20011595 Ver 1_Complete File_20011031 (2)

An Historic Architectural Resources Survey Report
Phase I (Reconnaissance)
Elizabeth City Thoroughfare Plan
Pasquotank County
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Report Prepared by Scott Owen
February 1996
1?
Princi " al Investigator
North Carolina Department of Transportation
/, /III
(Date)
Project Description
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes the following
improvements in Elizabeth City:
Main Street Connector (TIP No. U-3420) in two parts: first, on new location west from
the proposed Elizabeth Street Extension at or near existing US 17 Bypass (Hughes
Boulevard) to existing Main Street Extended near Jessup Street, approximately 0.42-0.75
mile; second, on new location west from SR 1333 (Main Street Extended) to the proposed
US 17 Bypass (TIP No. R-2515A), approximately 1.96 miles; both parts of new location
construction total approximately 2.71 miles. NCDOT plans a two- or three-lane section
with 100 feet of right of way within a 500-foot corridor. The Main Street Connector is
shown on the following maps as Imp. A, Red 3, and Blue 3.
Walker Avenue Extension on new location east from Walker Avenue to Tatem Street,
approximately 0.06 mile. NCDOT plans to continue the existing two-lane section for the
Walker Avenue Extension. Walker Avenue Extension is shown on the attached maps as
Imp. B.
Selby Road Extension in two parts: first, on new location east from SR 1145 (Oak Stump
Road) at Trinkaloe Road to existing Selby Road; second, continuing on new location east
from existing Selby Road at Body Road to Peartree Road at Perkins Lane; both parts of
new location construction total approximately 1.76 miles. NCDOT plans to build a two-
lane section, with 100 feet of right of way, in order to match Selby Road's existing cross
section. The Selby Road Extension will be located within a 500-foot corridor. It is shown
on the attached maps as Imp. C.
Creek Road Extension in two parts: first, on new location south from US 17-NC 158
(North Road Street) to existing Creek Road near Pot of Gold Trail, approximately 1.5
miles; second, continuing on new location from existing Creek Road at SR 1333 (Main
Street Extended) to the proposed Halstead Boulevard Connector (TIP No. U-3449),
approximately 0.8-0.87 mile; both parts of new location construction total approximately
2.37 miles. NCDOT plans a two- or three-lane section with 100 feet of right of way within
a 500-foot corridor. Creek Road Extension is shown on the attached maps as Red 1, Blue
la, Blue Ib, Blue 2a, and Blue 2b.
Elizabeth Street Extension on new location north from present US 17 Bypass (Hughes
Boulevard) at existing Elizabeth Street to US 17-UNC 158 (North Road Street) ,
approximately 2 miles. NCDOT plans a two- or three-lane section with 100 feet of right of
way within a 500-foot corridor. Elizabeth Street Extension is shown on the attached maps
as Red 2a, Red 2b, Red 2c, Red 2d, and Red 2e.
Halstead Boulevard Connector (TIP No. U-3449) on new and existing location west
from present Halstead Boulevard near the proposed Creek Road Extension to the proposed
US 17 Bypass (TIP No. R-2515A), approximately 3.25 miles. NCDOT plans a two- or
three-lane section with 100 feet of right of way within a 500-foot corridor. Halstead
Boulevard Connector is shown on the attached maps as Black 1, Black 2, and Black 3.
Water Street Widening south three blocks from Elizabeth Street to Fearing Street.
NCDOT plans to widen Water Street from 42 feet (measuring between curb faces) to 48
feet within existing right of way.
US 17 Bypass (Hughes Boulevard) Widening north from Church Street to Nobbs Creek,
approximately 1.8 miles. NCDOT plans to widen US 17 Bypass (Hughes Boulevard) from
four lanes to five lanes within existing right of way.
The study areas for these thoroughfares include all properties within and adjoining the
corridors of future alignments, as well as all properties adjoining any existing roads that
might be included or affected by the thoroughfares. These areas are outlined on the
attached maps (Figures 1-5).
Purpose of Survey and Report
This survey was conducted and report prepared in order to identify historic architectural
resources located within the study areas as part of the environmental studies conducted by
NCDOT and documented by the "1996 Elizabeth City Thoroughfare Plan." This report is
prepared as a technical addendum to the "1996 Elizabeth City Thoroughfare Plan" and as
part of the documentation of compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) and the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended. This report is on
file at NCDOT and is available for review by the general public. Section 106 of the
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, 16 U.S.C. Section 470f, requires
Federal agencies to take into account the effect of their undertakings on properties included
in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places and to afford the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation a reasonable opportunity to comment on such
undertakings.
Methodology
This survey was conducted and report compiled by NCDOT in accordance with the
provisions of FHWA Technical Advisory T 6640.8A (Guidance for Preparing and
Processing Environmental and Section 4(f) Documents); the Secretary of the Interior's
Standards and Guidelines for Archaeological and Historic Preservation (48 FR 44716); 36
CFR Part 800; 36 CFR Part 60; and Phase I (Reconnaissance) Survey Procedures for
Historic Architectural Resources by NCDOT dated June 15, 1994. This survey report
meets the guidelines of NCDOT and the National Park Service.
NCDOT conducted a Phase I (Reconnaissance) survey with the following goals: 1) to
determine the study areas of the above thoroughfares, defined as the geographic area or
areas within which a thoroughfare may cause changes in the character or use of historic
properties, if any such properties exist; 2) to identify all properties within the study areas
that are listed on the National Register of Historic Places and the North Carolina State
Study List; 3) to identify all properties within the study areas that appear to be definitely
eligible for the National Register; and 4) to identify all properties within the study areas
that appear to be probably eligible for the National Register.
The survey methodology consisted of a field survey and historical background research of
the study areas. The field survey was conducted by car and on foot on January 17-18,
1996, and covered 100% of the study areas. All National Register and Study List
properties identified within the study areas, as well as all properties within the study areas
that appeared to be probably and definitely eligible for the National Register, were
photographed and keyed to a U.S.G.S. quadrangle map and an aerial overview map.
The background research of the historical and architectural development of the study areas
was aided by a previous architectural survey of the county. Thomas R. Butchko conducted
an architectural survey of Elizabeth City and Pasquotank County between 1984 and 1986,
and published the results in 1989 under the title On the Shores of the Pasquotank: The
Architectural Heritage of Elizabeth City and Pasquotank County, North Carolina.
Pasquotank County survey maps and files in the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)
in Raleigh were also searched for any National Register or Study List properties that might
be located in the study areas.
Summary Results of Findings
Five properties were identified in this survey. Two National Register properties were
identified: Property #1 is located in the study area for the US 17 Bypass (Hughes
Boulevard) Widening, and Property #3 lies within the study area for the Water Street
Widening. This survey also identified two Study List properties (#'s 4-5), both of which
are located in the study area for the Selby Road Extension. Property #4 appears to be
definitely eligible for the National Register, and Property #5 appears to be probably
eligible. The last property identified in this survey (#2) also appears to be probably
eligible for the National Register, and is located in the study area for the Main Street
Connector. Photographs of these five properties are included at the end of this report.
Properties Listed on the National Register
1. Norfolk Southern Passenger Station (NR)
3. Elizabeth City Historic District (NR)
Properties Listed on the Study List
4. William Thurston Jackson Farm (SL)
5. Eugene S. Scott House (SL)
Properties That Appear Definitely Eligible for the National Register
4. William Thurston Jackson Farm (SL)
Properties That Appear Probably Eligible for the National Register
2. Seth David Jennings Farm
5. Eugene S. Scott House (SL)
Conclusions
A Phase II (Intensive) Survey should be undertaken to complete the identification process
for those thoroughfares which will become TIP projects within the next five years.

r}
{. #?u9r', .t??? o
t

? `C lj
P f 1 ? ? `

MUM"
'y* lrr [

? rv 11? .H ??- / ?{
4 - J 3L` .(i y i

A'.
t I
Jlk
k` , i- ?,. i"-* ?P ? ? 5' ? J ? i l'•'? 1, ; rpA. >•Rr.r.4...? t ^ N ? ? ?• ?.., t
VT P F? C # } '
.r*• M ' S
a t? U , < tiler +?1 .? rc .. •yM F,kM?i. .
6 1 ?``s i?(? '? ? ; ^i •l S• ?yr? (?,I•t?r ?" ?, ? 1?' ? %?`?'!?'? aT ? rt'R r?
/ ? R ? ,,?,' •rrf-\y"
s4? • A
T???: x ?? t yy
'f V.
., y 3N11 N?rLb1r'? +.,? ,., ?o???; y ?'. ? ?? ?•w?'?' Yi???: ? 't ?,. ' ? p?r,r,
,a
i"I r._ .,.,. ,_; .- ??A.L I?A f+4,''?1 ?i I}1 `f' toy ;'.f°I ?'.a ?Y:, •, ,fit. ?1 ..
't > , `'r ? i" 'Yr !? N ..k+'?',j4•A :???'?' ,§ ? ? ?/4* +f''?? r ? ?'v°?R
r' ,!r.10 c X ' _ -,?, ,?.. ." J r .,.i • ..Ilg,l' • t „f. 41,ii
• 4
YT
' •?!Rnrt - ..'. f rt + '.' .r•';!t't •;
? ' I 3" . J • i :;? _ * el • ? «' + =t> ., f. / i/??"ir? . w 4. 4r.' ? ' ?1iN
rr ? ? ,? ?n ?' ,?- s. 1` ?i t:.?"s?'?''"1, ? ?`:,'M4 q, °51;.'"° ! ?.,< a ? d P. f'?:
p?. y, ?? ,P7 r'1 r :?S ??,t,A?• tit '. f ?? ;.* ? ^?lfr? !"? .?,?,\; rr ?7 I , {s? I?,,,?9h>??''?M1
11?? d I' 'Fi g'Is. ?p ` 'I,d lu
rt 1A+;",• l .'",?. S i ?. "14f
'? t fit Cf Il:j?i4 , p ? i, ?•:??r,; t ?.: `f ???• ?1A+, ,W` j i ?t k''lfi?.<<?.?,,?))c1?+gM?',?'A ?? ;; Gi??
?' ?? v? ? ?fk ?' I ? K ? ?,i) ???r t r ?y?? ??? ' !'.A ? ?;«,?'
a? '.FQffe,
A yy
? fM ` -N ;:i ,y; _,, t ;', ?1'+jl+ < ,SI +`y.;; n4?'?., y f ?•?4•"? 'MIN?4Y'"':a3
I>K.1 , ,r`1. i2F , y,
q 5^?lesyt l ?' 4 ?' k t.bt, ., - ? f , ? S' '4; Fr
A 9
j rk,tt h1l _,a. '.;> f? < C 71, I f ]
IF*
I, r. Y Ty r'<%! '? •I. {[ h t ? `? `^ ? I ?• ? p ? ''? Ifs
tot,
4jr
4.. e 4 v 1 6 t` r 'r'r"'!???i+RLLS ?.'?? ,?rk?t ? t i
,
y w
l •-' 1 ''"- ., a 'f; +f ??ty,? ?;
f ?lh+ .. ? 7 ^• . ? ?,F? ` Y .:. ? . .'.l A. ' ? t1• Yf, ' M'? 4r '.(w ?T•
•'i ., •p s? / a? I ry , : 1 Tq; `a 'tb} `',*yt , :
r }
?J r`? Yrya ??'rStM ?.?
7 "'S' Is a r?? ri I ? min > ? ' F Arc'I
Ic
??+'r d ?ry k' P f s? ,r
?? ? ,? s?i'?'• °u. ?A` ?1 r W'???" I it ! ?,
v ? r ? f ?, ' ' k r tf; , ? r ,f,1? u: p y yn:f
OR .1
h,r?,f `t: PYR,` . MyS'?P ?y°,,1• ,tom, ,, rq. .r ' 3-: ??- ' yap, 5 : ?I?1?1? I C Y;•q?„j,,?"?T,?! ? rte. f ? t' --,? ?`yt •'4 ? '?? (F? G ? ' ai ?P?G'? :?
13 r?
41
-. ?3- . - ...-•-•R r i?'+k?`!•4. y4 ? ' •.`f??.. ,, ;.:_ '' P' P f rA'?i?;,?t?? ?fS ' •.i
+.. IX!'` ?,± '+"! ?> ? t * ??? f _ r??+r x `? x1111 ?do,
Ifl? YR 4 of ar. Y. ?1rF G `'.4
4, , y &? yc4
. ii' f f 4 Rol ? I -•It?t{?l ?'? ?? ? 4t A AY ?
1.1; ? .d ??n:?. .v. _ L +,• r??,a ' w ?1'M.,s v h _??! t ;??,>, a?' a ,. yi?a .f-•' M R ?' 'w?? ?? I?_-:. ?.
`r^twaf•' «;,. - J« 3j4 ??tAn r?•]y+ -?,3r w. ? h .r f+'1.4.? •, t+ t t a. ? i Tt I ,• trM
t...1
/ q ; " "fir _ ski A'r° r?r I ??y„1
,t, 4 'ta''1% G7" , •A'.:?dl C ' `[ `?'I?y9f?'?,Y. at
EMr' A4 •
? • f ?.? ;'M'Y -t,A t „? f? 1 k_ _ q/++ T f Fr "`Y
v d? P. a? A,i. rr ?t
M' I y aY SM?
A?. T i 4I•' l i?
„j
t` 4? 1
?i
''?i? ;:! ` ??' ' ? • ? ? ruck [ I ^.. `"", .. '? ? ??r1^,?' ' ? y ?. Nr;? 4ti?L
PIII 'af i. ?(((F` , I ? rlrr f y... ''f•? 1
Y.?.'. s?j''# a ?.`? . ?` ?.Ji?? <F?+b... E,? ?,*? ? i '?., w,,? ?`t? x rrr ? ;.'?'?, 4s?`'I
414
'9`.;` rl _ ??' _ 5 ? . i • - ? ?° ? I - f n.M- ?y ? y ;? 1 1??,??3y'??y f .'. ,,y
A8 r: ?"N .2 "S+ • x. `:, n/ I V t. `.dz'. i?'? as

v1 <? ?
Y
". 4
7, fllF4K--w
r`
Y7". 1
?i
Y.'
i
lu \
? X11 v ? v ?? / ,/ ?O
a
WIC"ILL It..
I
i
d ? ` ( ? w ter /''Y
CAMMM OIL
BROOUJDoe Woo
rl!
a a 1,11,
\
t a ,? L I I I ?. ,
P• ? ¦ u •o „poa• , Nfl ? ,` M ,
d d d b 8r oN ? _ - ` fe;?
na d I i
fum"Oov SPY. is
'A t$ b
- _. -? W
°w
I w ? ?
' ? ? • ? M N ?,N' '? - ? C
'!t Ifgldf Y
w J+ ! 9 E.
to D?? ?? / ?I L
d d -1 •\ ?
ItD. cc
ree AND
uuuute 1 I ?q• • V L ?p y
4:? pwN o
nnmou a°. I ? ? ?? U u
K '? L
r N Ion
J? Y ,A Q H a ?
1 ? dp w ? .
tk ¢ ,a
ea o. ,..
o'n•d a i
W
I m ?-
r- Q 0
rr
? I
O I
O 1 _
d I/'
-- o
c4
a
i r v

_ ter'
•t? 1-
4. William Thurston Jackson Farm (SL) -- Housc: Vicw from NE.

I
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., G ove mor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
October 16, 1996
Mr. Blake Norwood
NC DOT - Statewide Planning
P. O. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611 - 5201
?EHNR
Subject: Consensus Letter for the Elizabeth City Thoroughfare Plan
Pasquotank County
Dear Mr. Norwood:
The Division of Water Quality (DWQ) has reviewed the Consensus Charter for the
Elizabeth City Thoroughfare Plan. An on-site meeting occurred on February 6, 1996 and a
follow-up coordination meeting on February 13, 1996. The DWQ supports a method that
addresses environmental concerns early in the planning process. DWQ believes that
improvements A, B, C, blue lb, blue 2a should have minimal impact to wetlands and water
quality. However, DWQ remains concerned about the black 2 revised and blue 3 revised
corridors.
The black 2 revised corridor (Tip No U-3449) crosses Knobb Creek and its
wetlands on new location. This wetland is a semi-permanently flooded, high quality
cypress-gum swamp that is providing significant functions. These functions include
pollutant removal, water storage, bank stabilization, aquatic, and wildlife habitat.
DWQ could concur with this corridor if wetland and water avoidance/minimization
efforts were employed such as complete bridging of the wetlands, not placing bridge bents
in the body of water and designing the bridge such that no weep holes drain directly into
water. Should curb and gutter be constructed, the stormwater energy will need to be
dissipated before it enters the wetland. Measures such as energy dissipators at the wetland
end of curb and gutter would be appropriate. Otherwise the stormwater will cut channels
through the wetland and the water quality functions of the wetland will not be completely
utilized. Storrnwater treatment may be necessary.
The blue 3 revised corridor also impacts the same wetland complex of Knobbs
Creek as does the black 2 revised corridor. These wetlands are performing the same
functions as previously described.
DWQ could concur with this new crossing corridor if the existing filled crossing is
removed and restored. The crossing will need to be bridged due to the high quality nature
of the wetlands and especially the anadromous fish spawning uses of this wetland. The
other issues (bents, weep holes, curb and gutters) described above also apply to this
crossing.
Environmental Sciences Branch • 4401 Reedy Creek Road Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Telephone [phone] FAX # [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 501/6 recycled/10% post consumer paper
If field work reveals additional information, DWQ reserves the right to recommend
that other corridors/alternatives be evaluated. Our endorsement of these corridors is based
on the best available information without extensive field work.
Should you have any questions, please contact Eric Galamb at 733-1786.
Sincerely,
L74>
Jo n R. Dorney
Environmental Supe isor
JRD/EG/gh
norwood. ltr
cc: David Foster
Mike Bell, Washington COE
Kay Batey, FHWA
David Cox, WRC
John Hefner, USFWS
Consensus Charter
Elizabeth City Thoroughfare Plan
The North Carolina Department of Transportation has worked with the regulatory and resource agencies to
develop a methodology to address environmental concerns during the thoroughfare planning process.
This methodology is being referred to as a "phased environmental study". It's goal is to, where possible,
identify environmentally preferred corridors to be shown on thoroughfare plans.
As these transportation solutions are funded, detailed environmental studies will be conducted on the
preferred corridor for each project. Should the detailed studies reveal new information, unanticipated
impacts, or should law/rule changes require it, alternate corridors will be re-examined.
The undersigned agencies have worked together on the Elizabeth City Thoroughfare Plan to identify a
number of environmentally preferred corridors for future transportation solutions. For consistency, these
environmentally preferred corridors have been labeled:
- Improvement "A" MP# U-3420)
- Improvement "B" (Walker Ave. Ext.)
- Improvement "C" revised (Selby Rd. Ext.)
- Black "2" revised MP# U-3449)
- Blue "lb" (Creek Rd. Ext.)
- Blue "2a" (Creek Rd. Ext.)
- Blue "3" revised (Elizabeth St. Ext.)
While we have worked to achieve consensus on these environmentally preferred corridors, this consensus
is subject to the attached comments by several agencies. The agencies which attached comments and/or
conditions are marked with an asterisk (*).
The Town of Elizabeth City shall, to the extent possible, protect the preferred corridors so that
development does not foreclose the viability of the preferred corridors.
John orney Frank McBride
NC Div. of Environmen Management*, DEHNR NC Wildlife Resources Commiss'on*
Mike Smith
US Army Corps of Engineers*
Kay Batey a
Ftderal Highway Administration
,DEHNR
Katherine Doak
US Fish & Wildlife Service*
David Brook
NC D ent of Otural Re rces
ara Winslo
NC Division of Marine Fisheries*, DEHNR
Phil ' cK el
ivis' ?/ arks' D
'IT Rick Gardner
Mayor, Elizabeth City
Marion R. Poole
Statewide Planning Branch, NCDOT
FROM MC DOT PROGRAM DE!) RP 919 733 3555 09.30.1996 10!32
Consensus Charwr
Elizabeth City Thoroughfare Plan
The North Carolina Department of Transportation has worked with the regulatory and resource agencies to
develop a methodology to address environmental concerns during the thoroughfare planning process.
This methodology is being referred to as a "phased environmental study". Its goal is to, where possible,
identify environmentally preferred corridors to be shown on thoroughfare plans.
As these transportation solutions are funded, detailed environmental studies will be conducted on the
preferred corridor for each project. Should the detailed studies reveal new information, unanticipated
impacts, or should law/rule changes require it, alternate corridors will be re-examined,
The undersigned agencies have worked together on the Elizabeth City Thomilo f re Plan to identify a
number of environmentally preferred comdors for futw-e transpor?ta got n solutions. For consisbnoy, these
environmentally preferred corridors have been labalad;
- Improvement "A" QIP# U-3420)
Improvement "B" (Walker Ave. Ext.)
- Improvement "C" revised (Seib ltd. Ext.)
- Black "2" revised (TIP# U-3449
- Blue "lb" (Creek Rd, Ext.)
Blue "2a" (Creek Rd, Ext.)
- Blue "3" revised (Elizabeth St, Ext.)
While we have worked to achieve consensus on these environmentally preferred corridors, this consensus
is subject to the attached comments by several agencies. The agencies which attached comments and/or
conditions are marked with an asterisk (*).
The Town of Elizabeth City shall, to the extent possible, protect the preferred corridors so that
development does not foreclose the viability of the preferred corridors.
John Dorne
NC Div. of Environmental Management, I)EHNR
Mike Smith -"'
US Army Corps of Engineers*
Kay l3atcy
F deral Highway Administrotion
u+M??
Doug,"
NC 17iv of--,Wal Nbnagement*, DEHNR
National.
Statewide Planning Branch, NCDOT
Frank Mc ride
NC Wildlife Resourves Comilais r
l
I n .11- _ , I. _ Katherine Doak
US Fish & Wildlife Service*
David roe
NC Domment of CWwral Re"re S
NC Division of Marine Fisheries, pEHNR
rmi mcKneliy C/ V
NC Division of Parks & Rec.*, DE14NR
H. Rick Gardner
Mayor, Elizabeth City
P. 2
***END***
FROM NC DOT PROGRRM DEU BR 919 733 3585 08.30.1996 10:32
North Carolina
Department of Transportation
FAX COVER SHEET
Date; '71/. ,/q(, ....,

Please deliver to.
Name; e ig (C X15
Department:
This fax is being sent by.,
Name; VAnq AR o q- I T ...
Phone Number. 7*?3 ~ ZON
Number of pages (including cover sheet); .:.
if you do not receive all p4es clarly,
call back as soon as possible.
Notes:
P. 1
I H1' 5LIZA9*55 TO C!T`( GITY COVQr-(L Appe0$56C>
?,pr.,sc i..? vs e HAj2" er p IN ITS LAST W°I-K S-S IaN .)
IT WAS F6>T2wA1-?-D5V-> Tb FOLJ- C00tjC.IL- W'Tip
7-vkgr. -? ?.? PAT iaN THAT TO M^YcA?., `' 16NJ ('
Nip 'ul.?. Gr?vNcr t? W IL-L- M rt 14+9 M IZ>P L?E a'p ZMT>pr.
Atv.D AFTgv, W E? 6 a T Tji N IA YoR-'s S idN TruJ 4 1 V AN
our fax nunow is (818) T$3-9428.
NCWRC,HCP,FRLLS LAKE
TEL:[phone] Jul 08'96 12:50 Ne.001 P.02
® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Cony-nission KE
512 N. Salisbury Street., Raleigh, North Carolina 27604,1188, 919-733.3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Van Argabright
Statewide Plaroung Branch, NCDOT
FROM: Franklin T. McBride, Manager avNA--
-- ?Kt
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: May 21, 1996
SUBJECT: Comments on the alternatives included in the Elizabeth City Thoroughfare
Plan
This memorandum restates our position on the alternatives for the improvements
included in the Elizabeth City Thoroughfare Plan. We attended the coordination meeting
held on February 13, 1996.
Our position is as follows:
1. We concur with Improvement A.
2. We concur with Improvement B.
3. We concur with Improvement C.
4. We concur with Black 2 revised, provided that the high quality swamp at the
eastern project terminus is bridged and the existing fill causeway is
removed and restored. If these measures arc not feasible, we will ask that
other alternatives be evaluated.
5, We concur with improvement Blue lb.
6. We concur with improvement Blue 2a.
7. We concur with improvement Blue 3 revised, provided that the high quality
swamp along Knobbs Creek is bridged and the existing causeway is
removed and restored. If these measures are not feasible, we will ask that
other altcmatives be evaluated.
j NCWRC,HCP,FALLS LAKE TEL:[phone] Jul 08'96 12:50 No.001 P.03
Memo 2 May 21, 1996
Our endurscmcnt of theso alternatives is based on the information provided to us
by NCDOT during the phased Environmental study. Our position may change if new
information reveals less environmentally damaging alternatives, if endangered or
threatened species may be adversely affected, or if laws or regulations change.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide input in the early planning stages for
this thoroughfare plan. If we can further assist your office, please contact David Cox,
Highway Project Coordinator, at [phone].
FROM WASHINGTON 08.30.1996 10i07 P.02

August 22, 1996
Regulatory Branch
SUBJECT! Action ID 19961460
Mr. David B. Foster
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Highway Environmental Evaluation
Archdale Building, Room 1419-A
Post Office sox 276$7
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Dear Mr. Foster:
Ploase reference your recent regueet fo
with the North Carolina Department cif T.ransp
of preferred corridors for the Elizabeth Cit
in Pasquotank County, North Carolina.
It is highly likely that the Corps of r,
asked to issue a Clean Water Act permit for
the projects described in the Phase I Enviro
Elizabeth City 'thoroughfare Plan. Our permi
that we make a complete, thorough, and unbia
factors associated with a proposed project w
waters of the United States. A major compon
the consideration of reasonable and practica
required by both the National Environmental
Clean Water Act 404 (b)(1) guidelines (33 U.
40 CFR SecLiorl Part. 230). The Clean Water A
individual permit decieionn be made "after n
for public. hear_ingn" (33 U.S.C. Section 1344
requirements, we believe it is inappropriate
District to make any binding commitment conc
of a single preferred alternative prior to g
permit process required by our regulations,
325.
The District can, however, review, commi
recommendations in the planning review of al'
with reference to potential DQparLinent of th
concerns. As a result of our continued coon
to support the final choice of preferred ror
in the consensus charter, subject to the cony
from the State and Federal commenting agenci,
a letter concurring
tation's selection
Thoroughfare Plan,
gincexs will be
ork connected with
mental Review of the
program requires
ed review of all
thin jurisdictional
nt of that review is
le alternatives,
olicy Act, and the
.C.Section 1344(b);
t requires that
tice and opportunity
a))_ Based on these
for the Wilmington
rning the selection
ing through the
ound at 33 CFP Part
nt, and make
ernative corridors
Army permi L
ination, we continue
idorA as reflected
itions and comments
S.
?A a SUTF
N e onno
?4x qw.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS GARLAND B. GARRETT JR.
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201. RALEIGH. N.C. 27611-5201 SECRETARY
June 28, 1996
MEMORANDUM TO: Michael F. Bell
U.S. Army Corp of Engineers
David Cox
Wildlife Resource Commission
Katherine Doak
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Eric Galamb
Division of Environmental Management
Doug Huggett
Division of Coastal Management
Michael D. Smith
U.S. Army Corp of Engineers
FROM: R. Van Argabright %W7
Statewide Planning Branch - NCDOT
RECEIVED
JUL 0 3 1996
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
SUBJECT: Phase I Environmental Review of Elizabeth
City Thoroughfare Plan
In January 1996, you received a packet of information from me
that included tables summarizing the predicted impacts of roadway
improvement alternatives being considered for inclusion in the
Elizabeth City Thoroughfare Plan. This package of information was
used to determine preferred improvement alternatives.
There have been several minor changes to the tables. The
tables will be included in the Thoroughfare Plan Report with the
changes noted. However, I felt it was appropriate to give you a
copy of the changes and a chance to comment before I publish the
report. The tables have been changed to denote the latest
information. I have marked the previous values in red. I have
also included a copy of the figures that depict the
environmentally preferred improvements. These are figures that
will be included in the Thoroughfare Plan Report and have been
N%'*
updated to include the latest information.
If you have any questions or concerns, please call me at
[phone].
cc: Kay Batey
David Foster
+ TABLE C-3
IMPACT SUMMARY FOR IMPROVEMENT C
Note: Values in this table are based on estimated impacts for
a 100 ft. R/W within the corridor.
Category ?_ _JI!
Length on new location (mi) 1.76
Length on new location (km) 2.83
Number of Intersections w/ exist. roads 0
Estimated Relocations:
Residential 1
Business 0
Farms (acres) 18
Wetlands (acres) 1
Source NWI
Protected/Critical Watershed (acres) 0
High Quality Water Zones (acres) 0
Nurseries/Spawning Areas 0
Hydrologic Crossings:
Normal 2
Trout 0
100 yr. Floodplain (acres) 0
Critical Habitats 0
Special Natural Areas 0
Natural Heritage Occurrences 0
Historic Sites (N.R. & Candidate) 1(*)
Historic District (N.R. & Candidate) 0
Archaeological Sites 0
Archaeological Area 0
Cultural Resources:
Schools 0
Parks 0
Churches 0
Cemeteries 0
Community Facilities 0
Subdivision 0
Proposed Developments 0
Superfund Sites 0
Landfills 0
Groundwater Incidents 0
NPDES Dischargers 0
Non-discharge Systems 0
WA-3 'Du
* - Value changed from January 1996 package submitted to Environmental
Resource Agencies because new information was discovered.
C-9
4
TABLE C-4
IMPACT SUMMARY FOR IMPROVEMENT BLACK
Notes:
1) Values in this table are based on estimated impacts for a 100 ft.
R/W within the corridor.
2) Black 3 is shown proceeding down an existing road, however, only
impacts from the new alignment portion are included in this table.
Category Black 1 Black 2 Black 3
Length on new location (mi) 3.16 3.30 2.55
Length on new location (km) 5.09 5.32 4.10
Length on existing R/W (mi) 0.86
Length on existing R/W (km) 1.39
Number of Intersections w/ exist. roads 3 2 1
Estimated Relocations:
Residential 9 2 3
Business 1 2 1
Farms (acres) 29 33 26
Wetlands (acres) 2 1 1
Source NWI NWI NWI
Protected/Critical Watershed (acres) 0 0 0
High Quality Water Zones (acres) 0 0 0
Nurseries/Spawning Areas 0 0 0
Hydrologic Crossings:
Normal 3 3 3
Trout 0 0 0
100 yr. Floodplain (acres) 2 2 3(*5)
Critical Habitats 0 0 0
Special Natural Areas 0 0 0
Natural Heritage Occurrences 0 0 0
Historic Sites (N.R. & Candidate) 0 0 0

Historic District (N.R. & Candidate)
0
I i
0
0

Archaeological Sites I
0
0
0
Archaeological Area 0 0 0
- NAS " 2.3"
C-12

TABLE C-4 (CONTINUED)
IMPACT SUMMARY FOR IMPROVEMENT BLACK (CONTINUED)

Category
III Black 1 Black 2 Black 3
Cultural Resources:
Schools 0 0 0
Parks 0 1(*2) 1(*2)
Churches 0 0 0
Cemeteries 0 0 0
Community Facilities 1(*1) 1(*1) 0
Subdivision 1 0 0
Proposed Developments 0(*3) 0(*3) 0
Superfund Sites 0 0 0
Landfills 0 0 0
Groundwater Incidents 0 0 0
NPDES Dischargers 0 0 1(*4)
Non-discharge Systems
J

0

0

0
*1 - The community facility is the Jaycee's Fairgrounds, which is owned
by the Elizabeth City Jaycee's.
*2 - There is a registered plat stating that the park is on a parcel
"reserved for highway."
*3 - The Elizabeth City Planning Department has knowledge of a property
owner who is working on plans for a development. However, the plans have
not been submitted to the city. For this reason, the development was not
counted.
*4 - Groundwater Remediation Site - Gasoline
*5 - Value changed from January 1996 package submitted to Environmental
Resource Agencies because new information was discovered.
C-13

TABLE C-5
IMPACT SUMMARY FOR IMPROVEMENT BLUE
Notes:
1) Values in this table are based on estimated impacts for a 100 ft.
R/W within the corridor.
2) Blue 2a and Blue 2b are shown proceeding down an existing road,
however, only impacts from the new alignment portion are included
in this table.

Category Blue 1a Blue lb Blue 2a Blue 2b Blue 3
Length on new location (mi) 0.70 0.89 1.51 1.42 0.76
Length on new location (km) 1.13 1.43 2.44 2.29 1.22
Length on existing R/W (mi) 0 0 0.19 0.19 0
Length on existing R/W (km) 0 0 0.30 0.30 0
Number of Intersections w/ exist. roads 1 2 0 0 1
Estimated Relocations:
Residential 4 4(*1) 1 1 2
Business 0 0 0 5 0
Farms (acres) 6 8 13 11 3
Wetlands (acres) 4 2 4 6 4
Source NWI NWI NWI NWI NWI
Protected/Critical Watershed (acres) 0 0 0 0 0
High Quality Water Zones (acres) 0 0 0 0 0
Nurseries/Spawning Areas 0 0 0 0 1
Hydrologic Crossings: WAS
,6D.5" W
A.
gyp, 15
Normal 0 0 0 1 1
Trout 0 0 0 0 0
100 yr. Floodplain (acres) 2 2 4(*3) 4(*3) 7
Critical Habitats 0 0 0 0 0
Special Natural Areas 0 0 0 0 0
Natural Heritage Occurrences 0 0 0 0 0

Historic Sites (N.R. & Candidate) 0 0 0 0 1(*3)
Historic District (N.R. & Candidate) 0 0 0 0 0
Archaeological Sites 0 0 0 0 0
Archaeological Area

0
L-

0

0
I

0

0
WAS
„D„
C-16

TABLE C-5 (CONTINUED)
IMPACT SUMMARY FOR IMPROVEMENT BLUE (CONTINUED)
Category
1111 Blue la Blue lb Blue 2a Blue 2b Blue 3
Cultural Resources:
Schools 0 0 0 0 0
Parks 0 0 0 0 0
Churches 0 0 0 0 0
Cemeteries 1(*2) 1(*2) 0 0 0
Community Facilities 0 0 0 0 0
Subdivision 0 0 0 0 0
Proposed Developments 0 0 0 0 0
Superfund Sites 0 0 0 0 0
Landfills 0 0 0 0 0
Groundwater Incidents 0 0 0 0 0
NPDES Dischargers 0 0 0 0 0
Non-discharge Systems 0 0 0 0 0
*1 - At the intersection of Blue lb and Black 1, no relocations were included
since they will be included in the impacts of Black 1.
*2 - Westlawn Cemetery does fall in the 500 ft. corridor, however, there is
adequate flexibility in the area to avoid it.
*3 - Value changed from January 1996 package submitted to Environmental Resource
Agencies because new information was discovered.
C-17
TABLE C-6
IMPACT SUMMARY FOR IMPROVEMENT RED
Notes:
1) Values in this table are based on estimated impacts for a 100 ft. R/W within the
corridor.
2) Red 1, Red 2b, and Red 2c are shown proceeding down an existing road, however, only
impacts from the new alignment portion are included in this table.
Category Red 1 Red Red Red Red Red Red
2a 2b 2c 2d 2e 3
Length on new location (mi)
Length on new location (km)
Length on existing R/W (mi)
Length on existing R/W (km)
Number of Intersections w/ exist. roads 1
2
Estimated Relocations:
Residential
Business
Farms (acres)
Wetlands (acres)
Source
Protected/Critical Watershed (acres)
High Quality Water Zones (acres)
Nurseries/Spawning Areas
Hydrologic Crossings:
Normal
Trout
100 yr. Floodplain (acres)
Critical Habitats
Special Natural Areas
Natural Heritage Occurrences
Historic Sites (N.R. & Candidate)
Historic District (N.R. & Candidate)
Archaeological Sites
Archaeological Area
0.79 2.19 2.01 1.80 2.18 2.18 0.42
1.28 3.52 3.23 2.90 3.51 3.51 0.67
0.08 0 0.19 0.19 0 0 0
0.12 0 0.30 0.30 0 0 0
(*1) 1 4 3 1 1 0
(*2)
2 7 1 2 3 2 2
0 2 1 1 1 2 0
4 8 9 8 9 8 3
3 9 10 11 11 15 2
NWI NWI NWI NWI NWI NWI NWI
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 1 1 1 1 1
WAS r W2A5 v/A5 - -WAS - WAS -
„13.X I 14?-J.?i3.S . "13.x° "13.S
0 1 1 1 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
i
3 17 17 r-r 20 17 18 5
(*6) (*6) (*6) (*6) (*6)
0 0 0 0 0 0 I 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1(*6) 1(*6) 1(*6)I1(*6) 1(*6) 0
1WAS 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
-WAS WAs WAS WAS
.1 0 11 11 0" .10" Ioll it 0 if
C-21
• 4
TABLE C-6 (CONTINUED)
IMPACT SUMMARY FOR IMPROVEMENT RED (CONTINUED)
Category Red 1 Red
2a Red
2b Red
2c Red
2d Red
2e Red
3
Cultural Resources:
Schools 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Parks 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Churches 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Cemeteries 1(*3) 0 0 0 0 0 0
Community Facilities 0(*1),1(*4) 0 0 0 1(*5) 0 0

Subdivision
0
0 0
0
0 I
0
0
Proposed Developments 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Superfund Sites 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Landfills 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Groundwater Incidents 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
NPDES Dischargers 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Non-discharge Systems 0 0 0
1- 0 0 0 0
*1 - If Black 3 is selected
*2 - If Black 1 or Black 2 is selected
*3 - Westlawn Cemetery does fall in the 500 ft. corridor, however,
there is adequate flexibility in the area to avoid it.
*4 - If Black 1 or Black 2 is selected, the proposed improvement would
encroach on the Jaycee's Fairgrounds, which is owned by the
Elizabeth City Jaycee's.
*5 - Community facility is VFW
*6 - Value changed from January 1996 package submitted to Environmental
Resource Agencies because new information was discovered.
C-22
kI.
rmm

•
": ?
? A, ? v ,
\
*r ? 1 Y
rp y . a '
K "T.?? '
? L
ty 1?
.? n,, ?.

H
rl
O

H ) r 3 to
r-i +-
44 O 4-)
O C) ^
N
(Tj o o
oo cn N
W
U o m a) H >1

•C O) H O
4-J CY)
II
H
U ?I 0
p - 1 O
d
2 N ( M
N ri 0
N I
r >1 H H ?4 14 a) ?4

0 i Caro
5 a
S4 O r I Ctl H O ?4
04 U
U U r--I 04 O 44

Q 4-) 4-4 0 C)
tti 1~ O? 0
41 a) LO
:1 ? ? (d 4a
Oa)0 b 4-4
O
rl a
U) 0' ro

co
9 -1a?
a
? (1)
4j
w
Q
••w b
v
i

O H M 0 H N M

z a
--
. -777

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TkA NSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS GARLAND B. GARRETT 1R.
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 2$201. RALEIGI 1, N.C. 27611-$201 SECRETARY
January 26, 1996
MEMORANDUM: Michael F. Bell
U.S. Army Corp of Engineers
David Cox
Wildlife Resource Commission
Katherine Doak
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
V Eric Galamb
Division of Environmental Management
Doug Huggett
Division of Coastal Management
Ron Sechler
National Marine Fisheries v 'pF?
Fyn '?% c'1Michael D. Smith
?'qy J'O G
U.S. Army Corp of Engineersy I
Sarah Winslow 9<s?F
Division of Marine Fisheries,
FROM: R. Van Argabright
Statewide Planning Branch - NCDOT
SUBJECT: Phase I Environmental Review of Elizabeth
City Thoroughfare Plan
The purpose of this memo is to remind you of the upcoming
field visit to Elizabeth City on February 6, 1996 at 10:00 a.m.
We will meet at the Hardees located on U.S. 17 near the split of
U.S. 17 Bypass and U.S. 17 Business. In addition, there will be a
coordination meeting on February 13, 1996 at 10:00 a.m. in the
Statewide Planning Conference Room.
cc: Kay Batey
David Foster
Randy Turner
9
. ?
IMPROVEMENT A
IMPROVEMENT 8
EXTENSION QX EXISTING MAIN ,U EXT. PROPOSED
U.S. 11 BYPASS
PURPOSE OF THE IMPROVEMENT
The purpose of the improvement is to provide efficient
access between the Central Business District (CBD) of
Elizabeth City and the Proposed U.S. 17 Bypass planned for
the west side of Elizabeth City.
NEED FOR THE IMPROVEMENT
Motorist who are traveling thru Elizabeth City generate
a substantial amount of revenue for businesses located in
Elizabeth City. When the proposed U.S. 17 Bypass is opened,
some of this traffic will be diverted away from the city and
therefore, efficient access from the bypass to the CBD is
essential to ensure the financial prosperity of merchants in
Elizabeth City.
IMPROVEMENT OPTIONS
Improvement A
Improvement A shown in Figure 1b begins near existing
Shillington Road and proceeds southwest, terminating at the
proposed U.S. 17 Bypass.
IMPACTS OF THE IMPROVEMENT
The environmental and social impacts that the proposed
improvement would have are tabulated in Table A. The
majority of the data was collected using the ARCVIEW software
package maintained by NCDOT. The data found in NCDOT's
ARCVIEW software package was obtained from the Center for
Geographic Information and Analysis (CGIA). The remainder of
the data was obtained using aerial photography and cursory
field work.
r
TABLE A
IMPACT SUMMARY FOR IMPROVEMENT A
Note: Values in this table are based on estimated impacts for
a 100 ft. R/W within the corridor.
Category A
Length on new location (mi) 1.96
Length on new location (km) 3.15
Number of Intersections w/ exist. roads 0
Estimated Relocations:
Residential 1
Business 0
Farms (acres) 22.4
Wetlands (acres) 0
Source NWI
Protected/Critical Watershed (acres) 0
High Quality Water Zones (acres) 0
Nurseries/Spawning Areas 0
Hydrologic Crossings:
Normal 1
Trout 0
100 yr. Floodplain (acres) 0
Critical Habitats 0
Special Natural Areas 0
Natural Heritage Occurrences 0
Historic Sites (N.R. & Candidate) 0
Historic District (N.R. & Candidate) 0
Archaeological Sites 0
Archaeological Area 0
Cultural Resources:
Schools 0
Parks 0
Churches 0
Cemeteries 0
Community Facilities 0
Subdivision 0
Proposed Developments 0
Superfund Sites 0
Landfills 0
Groundwater Incidents 0
NPDES Dischargers 0
Non-discharge Systems 0
f--, v '
v?o? .

IMPROVEMENT B
IMPROVEMENT $
EXTENSION Q& EXISTING WALKE $ AVENUE IQ ROANOKE AVENUE
PURPOSE OF THE IMPROVEMENT
The purpose of the improvement is to provide a more
direct connection between existing Walker Avenue and Roanoke
Avenue.
NEED FOR THE IMPROVEMENT
Motorist who are traveling down Walker Avenue and want
to access Roanoke Avenue presently must take a right on
Brooks Avenue followed by a left onto Roanoke Avenue. With
this improvement, the right turn onto Brooks Avenue would be
eliminated.
IMPROVEMENT OPTIONS
Improvement B
Improvement B shown in Figure la begins at the existing
intersection of Walker Avenue and Brooks Avenue and proceeds
almost due east terminating at the existing intersection of
Roanoke Avenue and Tatem Street.
IMPACTS OF THE IMPROVEMENT
The environmental and social impacts that the proposed
improvement would have are tabulated in Table B. The
majority of the data was collected using the ARCVIEW software
package maintained by NCDOT. The data found in NCDOT's
ARCVIEW software package was obtained from the Center for
Geographic Information and Analysis (CGIA). The remainder of
the data was obtained using aerial photography and cursory
field work.
TABLE B
IMPACT SUMMARY FOR IMPROVEMENT B
Note: Values in this table are based on estimated impacts for
a 100 ft. R/W within the corridor.
Category B
Length on new location (mi) 0.06
Length on new location (km) 0.09
Number of Intersections w/ exist. roads 0
Estimated Relocations:
Residential 2
Business 0
Farms (acres) 0
Wetlands (acres) 0
Source NWI
Protected/Critical Watershed (acres) 0
High Quality Water Zones (acres) 0
Nurseries/Spawning Areas 0
Hydrologic Crossings:
Normal 0
Trout 0
100 yr. Floodplain (acres) 0
Critical Habitats 0
Special Natural Areas 0
Natural Heritage Occurrences 0
Historic Sites (N.R. & Candidate) 0
Historic District (N.R. & Candidate) 0
Archaeological Sites 0
Archaeological Area 0
Cultural Resources:
Schools 0
Parks 0
Churches 0
Cemeteries 0
Community Facilities 0
Subdivision 0
Proposed Developments 0
Superfund Sites 0
Landfills 0
Groundwater Incidents 0
NPDES Dischargers 0
Non-discharge Systems 0
?/??1 LA ?C
. ACU
IMPROVEMENT C
IMPROVEMENT Q
EXTENSION OE TRINKALOE ROAD OVER ?Q SEL$Y ROAD M2
EXTENSION QZ BZJM ROAD, OVEB ?Q PERKINS LMM
PURPOSE FOR THE IMPROVEMENT
The purpose of the improvement is to provide a more
direct and efficient east-west route from U.S. 17 on the west
side of Elizabeth City to N.C. 34 on the east side of
Elizabeth City.
NEED FOR THE IMPROVEMENT
Northeastern High School is located on and accessed from
Oak Stump Road. There are many times of the day that Oak
Stump Road becomes heavily congested due the school traffic.
If this route were built, many of the vehicles that presently
travel north up Oak Stump Road and then proceed east on
Halstead Blvd would instead choose the new route, thereby
eliminating some of the congestion. In addition, the
intersection of Oak Stump Road, U.S. 17 Bus., U.S. 17, and
Hughes Blvd. is a complex intersection and the addition of
this route would alleviate some of the vehicles that utilize
this intersection, thereby making the intersection less
congested and safer.
IMPROVEMENT OPTIONS
Improvement C
Improvement C is shown in Figure 2. The first segment
of the proposed route begins at the existing intersection of
Oak Stump Road and Trinkaloe Road and proceeds southeast over
to existing Selby Road. The second segment of the proposed
route begins at the existing intersection of Body Road and
Selby Road and proceeds southeast over to existing Perkins
Lane.
IMPACTS OF THE IMPROVEMENT
The environmental and social impacts that the proposed
improvement would have are tabulated in Table C. The
majority of the data was collected using the ARCVIEW software
package maintained by NCDOT. The data found in NCDOT's
ARCVIEW software package was obtained from the Center for
Geographic Information and Analysis (CGIA). The remainder of
the data was obtained using aerial photography and cursory
field work.
TABLE C
IMPACT SUMMARY FOR IMPROVEMENT C
Note: Values in this table are based on estimated impacts for
a 100 ft. R/W within the corridor.
Category C
Length on new location (mi) 76
Length on new location (km) 83
F
Number of Intersections w/ exist. roads 0
Estimated Relocations:
Residential 1
Business 0
Farms (acres) 17.5
Wetlands (acres) 1.1
Source NWI
Protected/Critical Watershed (acres) 0
High Quality Water Zones (acres) 0
Nurseries/Spawning Areas 0
Hydrologic Crossings:
Normal 2
Trout 0
100 yr. Floodplain (acres) 0
Critical Habitats 0
Special Natural Areas 0
Natural Heritage Occurrences 0
Historic Sites (N.R. & Candidate) 0
Historic District (N.R. & Candidate) 0
Archaeological Sites 0
Archaeological Area 0
Cultural Resources:
Schools 0
Parks 0
Churches 0
Cemeteries 0
Community Facilities 0
Subdivision 0
Proposed Developments 0
Superfund Sites 0
Landfills 0
Groundwater Incidents 0
NPDES Dischargers 0
Non-discharge Systems 0
kjfo
, ?+ T
IMPROVEMENT BLACK
IMPROVEMENTS BLAC$ ,? DIAC$ 2..,_BLAC K a
EXTENSION Qj H&LSXZjU BLVD F HUGHES BLVD . ;
PROPOSED U.S. 11 BYPASS
PURPOSE OF THE IMPROVEMENTS
The purpose of the improvements is to provide efficient
access between the Central Business District (CBD) of
Elizabeth City and the Proposed U.S. 17 Bypass planned for
the west side of Elizabeth City.
NEED FOR THE IMPROVEMENTS
Motorists who are traveling thru Elizabeth City generate
a substantial amount of revenue for businesses located in
Elizabeth City. When the proposed U.S. 17 Bypass is opened,
some of this traffic will be diverted away from the city and
therefore, efficient access from the bypass to the CBD is
essential to ensure the financial well-being of merchants in
Elizabeth City.
IMPROVEMENT OPTIONS
Improvement Black 1
Improvement Black 1 shown in Figures 1a and lb begins at
the existing intersection of Hughes Blvd. and Halstead Blvd.
and proceeds northwest thru the Oxford Heights Subdivision.
The road then turns almost due west, proceeding thru the
Jaycee's Fairgrounds, and terminates at the Proposed U.S. 17
Bypass.
Improvement Black 2
Improvement Black 2 shown in Figures 1a and 1b begins at
the existing intersection of Hughes Blvd. and Halstead Blvd.
and proceeds almost due north, skirts the Oxford Heights
Subdivision, the turns almost due west. The road then
proceeds thru the northern edge of the Jaycee's Fairgrounds
and terminates at the Proposed U.S. 17 Bypass.
Improvement Black 3
Improvement Black 3 shown in Figures 1a and 1b begins at
the existing intersection of Hughes Blvd. and Halstead Blvd.
and proceeds almost due north, skirting the Oxford Heights
Subdivision, then turns down existing Church St. Extension.
The improvement then proceeds almost due west and terminates
at the Proposed U.S. 17 Bypass.
IMPACTS OF THE IMPROVEMENTS
The environmental and social impacts that the proposed
improvement would have are tabulated in Table Black. The
majority of the data was collected using the ARCVIEW software
package maintained by NCDOT. The data found in NCDOT's
ARCVIEW software package was obtained from the Center for
Geographic Information and Analysis (CGIA). The remainder of
the data was obtained using aerial photography and cursory
field work.
TABLE BLACK
IMPACT SUMMARY FOR IMPROVEMENT BLACK
Notes:
1) values in this table are based on estimated impacts for a 100 ft.
R/W within the corridor.
2) Black 3 is shown proceeding down an existing road, however, only
impacts from the new alignment portion are included in this table.
Category Black 1 Black 2 Black 3
Length on new location (mi) 3.16 3.30 2.55
Length on new location (km) 5.09 5.32 4.10
Length on existing R/W (mi) 0.86
Length on existing R/W (km) 1.39
Number of Intersections w/ exist. roads 3 2 1
Estimated Relocations:
Residential 9 2 3
Business 1 2 1
Farms (acres) 29.0 32.5 25.6
Wetlands (acres) 1.6 1.3 1.3
Source NWI NWI NWI
Protected/Critical Watershed (acres) 0 0 0
High Quality Water Zones (acres) 0 0 0
Nurseries/Spawning Areas 0 0 0
Hydrologic Crossings:
Normal 3 3 3
Trout 0 0 0
100 yr. Floodplain (acres) 2.0 1.8 2.3
Critical Habitats 0 0 0
Special Natural Areas 0 0 0
Natural Heritage Occurrences 0 0 0
Historic Sites (N.R. & Candidate) 0 0 0
Historic District (N.R. & Candidate) 0 0 0
Archaeological Sites 0 0 0
Archaeological Area 0 0 0
TABLE BLACK (CONTINUED)
IMPACT SUMMARY FOR IMPROVEMENT BLACK (CONTINUED)
Category Black 1 Black 2 Black 3
Cultural Resources:
Schools 0 0 0
Parks 0 1(*2) 1(*2)
Churches 0 0 0
Cemeteries 0 0 0
Community Facilities 1(*1) 1(*l) 0
Subdivision 1 0 0
Proposed Developments 0(*3) 0(*3) 0
Superfund Sites 0 0 0
Landfills 0 0 0
Groundwater Incidents 0 0 0
NPDES Dischargers 0 0 1(*4)
Non-discharge Systems 0 0 0
*1 - The community facility is the Jaycee's Fairgrounds, which is owned
by the Elizabeth City Jaycee's.
*2 - There is a registered plat stating that the park is on a parcel
"reserved for highway."
*3 - The Elizabeth City Planning Department has knowledge of a property
owner who is working on plans for a development. However, the plans have
not been submitted to the city. In fact, the land must be rezoned in order
for the development to be built. For this reason, the development was not
counted.
*4 - Groundwater Remediation Site - Gasoline
IMPROVEMENT RED
IMPROVEMENT EM I,_ EM 2?&, EM 2J2., I= 2c, RED d. RED 2e. D 3
ME EXTENSION QJ EXISTING CRKU ED, B-Q= = = PROPOSED
HALSTEAAD BLVD . CONNECTOR (IMPROVEMENT BL&Qg I., BLAC 2s OR BLACK
EXTENSION QK EXISTING FLI7.ABE= U-` " EXISTING U.S. _
?j]Z = EXTENSION QE EXISTING MAIN ZT, EXTENSION = =L
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT RM 2? RFC 2h? RED 2c, D d, RED e.
PURPOSE OF THE IMPROVEMENT
The purpose of the improvement is to relieve traffic
congestion on U.S. 17 from Halstead Blvd. to Culpepper Ln.
NEED FOR THE IMPROVEMENT
The segment of U.S. 17 from Halstead Blvd. to Culpepper Ln.
is congested in 1995. In addition, if the only projects
constructed between now and 2020 are the funded projects in the
1996 T.I.P., then conditions are projected to worsen
significantly by 2020. The following table documents the
volumes and capacities for 1995. In addition, the volumes and
capacity projections are tabulated for 2020 using the assumption
that the projects funded in the'1996 T.I.P. will be constructed.

Street Segment 1995
volume 1995
capacity 2020
volume 2020
capacity
Halstead Blvd to Church St 24000 26000 31000 26000
Church St to Main St 24000 20000 31000 20000
Main St to Elizabeth St 22000 20000 27000 20000
Elizabeth St to Road St 20000 20000 24000 20000
Road to North side of bridge 30000 20000 39000 20000
N side brg to Coll of Albem Ent 30000 26000 39000 26000
Coll of Albem Ent to Barney Ln 22100 20000 29000 26000
Barney Ln to Hastings Ln 22100 26000 29000 26000
Hastings Ln to Culpepper Ln 22100 20000 29000 26000
IMPROVEMENT OPTIONS
Improvements Considered But Not Pursued
In order to provide adequate capacity on U.S. 17 in the
year 2020 using widening alone, the road would have to be
widened to a six lane divided section. A cursory survey
revealed that to construct this improvement, approximately 30
residences and 30 businesses would be relocated. In
addition, many of the remaining businesses would have a
portion of their parking,removed and access would be
restricted to all business. For these reasons, this option
did not appear to be a viable option to pursue.
Improvement Red 1
Improvement Red 1 shown in Figure 1a begins at the
proposed Halstead Blvd. Connector (Improvement Black 1, Black
2, or Black 3), proceeds almost due north, then turns
northeast to avoid a heavily developed residential area, then
turns almost due north at the Westlawn Memorial Park,
terminating at Creek Rd.
Improvement Red 2a
Improvement Red 2a shown in Figure 1a begins near the
existing intersection of U.S. 17 and Elizabeth St. and
proceeds almost due north until it nears the Pine Lakes
Country Club Golf Course where it turns and proceeds almost
due east terminating at U.S. 17.
Improvement Red 2b
Improvement Red 2b shown in Figure 1a begins near the
existing intersection of U.S. 17 and Elizabeth St. and
proceeds almost due north until it nears the Pine Lakes
Country Club Golf Course where it turns and proceeds almost
due east following existing Hastings Ln. and terminating at
U.S. 17.
Improvement Red 2c
Improvement Red 2c shown in Figure la begins near the
existing intersection of U.S. 17 and Elizabeth St. and
proceeds almost due north, then turns northeast and follows
existing Barney Ln. terminating at U.S. 17.
Improvement Red 2d
Improvement Red 2d shown in Figure la begins near the
existing intersection of U.S. 17 and Elizabeth St. and
proceeds almost due north, then turns northeast and
terminates at existing U.S. 17.
Improvement Red 2e
Improvement Red 2e shown in Figure la begins near the
existing intersection of U.S. 17 and Elizabeth St. and
proceeds almost due north, then turns northeast to minimize
impacts to the Pine Lakes Country Club Golf Course, and
terminates at existing U.S. 17.
Improvement Red 3
Improvement Red 3 shown in Figure la begins at existing
Main Street Extension and proceeds almost due east
terminating at either proposed Red 2a, Red 2b, Red 2c, Red
2d, or Red 2e.
IMPACTS OF THE PROJECT
The environmental and social impacts that the proposed
project would have are tabulated in Table Red. The majority
of the data was collected using the ARCVIEW software package
maintained by NCDOT. The data found in NCDOT's ARCVIEW
software package was obtained from the Center for Geographic
Information and Analysis (CGIA). The remainder of the data
was obtained using aerial photography and cursory field work.
TABLE RED
IMPACT SUMMARY FOR IMPROVEMENT RED
Notes
1) Values in this table are based on estimated impacts for a 100 ft. R/W within the
corridor.
2) Red 1, Red 2b, and Red 2c are shown proceeding down an existing road, however, only
impacts from the new alignment portion are included in this table.
Category Red 1 Red 2a Red 2b Red 2c Red 2d Red 2e Red 3
Length on new location (mi) 0.79 2.19 2.01 1.80 2.18 2.18 0.42
Length on new location (km) 1.28 3.52 3.23 2.90 3.51 3.51 0.67
Length on existing R/W (mi) 0.08 0 0.19 0.19 0 0 0
Length on existing R/W (km) 0.12 0 0.30 0.30 0 0 0
Number of Intersections w/ exist. roads 1(*1),2(*2) 1 4 3 1 1 0
Estimated Relocations:
Residential 2 7 1 2 3 2 2
Business 0 2 1 1 1 2 0
Farms (acres) 4.4 7.9 8.7 8.0 9.4 7.8 2.5
Wetlands (acres) 3.0 9.4 10.1 10.5 10.6 14.7 1.8
Source NWI NWI NWI NWI NWI NWI NWI
Protected/Critical Watershed (acres) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
High Quality Water Zones (acres) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Nurseries/Spawning Areas 0 1 1 1 1 1 1
Hydrologic Crossings:
Normal 0 1 1 1 1 1 1
Trout 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
100 yr. Floodplain (acres) 3.4 13.8 13.8 13.8 13.8 13.8 5.1
Critical Habitats 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Special Natural Areas 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Natural Heritage Occurrences 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Historic Sites (N.R. & Candidate) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Historic District (N.R. & Candidate) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Archaeological Sites 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Archaeological Area 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TABLE RED (CONTINUED)
IMPACT SUMMARY FOR IMPROVEMENT RED (CONTINUED)
Category Red 1 Red 2a Red 2b Red 2c Red 2d Red 2e Red 3
Cultural Resources:
Schools 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Parks 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Churches 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Cemeteries 1(*3) 0 0 0 0 0 0
Community Facilities 0(*1),1(*4) 0 0 0 1(*5) 0 0
Subdivision 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Proposed Developments 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Superfund Sites 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Landfills 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Groundwater Incidents 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
NPDES Dischargers 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Non-discharge Systems 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
*1 - If Black 3 is selected
*2 - If Black 1 or Black 2 is selected
*3 - Westlawn Cemetery does fall in the 500 ft. corridor, however,
there is adequate flexibility in the area to avoid it.
*4 - If Black 1 or Black 2 is selected, the proposed improvement would
encroach on the Jaycee's Fairgrounds, which is owned by the
Elizabeth City Jaycee's.
*5 - Community facility is VFW

IMPROVEMENT BLUE
IMPROVEMENT BLU ls?? BLU 112. DLU 2,%-L. RIAM 2J2. FLU I
MM EXTENSION Q& EXISTING CREE RIL, SOUTH = = PROPOSED
HAT.STEAD BLVD. CONNECTOR (IMPROVEMENT BL&a 1, =g 2-, QR
BLACK 3), MJX EXTENSION QE EXISTING CREEK RD. NORTH TO
EXISTING U.S. }J-_ WM = EXTENSION QK EXISTING ELIZABETH BT-
= EXISTING MAIN ZT., EXTENSION
PURPOSE OF THE IMPROVEMENT
The purpose of the improvement is to relieve traffic
congestion on U.S. 17 from Halstead Blvd. to Culpepper Ln.
NEED FOR THE IMPROVEMENT
The segment of U.S. 17 from Halstead Blvd. to Culpepper
Ln. is congested in 1995. In addition, if the only projects
constructed between now and 2020 are the funded projects in
the 1996 T.I.P., then conditions are projected to worsen
significantly by 2020. The following table documents the
volumes and capacities for 1995. In addition, the volumes
and capacity projections are tabulated for 2020 using the
assumption that the projects funded in the 1996 T.I.P. will
be constructed.

Street Segment 1995
volume 1995
capacity 2020
volume 2020
capacity
Halstead Blvd to Church St 24000 26000 31000 26000
Church St to Main St 24000 20000 31000 20000
Main St to Elizabeth St 22000 20000 27000 20000
Elizabeth St to Road St 20000 20000 24000 20000
Road to North side of bridge 30000 20000 39000 20000
N side brg to Coll of Albem Ent 30000 26000 39000 26000
Coll of Albem Ent to Barney Ln 22100 20000 29000 26000
Barney Ln to Hastings Ln 22100 26000 29000 26000
Hastings Ln to Culpepper Ln 22100 20000 29000 26000
IMPROVEMENT OPTIONS
Improvements Considered But Not Pursued
In order to provide adequate capacity on U.S. 17 in the
year 2020 using widening alone, the road would have to be
widened to a six lane divided section. A cursory survey
revealed that to construct this improvement, approximately 30
residences and 30 businesses would be relocated. In
addition, many of the remaining businesses would have a
portion of their parking.removed and access would be
restricted to all business. For these reasons, this option
did not appear to be a viable option to pursue.
Improvement Blue la
Improvement Blue 1a shown in Figure la begins at the
intersection of existing Church St. Extension and the
proposed Halstead Blvd. Connector (Improvement Black 3) and
proceeds northwest, terminating at existing Creek Rd.
Improvement Blue lb
Improvement Blue 1b shown in Figure la begins at the
proposed Halstead Blvd. Connector (Black 1 or Black 2). The
road proceeds northeast crossing Church St. Extension, then
continues northwest terminating at Creek Rd.
Improvement Blue 2a
Improvement Blue 2a shown in Figure la begins near the
intersection of Creek Rd. and Pot of Gold Trail and proceeds
northeast and crosses Knobbs Creek using the existing roadway
as much as possible. The road then turns northwest and
terminates at U.S. 17.
Improvement Blue 2b
Improvement Blue 2b shown in Figure la begins near the
intersection of Creek Rd. and Pot of Gold Trail and proceeds
northeast and crosses Knobbs Creek using the existing roadway
as much as possible. The road then turns almost due north
and terminates at U.S. 17.
Improvement Blue 3
Improvement Blue 3 shown in Figure la begins near the
existing intersection of U.S. 17 and Elizabeth St. and
proceeds northwest between two businesses, then turns almost
due west and terminates at existing Main St. Extension.
IMPACTS OF THE PROJECT
The environmental and social impacts that the proposed
project would have are tabulated in Table Blue. The majority
of the data was collected using the ARCVIEW software package
maintained by NCDOT. The data found in NCDOT's ARCVIEW
software package was obtained from the Center for Geographic
Information and Analysis (CGIA). The remainder of the data
was obtained using aerial photography and cursory field work.
TABLE BLUE
IMPACT SUMMARY FOR IMPROVEMENT BLUE
Notes:
1) Values in this table are based on estimated impacts for a 100 ft.
R/W within the corridor. '
2) Blue 2a and Blue 2b are shown proceeding down an existing road,
however, only impacts from the new alignment portion are included
in this table.
Category Blue la Blue lb Blue 2a Blue 2b Blue 3
Length on new location (mi) 0.70 0.89 1.51 1.42 0.76
Length on new location (km) 1.13 1.43 2.44 2.29 1.22
Length on existing R/W (mi) 0 0 0.19 0.19 0
Length on existing R/W (km) 0 0 0.30 0.30 0
Number of Intersections w/ exist. roads 1 2 0 0 1
Estimated Relocations:
Residential 4 4(*l) 1 1 2
Business 0 0 0 5 0
Farms (acres) 5.7 7.5 13.3 11.0 3.0
Wetlands (acres) 3.9 2.1 3.7 6.2 3.6
Source NWI NWI NWI NWI NWI
Protected/Critical Watershed (acres) 0 0 0 0 0
High Quality Water Zones (acres) 0 0 0 0 0
Nurseries/Spawning Areas 0 0 0 0 1
Hydrologic Crossings:
Normal 0 0 0 1 1
Trout 0 0 0 0 0
100 yr. Floodplain (acres) 2.3 2.3 0.5 0.5 6.7
Critical Habitats 0 0 0 0 0
Special Natural Areas 0 0 0 0 0
Natural Heritage Occurrences 0 0 0 0 0
Historic Sites (N.R. & Candidate) 0 0 0 0 0
Historic District (N.R. & Candidate) 0 0 0 0 0
Archaeological Sites 0 0 0 0 0
Archaeological Area 0 0 0 0 0

TABLE BLUE (CONTINUED)
IMPACT SUMMARY FOR IMPROVEMENT BLUE (CONTINUED)
F Category Blue 1a Blue lb Blue 2a Blue 2b Blue 3
Cultural Resources:
Schools 0 0 0 0 0
Parks 0 0 0 0 0
Churches 0 0 0 0 0
Cemeteries 1(*2) 1(*2) 0 0 0
Community Facilities 0 0 0 0 0
Subdivision 0 0 0 0 0
Proposed Developments 0 0 0 0 0
Superfund Sites 0 0 0 0 0
Landfills 0 0 0 0 0
Groundwater Incidents 0 0 0 0 0
NPDES Dischargers 0 0 0 0 0
Non-discharge Systems 0 0 0 0 0
*1 - At the intersection of Blue lb and Black 1, no relocations were included
since they will be included in the impacts of Black 1.
*2 - Westlawn Cemetery does fall in the 500 ft. corridor, however, there is
adequate flexibility in the area to avoid it.
1 V? K ll
k?-f
Tz?
1
?) K I?oD GE5 NC w i 19 ?5
Ow v; OX 11/C r,?iPC Cg ?> 5"? - °j 8G
AFcAr5ra&}IY )V(Do i 47,D5
?? , ,?L u ! 1.., l I
tO) D, v d, H AvjT(-bokJ COMA Z6q-?;20/ (z az. c( 7
() 2a c(c/ Tv v- o -e k- ? ? C Oc)T , Ci ?y
AM
IMMPFPPP
C
( o -a-) V , 'U'Al
?-7?3-
J7
T)S--
OS 0 C4, j 0 fer( alLA?c
q,? / 7 /??
Please call Mr. J7o1-4QQVP'PRw taff at 7"4160"p",
or others have questions.
tgfneis.mem
cc: Jim Mulligan, Washington Regional Office
Roger Thorpe, Washington Regional Office
Deborah Sawyer, Washington Regional Office
Steve Benton, DCM
Charles Gardner
Tracey Davis, DLQ
William Westcott, WRC
Central Files
Trudy Wilder, CESAW-CC;-E
z/3/y?
a-,- 6 ?la"", ?7?S,

IMF . b4c l z ? .?,?? ?<??
7n?, aa,r< z ? 3
-WODa ? 6fa?k z
0
7 f64t/ -well ai Calv'e45 ?;#c<U/ 7/v
6ONUN4ti41\,Ct A5.
tile
? a wro? ?3k c?Q? - YN? ?
{?i?52nu tros? wL- .? c Af
3
/a?i VP ck
ox

l?r shy /kf 4 „Y r.?w U,?X< .?
do c.
wdq? 6? 5 Fem. ct? ? 4
- FtoV, de ?IdA46WJ
?f v4d

- V-?ooev B
-- /10 ll/ L.

v? ou,? L
r ?' C low©' -Po

w?
M a?
an ta.:7f ? WA A-e 3.

lvl??It
pv,
L

r-4?. ,,?Yf 6-7-e

edoei
2,6
3
100 CovAOml
CWT Je Cc-? ?? u? ?;u 71 cdzv?s d
117-e
71t

. STATE
S-mn OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TPANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS GARLAND B. GARREIT JR.
GOVERNOR 11.0. BOX 25201, RALFIGI I, N.C. 27011 5201 SECRIIIARY
January 11, 1996
MEMORANDUM TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Michael F. Bell
U.S. Army Corp of Engineers
David Cox
Wildlife Resource Commission
Katherine Doak
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Eric Galamb
Division of Environmental Management
Doug Huggett
Division of Coastal Management
Michael D. Smith
U.S. Army Corp of Engineers
R. Van Argabright f011A
Statewide Planning Branch - NCDOT
RFo,plV?o
F JIRANN ?ry? Tg.7 C 19y
So/? 6
Phase I Environmental Review of Elizabeth
City Thoroughfare Plan
Attached you will find the following documents for your
review and comment: a map denoting roadways that are projected to
be "over-capacity" in 2020 (assuming that all projects in the 1996
T.I.P. will be constructed), a map denoting the proposed widenings
and the general vicinity of proposed improvements on new location,
aerial photographs with the proposed improvements on new location
denoted, and a written summary of the proposed improvements on new
location.
The following is a guide that explains our proposed selection
process for the improvements:
1) We feel that the corridors denoted for Improvement A,
Improvement B, and Improvement C are the most
desirable corridors and therefore, no alternatives
NW
?r

are shown.
2) Black 1, Black 2, or Black 3 are denoted as three
alternatives for the Halstead Blvd. Connector. One
will be selected.
3) The next step will be to select the package of Red or
Blue. If the Blue package is selected, then we
automatically get Blue 3. If we have selected Black
3 then we get Blue 1a, but if we have selected Black
1 or Black 2, then we get Blue 1b. Finally, we must
select either Blue 2a or Blue 2b. If the Red package
is selected, then we automatically get Red 1 and Red
3. Then we must select one improvement, either Red
2a, Red 2b, Red 2c, Red 2d, or Red 2e.
If you have any questions or concerns, please call me at
[phone].
cc: Kay Batey
David Foster
Randy Turner
FEB 21 '% 09:16AM EHNR• PUBLIC AFFAIRS
MEMORANDUM
TO: xxxx
FROM: xxxxx
xxxx, 1996
sueje r: Would it be mare appropriate to call
than "concurrence" fetter???
P. 2/2
this "consensus" tier, rather
NCDOT has worked in conjunction with the regulatory and,esouice agencies to develop a
methodology for addreminu environmental concerns during the thoroughfare planning proccss.
This process is being referred to as a "phased environmental study". The object of this process is
to, where possible, choose environmentally preferred corridors to be shown on file thoroughfare
plans. Then at these transportation solutions become funded projects further detailed environmental
studies will be conducted on the preferred corridor for each project. Should these detailed studies
reveal additional information on unanticipated impacts, or should law/rule changes require. it, other
alternate corridors will be re-examined to satisfy these requiremenm
The undersigned agencies have worked together on the Rli nhrth City Thor rug tfam flan to identify
a number of environmentally preferred corridors for future transportation solutions. For
consistency, these environmentally preferred corridors have been labeled:
- Improvement "A" raviscd
- Improvement "B"
- Improvement "C" revised (the final names & locations will be drawn. and sent with the final
- Black "T' concurrence letter, due to possible tweak around u historic site)
Blue "1b"
- Blue "U,
- Blue "Y revised
While we have worked to achieve conscnsus on these environmentally preferred corridors, the
consensus is subject to the attached comments by several of the agencies- The agencies who have
attached letters of condition are marked with an * (asterisk) after the agency name.
(to be followed by the signatory locations & names)
NOTE: Plt4jejist. J
1p, name and dtle at the p-ma-YOU Wish tO- i
vour u9ncy
11-0 `? ? -ash C
-41
FEB 21 '96 09:16AM EHPR•PUBLIC AFFAIRS P. 1A I
Eagsimile Cover. Sheet
Date: 2/20/96
To: Environmental Review team for Elizabeth City
Thoroughfare plan:
ric Galamb, DF.M, fax 733-999
Da , ax
Mike Bell, USCOE fax [phone]
Katherine Doak, USF&W, fax [phone]
Ray Batey, FHWA, fax [phone]
Debbie Bevin, DCR, fax [phone]
Doug Huggett, DCM, fax [phone]
Sara Winslow, DMF, fax [phone]
Ron Sechler, NMF, fax [phone] '
?a
From: David B. Foster,
DP-HNR, Hwy. Envir. Eval., 715-4151
fax [phone] or (733-2622 & please call to alert me)
14th floor, Archdale Bldg.
dfosterOdeh.ehnr. state. nc.us
1 page(s), gLU the cover sheet
Review team,
Here is the draft concurrence letter. Please review it and fax it back
to me (by Friday, the 23rd, if possible) with any comments. We have
tried to keep it simple and straight forward.
Please note who you want to sign it (you may choose to sign it yourself
as the participating staff person If you wish), remember it is a
voluntary effort to promote better decisions, not a formal document
...thanks for all your good work!
David
?L ?z C?Ty ? lz /'I TG_
?eaoloi? Bevis
lJ ?; (oA
r 11__
U 1\C (7C1(C?
W?WOOD
LA L

?l,/?.? ?'SG - Y3 3 U

OCR - SNPo -733 - (o54-5
I,?SFtvS -? `)S?-4Sa-oA/c

7844, . 222
1- ?? wl? SSG - 4' 3 5
??- -7 -7 7. 3f41 -,??- Z1L

,J?? X33 y-??s
J?
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726 r
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726 \ 1
April 11, 1996
Mr. David B. Foster
Statewide Planning
N.C. Department of Transportation
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611-5201
Re: Action ID No. 199601460, Elizabeth City Thoroughfare Plan
Pasquotank County, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Foster:
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has reviewed the Consensus
Charter for the above-referenced project and is responding to your
request for concurrence with the document. This is the report of the
Department of the Interior submitted in accordance with provisions of the
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C.
661 et seq.). This report also serves as initial comments to state
resource agencies in their permitting and/or certification processes.
The Service attended an on-site interagency meeting on February 6, 1996
as well as a follow up coordination meeting on February 13, 1996. Much
discussion has taken place regarding the choice of corridors and the
conditions under which they would be environmentally preferred. We
support the methodology to address environmental concerns early in the
planning process. If resource agency recommendations are incorporated
at an early stage, all agencies should benefit through a more efficient
and effective environmental review process.
The February 13th coordination meeting discussion was recorded on tape
by the N.C. Department of Transportation (NCDOT). Service
recommendations made at that meeting remain valid. In addition, these
written comments should accompany the Consensus Charter and represent our
conditional approval of the selected "environmentally preferred
corridors". The following corridors discussed match those referenced in
the Consensus Charter and depicted on the revised drawings.
Improvement "A": This corridor appears to be environmentally preferred
based on minimal anticipated impacts to fish and wildlife
resources.
Improvement "B": This corridor appears to be environmentally preferred
based on minimal anticipated impacts to fish and wildlife
resources.
Improvement "C": This corridor is acceptable provided the alignment
chosen avoids and minimizes wetland impacts and habitat
fragmentation to the maximum extent practicable. A
section of the corridor has been widened so that
alternative alignments would be available to avoid
impacts to palustrine forested wetlands in this location.
Black 112" revised: This corridor crosses a tributary of Knobbs Creek on
new location. This crossing would impact semipermanently
flooded cypress-gum swamp which is a highly valued
resource type that performs a number of ecological
functions, including the provision of fish and wildlife
habitat. There are several existing crossings of this
tributary within the near vicinity of the proposed
crossing already. We would agree to an additional
crossing on new alignment provided the crossing occurs on
structure for the entire length of the floodplain. Our
acceptance of this corridor as environmentally preferred
is contingent upon this specified condition. Otherwise,
we recommend that NCDOT pursue an upgrade of an existing
road crossing downstream of the proposed corridor,
potentially at Church Street, the abandoned railroad bed
or some other location. In addition, opportunities to
restore existing crossings to pre-fill contours should be
incorporated into the compensatory mitigation plan for
this project, i.e. the subdivision crossing upstream, the
abandoned railroad bed or any other suitable location.
The NCDOT should strive for a no net increase in road
crossings and a no net loss in wetland acreage.
Blue "lb": This corridor is acceptable provided the alignment chosen
crosses this palustrine forested wetland system at a
narrow section of the tributary and occurs on structure
to the maximum extent practicable.
Blue 112a": This corridor is environmentally preferred because it
represents an upgrade of an existing crossing of Knobbs
Creek, thereby impacting wetlands previously disturbed
and minimizing habitat fragmentation. Median width in
this location should be negligible. The existing bridge
should be extended in length to minimize fill within the
floodplain. An opportunity for compensatory mitigation
credit exists here if the bridge is extended and part or
all of the existing crossing is restored to pre-fill
contours.
Blue 11311: This corridor crosses a tributary of Knobbs Creek on new
location. As is the case with Black 112" revised, the
resources in this area include semipermanently flooded
cypress-gum swamp, a highly valued resource. There is an
existing crossing of this tributary directly adjacent to
and upstream of the proposed corridor. We would agree to
an additional crossing on new alignment provided the
crossing occurs on structure for the entire length of the
floodplain and the "T" intersection does not overlap into
wetland boundaries. Our acceptance of this corridor as
environmentally preferred is contingent upon this
specified condition. Otherwise, we recommend that NCDOT
pursue an upgrade of the adjacent existing road crossing
upstream of the proposed corridor. Opportunities to
restore existing crossings, such as the one directly
adjacent to the proposed, to pre-fill contours should be
V
incorporated into the compensatory mitigation plan.
When committing to a corridor choice, it is productive for the agencies
to discuss design issues that serve to avoid and minimize impacts.
Corridor approval is often contingent upon certain design specifications.
It is also useful to identify potential compensatory mitigation sites in
advance. Several sites were identified in the field that seem to offer
the opportunity for meaningful in-kind, on-site restoration to compensate
for unavoidable wetland impacts.
If NCDOT incorporates this guidance into planning and design of this
project, the environmental documentation and permitting process would be
streamlined to save both time and money as well as foster enhanced
resource protection.
We reserve the right to review and comment upon any required federal or
state permits at the time of public notice issuance.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to comment on this project. If
you have any questions regarding this information, please contact
Katherine Doak of my staff at [phone] ext. 19.
Sincerely yours,
John Hefne
Field Supervisor
JH/KHD
CC: COE (Mike Bell)
NMFS (Ron Sechler)
NCDEHNR-DEM (Eric Galamb)
NCDEHNR-DCM (Richard Watts)
NCWRC (David Cox)
NCDOT (R. Van Argabright)
FWS/R4/KDoak/KHD:4-11-96/919-856-4520 ext 19/wp:19961460.CON
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
REPLY TO
ATTENTION OF
August 22, 1996.
Regulatory Branch
SUBJECT: Action ID 19961460 (??\2
Mr. David B. Foster
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Highway Environmental Evaluation
Archdale Building, Room 1419-A
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Dear Mr. Foster:
N
Please reference your recent request for a letter concurring
with the North Carolina Department of Transportation's selection
of preferred corridors for the Elizabeth City Thoroughfare Plan,
in Pasquotank County, North Carolina.
It is highly likely that the Corps of Engineers will be
asked to issue a Clean Water Act permit for work connected with
the projects described in the Phase I Environmental Review of the
Elizabeth City Thoroughfare Plan. Our permit program requires
that we make a complete, thorough, and unbiased review of all
factors associated with a proposed project within jurisdictional
waters of the United States. A major component of that review is
the consideration of reasonable and practicable alternatives,
required by both the National Environmental Policy Act, and the
Clean Water Act 404 (b)(1) guidelines (33 U.S.C.Section 1344(b);
40 CFR Section Part 230). The Clean Water Act requires that
individual permit decisions be made "after notice and opportunity
for public hearings" (33 U.S.C. Section 1344(a)). Based on these
requirements, we believe it is inappropriate for the Wilmington
District to make any binding commitment concerning the selection
of a single preferred alternative prior to going through the
permit process required by our regulations, found at 33 CFR Part
325.
The District can, however, review, comment, and make
recommendations in the planning review of alternative corridors
with reference to potential Department of the Army permit
concerns. As a result of our continued coordination, we continue
to support the final choice of preferred corridors as reflected
in the consensus charter, subject to the conditions and comments
from the State and Federal commenting agencies.
Printed on ® Recycled Paper

-2-
Should you have any questions, please contact Mr. Michael F.
Bell, Project Manager/North Carolina Department of Transportation
Coordinator, of my Washington Regulatory Field Office staff, at
telephone [phone], extension 26.
Sincerely,
Mic ael D. Smith, P.W.S.
Chief, North Section
Regulatory Branch
Copies Furnished:
Mr. John Parker
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Mr. Larry Hardy
National Marine Fisheries
Service
Pivers Island
Beaufort, North Carolina 28516
Mr. John M. Hefner
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Fish and Wildlife Enhancement
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636
Mr. Thomas Welborn, Chief
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency
345 Courtland Street, N.E.
Atlanta, Georgia 30365
^/Mr. John Dorney
North Carolina Division
of Environmental Management
Water Quality Section
Wetlands and Aquatic Plants
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Mr. David Cox
Post Office Box 118
Northside, North Carolina 27564
Mr. Nicholas Graf
Federal Highway Administration
310 New Bern Avenue, Suite 410
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601
",.*Z
1
6EL ?i4gh?
?,7,
r-I
I~
O
9U)
0 A-)
U) N r-I
•r1 > rn
O
?4 c)
_j r
b I
O UJ 104
44 0 104
Fd a
H O ?4
H ao
(d 41
4J 44 0
q ° w
U)
tLI-4
o N o
•?4-I ro m
JJ H M
O
z

¦

.wti.
n
s

N U r1
O -?4 b
?4
a?N
H G N
R.'
U)
(o
a
44
0
00
00
0
r-I N
I I
I I
r-I W
U
k
O
a

"air

- i
- G

?4 %-D
r
o u a)

t'
l ti ? .
? w H U
'J ?4 N
ff 0
N

(
4j 4J
44
(4
4

4 Pi
44
? ??. , 4. -• ( ? p i • 4'Sj]'.49?r ` rf'.k? rA? 9 ?a!' ?? \..n' i•^i
,?gY LpY j
+ `! r f
.J
I'.
,16
1
.
°O•S
f
i
s Ai.

¦

:y
rl? ,

1 aaG1?
k1'??y ^n
S:
?l ; J
i Sy At
?ll.R%

F l
A ,
1? ? X1
,
?
•4
1
}
ii My
j
Improvements A. B, B1 ark 1 Revised, Blue lb, Blue 7.a, 6
Bl It 3 Revised
Pasquotank County, North Carolina
Revised February 22, 1996
aaa
Approx. Scale: 1 in. = 1000 ft.
1 m. 12,000 m.
Figure la
Notes:
11 Environmental Information is shown only in
areas of proposed improvements.
t for
500 ft
. excep
2) All corridor widths are
Black 2 Rev., which has a variable corridor width.
D1 The northern portion of Blue 2a is not shown.
4) The corridor edge is omitted in most areas for
clarity.
5) Date of Photograph - 7/20/91
Legend:
11 Homes under construction and recently completed. .-.
21 Apartments under construction
11 Wetlands (typ
) l
.
41 Stream (typ.)
51 Anadromous Fish Spawning Area
61 NPDES Site - Groundwater Remediation Site (Gasoline)
71 Edge of corridor (typ.)
8 Oxford Heights Mini-Perk
Jaycee's Fairgrounds
9
1
10 Weetlewn Memorial Perk (Cemetery)
b Golf Course
Cl
C
t
k j. ,
u
es
oun
ry
111 Pine La
O?O? WA
T F9QG
r
DWQ Project No.: 2,DO1I5-JY'
Applicant:
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek,' P.E. Director
County: p4s UO an
Project Name: kstl5 TeyJ AM.
Date of Issuance of 401 Water Quality Certification: 8" oZ$'"D Z
Certificate of Completion
Upon completion of all work approved within the 401 Water Quality Certification or applicable Buffer Rules, and
any subsequent modifications, the applicant is required to return this certificate to the 401/Wetlands Unit, North
Carolina Division of Water Quality, 1621 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC, 27699-1621. This form may be
returned to DWQ by the applicant, the applicant's authorized agent, or the project engineer. It is not necessary to
send certificates from all of these.
Applicant's Certification
1, , hereby state that, to the best of my abilities, due care and diligence
was used in the observation of the construction such that the construction was observed to be built within substantial
compliance and intent of the 401 Water Quality Certification and Buffer Rules, the approved plans and
specifications, and other supporting materials.
Signature:
Agent's Certification
Date:
1, , hereby state that, to the best of my abilities, due care and diligence
was used in the observation of the construction such that the construction was observed to be built within substantial
compliance and intent of the 401 Water Quality Certification and Buffer Rules, the approved plans and
specifications, and other supporting materials.
Signature: Date:
Engineer's Certification
1aWal In
as a duly registered Professional Engineer in the State of North
Carolina, hav ng been authorized to observe (periodically, weekly, full time) the construction of the project,for the
Permittee hereby state that, to the best of my abilities, due care and diligence was used in the observation of the
construction such that truction observed to be built within substantial compliance and intent of the 401
Water Quality tficatioBufffe es, the app ved plans and specifications, and other supporting materials.
Signature /6??Registration No. 2l6ME
Date Q- Z 7-03
O?OF W AT F, Q
r
O ?
DWQ Project No.: 20b ?59!5r County: _ & !9AUVtA"k
Applicant: _ / V ?Ap T
Project Name: Y?.s-W 814. U- 3441
Date of Issuance of 401 Water Quality Certification: Z
Certificate of Completion
Upon completion of all work approved within the 401 Water Quality Certification or applicable Buffer Rules, and
any subsequent modifications, the applicant is required to return this certificate to the 401/Wetlands Unit, North
Carolina Division of Water Quality, 1621 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC, 27699-1621. This form may be
returned to DWQ by the applicant, the applicant's authorized agent, or the project engineer. It is not necessary to
send certificates from all of these.
Applicant's Certification
I, , hereby state that, to the best of my abilities, due care and diligence
was used in the observation of the construction such that the construction was observed to be built within substantial
compliance and intent of the 401 Water Quality Certification and Buffer Rules, the approved plans and
specifications, and other supporting materials.
Signature:
Date:
Agent's Certification
1, , hereby state that, to the best of my abilities, due care and diligence
was used in the observation of the construction such that the construction was observed to be built within substantial
compliance and intent of the 401 Water Quality Certification and Buffer Rules, the approved plans and
specifications, and other supporting materials.
Signature:
Engineer's Certification /
rtial V al
I, K)ft4L.L_ (f FiU'VA , as a duly registered Professional Engineer in the State of North
Carolina, 'having been authorized to observe (periodically, weekly, full time) the construction of the project,for the
Permittee hereby state that, to the best of my abilities, due care and diligence was used in the observation of the
construction such that the constructioin was observed to be built within substantial compliance and intent of the 401
Water Qualityf ertrftc?'? and r Rules, t e proved plans and specifications, and other supporting materials.
Signature r ??; ? _ Registration No. AJL Z
Z1452-
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek,*P.E. Director
Date I-7,7-Q?
'!A ~F r I ~h ~ s°' . R
u ~ ff ; a~+a ~'~T ~ x. 1 P..r~ I~i ^b 3 ~ ~ -8 ~5. `
1-.`' r. L.~:xa {fir ;t' r, '>^''as ~ ~ ~ ~~"n
i _ .,fir, ~4Y ! y.,. Jp 1 ;fit A~ei ~ Y ~;t;t~~
,'l ~ ,~-r~ ; ,r ~ - v
0 R -i. 1 ~ t ~ ,b i
ti . a -
- . - n.
L~ , ~S i k r ~ ter. r_; . ~ ~ 1.1~ ~ r:
„ft ~ ti`¢~
_ r r 1 1 Y V * }a.
F P~~uE ~i I~ED2d ' 1~1: i~!'• ~''a '1
- ~ S f,+fl.~
r ~ REO2a
3 ~ ~ ~ R ~i :h '1
R r.~. ,R. r¢. - ~ ~.L
_ . . i' ~
- > ~ 1 1 ,

; . ;
;i. - r'.
~ _ -
, - f.
- , ,
~ - k, 1 t ` ~ r 4.
~ rL e
, ~ ~ i~1 - p. 'der' tii ~r 'Igo 7.
.a a .,z ' . ~ 'r, _ ~ F.A, _ ~w,,;,x~.
~J'. ~ ~~X~
/ ,.1.. Aik iS-m a aY t
, of ~ ~i, e~ yd~ r , kr~ x
~ .L~ G 6 24 ~ ~ r ~ ,.r ~ ~ 71s i? ,..i a ~ r 'S.:i _
_ UE Zb ~ ~ ~r y - Y._ ~i ~_i ~.~jp~...~y .A.H'~
~ . r R !1'c / / _
n 1y.~ ~ I P ~ E ru_ 6 v 4S'`~ 5 -
iC'.I , y' ~ / / ~ .1 , ~ ~ ~~pY°. yy. ,t'~. - r rY~' - ~ ?}r-~ Y ; M`1. ,F~' ~x s, 'ii..
.d 1 f y ~ A ~2•i y ~ iQ is f.~ .1 CJ~ vY 4 ~ '1:-. d
~ - <x ail;}.
s~ r~ ~ ~ Wis. ~ r ~Y 1
~ ~g. rs ° n ~ rY. , fi ~ r i w.
H ,
~ wl,~..: ED2d , a 2 f , _ * ,w r: RE02b r~ c f~ _ P t r. ~
~4 ~M- Q ~ ' •1 1~ ~ RED r ~ .ti 2a , , , ~ ~
~i in . ~ r , ~ - - i - - • R dy f err ~'P y "FI! {r f~3Yll' - i . yr ~ .M1.. ~ J - !
17 , ~w. - - r~y~ }±N+M,My'.~ P ~-,y ' III . `{e. 1~~ . + Y , Ih1
,.9! ~I ~
~s s ~ ~ r• ~ SIC' ~~`e` .~r ^,sr'~jl~~r~.7. .~~M.~II w~~, , . i - .'~'1 ~ . s i • . ~ ~ , x i 1 1~"`` + - was' ~ ".K
.r ~ .J
, R;• _ fir.. '`3 TjY J h t~V 5~ h ~ ~ r _
~ - x'f. :~,,efr "~e'dl' s , ~ x~ k `t4 ~ 9"~ ,
r i - .ti.. i, Y t e ` ~ i:~.
d - ~ P ~ ~ 'l~- 'Y "jo. F ///~I ilk ~ / 4 S = ~ , `ice ~ ~ n
n ~ f :L E ~ s_ ~~y ' Y
gED1 ~ AWE lb A Y- A ~ 1 rl ~ ,j "ie,~; ~ M,~ >
1 ` T'' ? f.l ,f ~k ^ .n` ~ ~ '$rh, ,/ll' r~: ~a :ri ,fir ~ : ~ ~a;~~
yrt ~ <<t~ t,
Y~ .p ~ ~ ~v.~ r, '
. ~ = Y
1• ~ / r. i f ~ o .,;rte -J•1., ~ f„ ,r. !ti ~ T ~ 1u'"%'
,,p 3.
N lb 0. r "..7r :y. R~ `ii s/ ""1 •i t= ~ i
F~ j
~ A`i M°,. p t _ .yir, M'.. FFF _ pp ~ ~:fi: '
~ ,fir a ~~4.~ ,w}G` r ~ Y/ / : I 1 i• .r r, -
rW.1 _ A A C i~ ` ~ I •1 t; r q; w
s r h A6:
- _ _ _ ~ ~ ~ r Improvements A, B, Black, Red, & Blue
- rl e R , a ~ ..1 a q ~ « Pasquotank County, North Carolina December 27, 1995
~ ~ e!r'
[3LgGK I ~ , Approx. Scale: 1 in. = 1000 ft. j
- 'M - „ , r r:': ,P~ ~ r- , 1 m. = 12,000 m.
4 t ~ . ' " M M. ~ rA . ~x Q ~
. a `4- Figure 1a
i _ 4 , Notes:
1) Environmental Information is shown only in
? t . ;.s IMPROVE y,. i#- e r Zj a areas of proposed improvements.
{ ~ 2) The 500 ft. corridor edge is omitted in some
- 4„~. rt , ~ t ~ r~ r, y ~ , areas for clarity.
"r i W F+ ~ 94Ij 3 Date of Photo rah - 3/20/91 9 p
, ~ V. ' ~ ~ - q~ Legend:
r, , u~ ~c ' 1 Homes under construction and recently completed. )
y ~ nstruction •,e:- 2) Apartments under co
~ ~ ^ 3) Wetlands (typ.) j
II".~., ~ try, al ~ ~ w , ~ - ~ ! +.a - 1~ ~ _ i? 4) Stream (typ. )
5) Anadromaus Fish Spawning Area - R mediation Site Gasoline
6) NPDES Site Groundwater e ( ) 7) Ed e of 500 ft. corridor (typ.)
1 i,w. ~ t r A+y ; y . r d` ~ ~j g .+iy, 8) Oxford Heights Mini-Park
r i~ =~..-a' ~a - ~~3 r: .•,1F~ ~th'~ ~ ~ y` ° ~ -,Hr.. i r••. R..• ~ ; ~.v; 9) Jaycee s Fairgrounds
Westlawn Memorial Park Cemetar ) ; ~ ~a. 10) ( Y
y ~ r, T ~ ~ A.. ~ ` 1 's ern " . M ti . ~ 11) Northeastern High School ~
~+F a ~ ~i~~„~j.. ~ ~A~. ~ ' ~a A \r -L ~ ~k: ~ s . i 9 x• M 1 ~'f ~f.;• .~1 ~ y.+.~'~ . s J ? i ~ ~ 2 Albemarle Hos ital ' ~ 1) p y~ ' ' ~ T hnical Institute
. ~ ~ s+ , n , err aP A.1 ~'M ~kr ~yy. y r?C• _ ~ ~ 13) College of Albemarle ec 4 t~ ~ ~ 14 Pine Lakes Countr Club Golf Course
* f, d,°;~• "y, a . 1 ~ ~r., r''~~~ rr ~ ~ ~ios~' `w'n ~ - ~ ~ r ~"~.A , ~

v V + - ~ r. r,.,, - ah:. _ ~ , ~ ~ . i' rat ' 4 ~ x~ t vp ~r~ [ r ~r? P n ~~4~°.~~4A, ~
i h. yl[
Ny': s * t,
,j. hp _ ~Wj
- y Js~,. t - - y . v i G' , n'l . ~ 'i . ..sc I ~ ° ~'P
,~,y ~ r,:,;. ,
i
- ..n { . .
F. 'k. .,ti
' ~ p<

C
•?9.' .,R
vE~^E~Y A ~rnPRv ll ~ M1r1 YF~ ~ ~ +J Ra ;~*~~jl,

`t ~ N
~ r ~
`k;
, a k.,. e. " ~ + .ct • ~ ri
•w. ~ ' q y~ ~
n ; , 4~ 'dam J~ _ t -u: ~ Cr, S ~y ~p. jb• ~ ~
~i_ ~ ' •F ~R~ „ ~
a
:+~=s° ~''t v _ R ~a ~ ,
~4 rc„ z 7 a
~ ~
. q. ~ ; . -rw ° _ " r. sn-
4 ~ 9d l F - ' i c - i - ti. f. ~ _ , A rT : ' ,._t , I! k -~~~.Y.k Y- t§' ' •t• n tf-w Vr~ . I•~i' y.~'~ A
~:-.~~-a~ ~ ~4 3. y~: ,~t,i_~~ Y' ~rt l Y ~ nr r, :'1~4 y1 f''.hi.
, F~~ st - S
I ~~y '1. _4 .lt~ ~.7 } t~' • _.4 ~ ]:9 - .r. y. .fin. - ~ ~ t
O
Y 4 I ro.:~r: ~ F_ ~ b ~ . i - R ~ '
r 1 A `rS •
11 _

C 1.'~. . - it ~'Ipi:1' _ ,
mar' L ' ~~F 4 1. . ~1
i a~. , r~ _ ~~ffi V .~fG. I ~ ~l:Ee J~ :.kF'.. - ~
ri t~ . 7~~ ~ II
_ , , ~ Improv Improvements A, B, Black, Red & Blue
. . _ . _ . pa q - _ - Pasquotank County, North Carolina
, ~l: i December 27, 1995
- ra. .
F~;; App. Approx. Scale: 1 in. = 1000 ft.
IAN;,: 6- 1 m. = 12,000 m. I
i _ , Figure lb
~ .r I,; _ 4..
~ _ Notes:
' 1 Envir ~xi ~ ) onmE i Environmental Information is shown onl in Y ,i~ 'L
~Q~~ ~ areas of areas of proposed im rovements . ' ri ~ . The 500 ft. corridor edge is omitted in some
areas fog areas for clarit `t .
3) Date of F ~a ~~.ai~. Y _ Q Date of Photograph 3/20/91 ~ ~ ~ ~'q:'
~ ~ ~ i r.; 4 A. ~ c F6 t.- .
L e en ~ ~ d 9 _ ~ end : •;i , • ai:: ~ k
1) Wetlands Y' _ a r 2 tream x~ K Wetlands (typ.) ~ / 1~:~1
,a,. , G rG ~ 3) Edge of , 4 Stream (t ) ~I 4~~~~ YP . 1.
~ i ~ ~ ) Ja cee s _ f~. Y ge of 500 ft . corridor (typ.) " ~ ~ „ ~ Jaycee s Fair rounds ~ - _ ~ + ~
~ 5) Westlawn Westlawn Memorial Park (Cemetar ~i '1
; ' _ 6) Northeast t_ ~.y~ . m :x 4a; Y 4 Northeastern Hi h School p• . ~r, ` ~ ~
h~'~ j , ? `s';. ~ m°~' k:.~, ~ 7) Central E _ ~ r - ~ ti ?'f - Q ~ r;F Central Elementary f. ''•~-I. ~ ~.w,~. ~ -A ;i
""gyp ~ ~ < / ~y'