (X) COMMENTS COST
ESTIMATED COSTS OF IMPROVEMENTS:
X PAVEMENT
X SURFACE .................................. $ 777,000
BASE ..................................... $ ,
MILLING & RECYCLING ...................... $ ,
TURNOUTS ................................. $ ,
SHOULDERS
PAVED .................................... $ ,
EARTHEN .................................. $ ,
X EARTHWORK ................................... $ 320,000
SUBSURFACE ITEMS ............................ $ ,
X SUBGRADE AND STABILIZATION .................. $ 153,650
X DRAINAGE (LIST ANY SPECIAL ITEMS)............ $ 255,000
SUB-DRAINAGE ................................ $ ,
STRUCTURES:
BRIDGE REHABILITATION .................... $ ,
NEW BRIDGE ............................... $
WIDEN BRIDGE ............................. $ ,
REMOVE BRIDGE ............................ $ ,
NEW CULVERT .............................. $ ,
CULVERT EXTENSION ........................ $ ,
RETAINING WALLS .......................... $ ,
NOISE WALLS .............................. $ ,
OTHER MISC. STRUCTURES ................... $ ,
X CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER .750 mm.(26)........ $ 126,000
CONCRETE SIDEWALK ........................... $ ,
GUARDRAIL ................................... $ ,
FENCING:
W.W . .................................... $ ,
C.L . .................................... $ ,
X EROSION CONTROL ............................. $ 36,000
LANDSCAPING ................................. $ ,
LIGHTING .................................... $
X TRAFFIC CONTROL ............................. $ 51,000
SIGNING:
NEW ..................................... $
UPGRADING ............................... $ ,
X TRAFFIC SIGNALS:
NEW ..................................... $ ,
X REVISED ................................. $ 80,000
X RR SIGNALS:
X NEW ..................................... $ 120,000
REVISED ................................. $ ,
WITH OR WITHOUT ARMS .................... $
Page 3

PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
IF 3R:
DRAINAGE SAFETY ENHANCEMENT .............. $ ,
ROADSIDE SAFETY ENHANCEMENT .............. $ ,
REALIGNMENT FOR SAFETY UPGRADE........... $ ,
X PAVEMENT MARKINGS:
PAINT .................................... $ ,
X THERMOPLASTIC.. . .................. $ 30,600
RAISED PAVEMENT MARKERS .................. $ ,
DELINEATORS ................................. $ ,
X OTHER (CLEARING, GRUBBING, MISC. & MOB.)..... $ 466,750
CONTRACT COST (SUBTOTAL): $ 2,416,000
---------------------------------------------------
ENGINEERING AND CONTINGENCIES ................... $ 350,000
PE COSTS ........................................ $ ,
FORCE ACCOUNT ................................... $ ,
SUBTOTAL: $ 2,766,000
--------------------------------------------------
RIGHT OF WAY:
WILL CONTAIN WITHIN EXISTING R/W? YES NO X
EXISTING WIDTH
NEW R/W NEEDED ESTIMATED COST $ ,
EASEMENTS: Type Width
ESTIMATED COST $ ,
Utilities ................................... $ ,
RIGHT OF WAY SUBTOTAL: $ 2,475,000
--------------------------------------------------
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST: $ 5,241,000
PREPARED BY: RICHARD WAYNE FEDORA DATE: 3/21/94
Page 4

PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
COMMENTS SUBMITTED BY THE FOLLOWING:
INIT DATE INIT DATE
HIGHWAY DESIGN BOARD OF TRANS MEMB
ROADWAY HLS 3/16/94 MGR PROGRAM & POLICY
STRUCTURE RM 3/16/94 CHIEF ENGINEER - OPER
GEOTECHNICAL MMC 3/16/94 SECONDARY ROADS OFF.
HYDRAULICS BW 3/16/94 CONSTRUCTION BRANCH
DESIGN DEP. ADMINISTRATOR -
SERVICES PRECONSTRUCTION
LOCATION & ROADSIDE
SURVEYS TET 3/15/94 ENVIRONMENTAL
PHOTOGRAMMETRY JM 3/16/94 MAINTENANCE BRANCH
RIGHT OF WAY DS 3/16/94 BRIDGE MAINTENANCE
R/W UTILITIES STATEWIDE PLANNING WS 3/14/94
DEM EG 3/16/94 DIVISION ENGINEER
FHWA GP 3/16/94 BICYCLE COORDINATOR CBY 3/15/94
COUNTY MANAGER PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT DR 3/16/94
DEPARTMENT OF PROJECT
CULT. RES. RS 3/16/94 MANAGEMENT
PRELIMINARY TRAFFIC
EST. ENG. ALG 1/31/94 ENGINEERING GCF 3/11/94
PLANNING &
ENVIRONMENTAL LVP 3/16/94 CITY/MUNICIPAL,ITY CA 311.6194
OTHERS
(SCOPING SHEET FOR LOCAL OFFICIALS WILL BE SENT TO THE
DIVISION ENGINEER FOR HANDLING.)
COMMENTS OR REMARKS:
*IF YOU DO NOT AGREE WITH THE PROPOSED PROJECT OR SCOPING,
NOTE YOUR PROPOSED REVISIONS BELOW, AND INITIAL AND DATE
AFTER COMMENTS.
Page 5
r-??J? i r
f ,
«' O `
in
Q

TIP7 --c

01
r p 10 / ?? ; 1 ;
? ? \ it rG- ' • '
426 yCP?i
-ter \ ?. •? ? ?
1 l
<•=? \ PLANNING LIMITS
}
R ?..
ell
?J 14 ?v
/?u? ? ,1N • ? • ?--J?l I 1
38
1?WC II ? o
M G ? ,-...,/ •. H _ ? ?"' p 111

:r
li?r i ? .
Is ? y
1
I O _ !mil ?
1
Add
1111 y
Il...r

AM
f1m
= ,
„r
y IIR
fS Y ur IJK
.?
S ° C ?rw111 an
?.I
S I .4
1.r
11d
7 y
Y !J?

\BV
J ?n >r
a

ror. 1 J,ft,

• 1y .

OMT?MAO
KW- IA7._
a i!1
^I
to
Lp1
I
UA (f
way1M
Q I.
J/ G LLL y .ti 11!!
an 140
wk0m
lor.IA4r
Alr..• . h' ` LY ? ? ?? y ` O 1.1 01
1 ? Nlr?rr/r Ltt
.n r Ltt Lil ?, f 1Yl y1i LQ ~ ?l Lb JUL
Irb ;?o ?! s w JZw JW !•IL ?' r
? r
Illl +
Li! >t? ?i 1? ?? vLL i
Hf L1Q LLL v ?•' _ ? ? JAIL
y 7 lift
4 -'? y ? ? J? ? ?? e Y r
?? v inln ~ iw
r > Ift ® a?
Ift
t
s LK
lr'il? ? CAl?reyl >? 1 ? r4..r,? as
.S, lint ?. '' c'a+e.+ • 'i, .
yon IwrAX
!!Qt 1 L11 y Lv PW.253 p L>r
?..,v Y yu ?' ? c
.? c
lilt a
,r y ? Lit ! ? M
t Dw6y%o Lu to
'
N k. Li! b M YI
Lb d ?,
? v y1! ? ? y U`.
IA ?, 1
4
? 'r lilt !
l r JlP1, :? h ??
11}1
61"w4n,,
? Lg
M
J?
wl M.1. ?
a
lie
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
ROANOKE RAPIDS
SR 1428 (BOLUNG ROAD)
FROM SR 1400 TO NC 48
T. I. P. U -1007
0 kilometers 3 FIG. 1A

r
iia

RAPIQ4 XE?
L1L ??.
Are ft ,
.? „ ..PLANNING LIMITS i

HALIFAX COUNTY
I
1W ?? t1
Y
y
1211
?IU ROSEMAfY
IUMNC
POP. 1.828
,.r
SQY
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
ROANOKE RAPIDS
SR 1426 (BOLUNG ROAD)
FROM SR 1400 TO NC 48
T.1. P. U -1007
0 kilometers 1.24 FIG. 1 B
I f
mow..
f :
Litfl.3
3
Mrler
?r Mln ?
r ?. $rod
2 NafN
S
alirla H
Ri 4
?? BMwiw

P-3
AFL I
?uf `? RAPIDS
PW. 14,702
PLANNING LIMITS
" ,m
Enfield I ' r
5
mad No*
ll
-?tl?iddM f r _1
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

TRANSMITTAL SLIP DATE
SIZI 94
TO: REP. NO. OR ROOM, rf
f 1
L7 ?C Gala b ,
?J?m - X c?11?.i
FROM: REF. NO. OR ROOM, ¦LDG.
A.? arn??An ??? , P 'P--e
ACTION
? NOTE AND FILE ? PER OUR CONVERSATION
? NOTE AND RETURN TO ME ? PER YOUR REQUEST
? RETURN WITH MORE DETAILS ? FOR YOUR APPROVAL
? NOTE AND SEE ME ABOUT THIS ? FOR YOUR INFORMATION
? PLEASE ANSWER ? FOR YOUR COMMENTS
? F ARE REPLY FOR MY SIGNATURE ? SIGNATURE
TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION ? INVESTIGATE AND REPORT
COMMENTS:

4
EWATWERUALITY ' I
ON

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT, JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS R. SAMUEL HUNT II I
GOVERNOR RO. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201 SECRETARY
April 29, 1994
MEMORANDUM TO: Mr. Eric Galamb
DEM - DEHNR, 6th Floor
FROM: H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
SUBJECT: Roanoke Rapids, SR 1426 (Bolling Road/Fifth Street) from
SR 1400 to NC 48, Halifax County, Federal Aid Project No.
STP-1426(1), State Project No. 8.2300601, TIP No. U-1007
The Planning and Environmental Branch of the Division of Highways has
begun studying the proposed improvements to SR 1426 (Bolling Road/Fifth
Street). The project is included in the 1994-2000 North Carolina Trans-
portation Improvement Program and is scheduled for right of way in fiscal
year 1996 and construction in fiscal year 1998.
The project will widen SR 1426 (Bolling Road/Fifth Street) from two
lanes to three lanes with curb and gutter from SR 1400 (West Tenth Street) to
NC 48 (Roanoke Avenue) in Roanoke Rapids.
We would appreciate any information you might have that would be helpful
in evaluating potential environmental impacts of the project. If applicable,
please identify any permits or approvals which may be required by your
agency. Your comments will be used in the preparation of a federally funded
Environmental Assessment. This document will be prepared in accordance with
the National Environmental Policy Act. It is desirable that your agency
respond by June 20, 1994 so that your comments can be used in the preparation
of this document.
If you have any questions concerning the project, please contact Wayne
Fedora, Project Planning Engineer, of this Branch at [phone].
HFV/plr
Attachment
i??
HALIFAX COUNTY
3

k
/ Ache 18 1 Halifax
e
dot Mln
7
/I• ve,w Bnnkleyvdle I 9
1 Heathsw Ile L,
301 2 S
5
"°'I"'°r H A' L I F
Ringwood 6 t
4 S Sp
r ,"? w I Enfield to
r ?Glenvlew -
'Qnea
1
X - :
n4 Hdl ?'°?n,.4?
258
5
Scotland Neck
Le
6
I75 Pa mvra
I 1124 r 1 /
1 11 I J
171
ills aw ov
I 1322 ° J? i`.•n'::. f....
II
1340
1 '7
1371 O4 17A ]
///l Ts
and
All, oft am 00
9l? o I?ev Ap 'I.]a I 112
141z ROANOKE RAPIDS
o° .10 uo '2 143? POP. 14,702
M1 I o o f 9a? 1439 wli.
I I In .II '
IS]] IA19 ,I
I??o o .1v 0 J /
1.7 IAAI
149A 16
1471 II uil ?r
ROSEMARY 4e
(UNINC.1
943 POP. 1,828 r: I?s31_se. PLANNING LIMITS
1420 i uo 182
Ap' Y` u g
IF97 .07 .0 125
> ag
i
y A 0 01.22
0?q1 ry9?4t IA? si •$
0' u"
1470 14,9 4§_4
o ,1 Jess 141411
n 1 lA2A
g A11
sax o, PAP
AAe_ .18 58 .19 NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
.14 .n TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
OS FAP
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
? r,s»
BRANCH
ROANOKE RAPIDS
SR 1426 (BOLLING ROAD)
FROM SR 1400 TO NC 48
T. I. P. U - 1007
0 kilometers 1.24 FIG. 1 B