20140273 Ver 1_Scoping Comments_20080528

o��C ... , , �9QG
\ Vj r
a °� -i
O '<
Wiliiam G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
May 28, 2008
Coleen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
MEMORANDUM
To: Melba McGee, DENR Environmental Coordinator a�
.J,
From: Rob Ridings, Division of Water Quality, Transportation Pernvtting Unit y
Subject: Comments on the Finding of No Significant Impact related to proposed widening of SR
1616 from US 64 Business to SR 1541, Rocky Mount, Nash County, Federal Aid Project
No. STP-1616(4), State Project No. 34927.1.1, TIP Nv�d31; DENR Clearinghouse
No. 08-0351.
This office has reviewed the referenced document dated received May 20, 2008. The Division of Water
Quality (DWQ) is responsible for the issuance of the Secrion 401 Water Quality Certification for
activities that impact Waters of the U.S., including wetlands. It is our understanding that the project as
presented will result in impacts to jurisdictional wetlands, streatns, and/or riparian buffers. The DWQ
offers the following comments based on review of the aforementioned document:
Project Spec'dic Comments:
1. Stoney Creek and its tributaries aze class C, NSW; 303(d) waters of the State. DWQ is very concemed
with sediment and erosion impacts that could result from this project. DWQ recommends that the most
protec6ve sediment and erosion control BMPs be implemented to reduce the risk of nutrient runoff to
Stoney Creek. DWQ requests that road design plans provide treatment of the storm water runoff through
best management practices as detailed in the most recent version of NC DWQ Stormwater Best
Management Practices.
2. This project is within the Taz-Pamlico River Basin. Riparian buffer impacts shall be avoided and
minimized to the greatest extent possible pursuant to 15A NCAC 2B.0259. New development acriviries
located in the protected 50-foot wide riparian areas within the basin shall be limited to "uses" identified
within and constructed in accordance with 15A NCAC 2B.0259. Buffer mitigation may be required for
buffer impacts resulting from activities classified as "allowable with mitigarion" wiUvn the "Table of
Uses" section of the Buffer Rules or require a variance under the Buffer Rules. A buffer mitigation plan,
including use of the NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program, must be provided to DWQ prior to approval of
the Wate�Quality Certification.
General Comments:
The petmit applicarion shall provide a detailed and itemized presentarion of the proposed impacts to
wetlands and streams with corresponding mapping. If mitigarion is necessary as required by 15A
NCAC 2H.0506(h), it is preferable to present a conceptual (if not finalized) mitigation plan with the
environmental documentarion. Appropriate mitigation plans will be required prior to issuance of a
401 Water Quality Certificarion.
Transportation Peimilting Und �
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NoM Carolina 27699-1650
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Sulte 250, Raleigh, NoM Carolina 27604
Phona: 919-733-17861 FAX 979-733�8931 Intemet http�/lh2o enr state nc us/ncwetlands
An Equal OpportunitylAtAimative Action Empbyer- 50%Recyde�U70% Post Consumer Paper

��
2. Environmental .assessment a�t�e� �ater runoff..nThese alt rnatilve shall in ude road des gns that
streams and wetlands from s
allow for treatment of the storm water runoff through best management practices as detailed m the
most recent version of Stormwater Bes t Mana gement Practices, such as grassed swales, buffer , �
areas, preformed scour holes, retention basins, etc.
3. After the selection of the preferred� alternative and prior to an i ill need to demonstrate the�avoid ce,
Certification, the NCD.OT is respectfully reminded that they w
' � and minimization of impacts to wetlands (and streams) to the maximum extent practical. In �
accordance with the Environmental Managem�er han acre to wetlands15In he event�that06(h)},
mitigation will be required for irnpacts of gr
mitigation is required, the mitigation plan sPha�ll a� maynbe ava lable forusepasawetland tigation.d `
values. . The NC Ecosystem Enhancement gr
4. In accordance with the Environmental Managemact of eater than SO li earfeet o any single
-- 2H.0506(h)}, mitigation will be required for imp �'
, perennial stream. In the event that mitigation is required, the mitigation plan shall be designed to
replace appropriate lost functions and values. The NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program may be
available for use as stream mitigation. ,
5. Future documentation, including the 401 Water Quali d s eaml im�ac spwi hacorrespond nghnue to
include an iterriized listing of the proposed wetland an P
mappmg.
6. DWQ is very concerned with sediment and erosion impacts that cac�dtliat ma �occurl to the qua c
DOT shall address these concerns by describing the potential imp Y
environments and ariy mitigating factors that would reduce the impacts.
7. An analysis of cumulative and secondary impacts anticipated on of Water Qualty Policy on thea
. The type and detail of analysis shall conform to the NC Divis
, assessment of secondary and cumulative impacts dated April 10, 2004. '
8. NC DOT is respectfully reminded that all impacts, including na �°anan buffer sneed to�belincluded
excavation and clearing, to jurisdictional wetlands, streams, a p
in the final impact calculations. These impacts, in addition to any construction impacts, temporary
or otherwise, also need to be included as part of the 401 Water Qua:lity Certification Application.
9, .:_y��re streams must be cro'ssed, the DWQ prefers bridges be used in lieu of culverts. However, we
realize that economic considerations often require thss S e b fish and other aquatic organ sams. -
eulverts shall be countersunk.to allow unimpeded pa g Y rove
Moreover, in areas where high quality wetlands or streams are impacted, a bridge may p
' preferable. When applicable,lDOT should not install the bridge bents:�in the creek, to the�maximum
. extent practicable.
10. Sediment and erosion control measures shall not be placed in wetlands or streams.
11. Borrow/waste` areas shall avoid wetlands to� the maximum a�e�ntual cti Certif cation and coluld s in
� borrow/waste areas will need to be presented in the 401 W Q tY . ,
precipitate compensatbry mitigation.

J' +
l� �
� lication will need to specifically address the proposed ,
, 12. The 401 Water Quality Certification app ,
methods for stormwater manag
ement. More specifically;, stormwater shall not be permitted to
discharge directly into streams or surface waters.
the magnitude of impacts to wetlands and
13. Based on the information presented in the document, eers and corresponding
streams may require an Nationwide Permit application to the Corps of Engin
� Water uality Certification. Please be advised that e40 uwat standards are met and no we land
401 Q to ensure that wat q �' Iication
.. satisfactory protection of water quality �
Please be aware that any approval will
or stream uses are lost. Final permit authorizati e NCDWQire •the submittal of a forma app
by the NCDOT and written concurrence from th
e contin ent on appropriate avoidance and minimizael table stolrmwaterman g m nt plan,t nd the
b g
maximum extent practical, the development of an a To riate.
inclusion of appropriate mitiSation plans where app p
14. Bridge supports (bents) shall not be placed in the stream when possible.
refers s anning structures. Spanning structures usually do not ,
15. Whenever possible, the DWQ p bbin of the streambanks and do not require stream channel .
require work within the stream or gru g �
eali ent. The horizontal and vertical clearances pr� assabe and do not block navig ti n by
r g�
wildlife passage beneath the siructure, do not block is p g
canoeists and boaters. �
means assed swales, pre-formed scour holes,
16. Bridge deck drains shall not discharge directlyriate the str (� • Stormwater shall be directe across
the bridge and pre-treated through site approp
e etated buffers, etc ) before entering the stream. Please refer to the most current version of N
vg
DWQ Stormwater Best Management Practices.
ed durin construction, a dry work area shall be maintained to prevent direct contact .
17, If concrete is us g ossible a uatic.life and
curin concrete and stream water. Water that inad levated H and p�c�ed q ncrete shall
between g
not be discharged to surface waters due to the potential for e .
fish kills.
lg, If temporary
access roads or detours are constructed, the site shall be graded to its preconstruction ,
ed. When using temporary structures the area shall
contonrs and elevatioris. Disturbed areas shall be seeded or mulched to stabilize the soi an
appropriate native woody species shall be plan .
be cleared but not grubbed. Clearing the area���t a rootl at ntact allowsthe area to re�vegetate
mechanized equipment and leavirig the stumps
��— naturally and minimizes soil disturbance. - :.
19.
Placexiient of culverts and other structures in waters, erts �th a d ametergreate rhan 48ainches, ,
.the elevation of the streambedby.one foot for all cu v
and 20' ercent of the culvert diameter for culverts ha a gla elment of ulverts and other structures
p
low flow passage of water and:aquatic life. Design an p
' ludin temporary erosion control measures shall not beent to ort ps eam and down stream of the
mc S
dis-equilibrium of wetlands or streambeds or banks, a �ac
above structures. The applicant is required to providcondationis unable to be mret due oebedrock or
� maintained if requested in writing by DWQ• If th ldanee
construetion, please contact the NC DWQ for gu
other limiting featuxes encountered during .
� ow to roceed and to determine whether or not a permit modification will be required.
on h P
20. If multiple pipes or barrels are required,
they shall be designed to mimie natural stream cross section,
. � as ossible including pipes or barrels at flood plain elevation and/or sills where
_ as closely. p

appropriate. Widening the strcarn �ae� ases wa�ter veloc ty oaus g sedimentldepo ition that inlet
or outlet end of structures typ Y
requiresincreased maintenance and disrupts aquatic life passage.
21 app� oved nderSGenera� 401 Certifis ation Number 3494/Nat onwide Permit No.e6 for Survey is
Activities. 1 ted
22.
23.
24.
25
Sediment and erosion control measures sufficient to protect water resources must be imp emen
Control Plann ng and Des gn Manual and the most ecent vers on of NCS000250 �ment and Erosion
All work in or adjacent to stream waters shall be conducted in a dry work area. Approved BMP
measures from the most current versio cofferd mOs and�ot er divers on shvchues shall be nsed to
manual such as sandbags, rock berms,
prevent excavarion in flowing water.
ry(NWI) maps, NC Coasta] Region Evaluation of
While the use of Narional Wetland Invento ma s are useful tools, their inherent
Wetland Significance (NGCREWS) maps and soil surveY P
inaccuracies require that qualified personnel perform onsite wetland delineations prior to pernvt
approval.
Heavy equipment shall be operated from the bank rather than in sother c llutantsl nt str ams. �i1ns
minimize sedimentation and reduce the likelihood of introducing P
equipment shall be inspecte�aul c flu dsaortother�to xc matenals�mination of surface waters from
leaking fuels, lubricants, hy
precludes aquaticlife pasagehBi engineer`ing bou d rs orsltructures shalbe properly des gnedhat
sized and installed.
Riparian vegetation (native trees and shnibs) shall be preserved to the maximum extent possible.
Riparian vegetation must be reestablerion of consh�uctlons�ction limits of the project by the end of
the owing season following comp
26.
27
�
The NCDWQ appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on your project. Should you have any
questions or require any additional information, please wntact Rob Ridings at [phone].
C of Engineers, Washtingon Field Office
cc: W�lliam Wescott, US ArmY orps
Chad Coggins, Division 4 Environmental Officer
Kathy Matthews, Environmental Protection Agency
Travis Wilson, NC Wildlife Resources Commission
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., NCDOT PDEA
�E �3�.�:;...,,.

Department of Environment ancl Natural Resources
� Ofiice of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs
Project Review Form
Project Number: 08-0351 County: Nash
Due Date: 06/11/2008
Date Received: OS/16l2008
Project Description: Widen SR 1616 (Counhy Club Rd) from US64 Business to SR 1541 (Jeffrey's Rd). The project
will widen the existing roadway to 64ft (19.2 meter), 5-lane, curb a�id gutter facility throughout
the project'�-33�3.
This Project is being reviewed as indicated below:
Reeional Office
Asheville
Fayetteville
Mooresvil le
Raleigh
Washington
_ Wilmingron
_ Winston-Salem
Sign-Off/Region:
Response (check all applicable)
Office Area I In-House Review
Air
Warer
Groundwater
Land Quality E�gineer
_ No objection to project as proposed.
Insufficient information to complete review
Soil & Water
Coastal Management
Wildlife
�/ Wildlife - DOT
Forest Resources
Land Resources
Parks & Recreation
Water Quality
�/ Water Quality - DOT
Air Qualiry
Marine Fisheries
_ Water Resources
Environmental Health
Solid Wasee Mgmt
Radiation Protection
Other
_ No Comment
_ Other (specify or attach commenu)
Reviewer/Agency:
Regional Office Only:
Please log into the IBEAM system and update your comments in the DSS (Decision Support System) application,
SEPA module. If you have any questions, please contact
Melba McGee, Environmental Coordinator at [e-mail]
�
��t�r:-,�__.
� r�'` (
��"I`` -J��'��!'7(�.
' /
biqy i �; '[1i;�
�"�" "'
.,, .
„i,:�.��'rrN'�A;Fjj_" �I

SK 161fi (Cuuntry Club Ruadl
From [JS fi4 Business to SR 1541 (Jeffl•ey's Road)
Rucky Mount, Nash Cuunty
Federal Aid Project Nu. STRlfilfi(4�
WI3S Nu.34927.t.1
7'1P No. U-3331
ADNI[MS'PKA'P1VE ACT[ON
GINDING OF NO SIUNII�ICAN'I' IMYACC
U. 5. DCPARI'MliN'P Of -PRA�SYORI'A PION
FRDERAL NIGH W AY ADM1I INISTRA I'ION
1ND
V. C. DGPARThIGNT OF 7'RANSPOR"I',\TION
tiuhmil[ed pursuant to 42 U.ti.C.433212) (cl
n�rxovr �:
�%�S ����ti���--
Dute F�R �regory J.'Churpe, Ph.D., Manager
Project llevefopmenf and Environmental Analysis Branch, NCDO"f
�.
Date Juhn F. Sullivan III, P.E., Division
�ederal Highway Adminislration

SR 1616 (Country Club Road)
From US 64 Business to SR 1541 (Jeffrey's Road)
Rocky Mount, Nash County
Federal Aid Project No. STP-1616(4)
WBS No. 34927.1.1
� TIP No. U-3331
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Apri12008
Documentation Prepared in Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch by:
-3o—Og
Date
� �i,p o9
D e
Project Engineer

,
'�
TAB�E OF CONTEN'I'S
I. TYPE OF ACTION ..............................................................................................1
II.
III.
IV.
V.
VI.
A
B
C.
D.
E.
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION ..................................................:...1
ALTERNATIVESSTUDIED ..............................:............................................... 2
SUMIVIARYOF IMPACTS ................................................................................. 3
ACTIONS REQUIRED BY OTHER AGENCIES ............................................ 5
COORDINATION AND COMMENTS ............................................................. 6
CIRCULATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ................................................... C
COMMENTS RECENED ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ................:............. 6
1. i�nited States Environmental Protection Agency ................................................... 6
2. United States Fish and Wildlife Service ................................................................. 8
3. NC Department of Environmental and Natural Resources ..................................... 9
4. NC Division of Environmental Health ................................................................... 9
5. NC Wildlife Resources Commission .............................:...................................... 10
6. NC Division of Water Quality .............................................................................. 10
ADDITIONAL COORDINATION WITH FEMA ............................................................ 13
PUBLICINVOLVEMENT ........................................................................................... 14
COMMENTS MADE DURING AND FOLLOWING THE PUBLIC HEARING ..................... 1S
VII. REVISIONS TO ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT .................................16
A. DESIGN CHANGES .................................................................................................. 16
B. SECTION 4(F� PROPERTY ........................................................................................ lE)
C. TRAFFIC NOISE & AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS ........................................................... 17
1. Traffic Noise ......................................................................................................... 17
2. Air ualit .................:........... 17
Q Y ...............................................................................
a. Mobile Source Air Toxics (MSATs) ........................................................... 18
VIII. BASIS FOR FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IIVIPACT .............................19
FIGURES
Figure 1
Figure 2 .
Figure 3a & 3b
� APPENDICES
Appendix A
Appendix B
Vicinity Map
Aerial Project Layout
FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map
Written Comments on Environmental Assessment
Section 4( fl Coordination — Letter from City of Rocky Mount

PROJECT COMMITMENTS
SR 1616 (Country Club Road)
From US 64 Business to SR 1541 (Jeffrey's Road)
Rocky Mount, Nash County
Federal Aid Project No. STP-1616(4)
WBS No. 34927.1.1
TIP No. U-3331
Pro¢ram Develoament Branch Division 4 Desien Unit. Division 4 Construction.
Financial Manaeement Division
The existing sidewalk will be replaced if it is damaged or removed as a result of
construcaon. A sidewalk will be included on one side of the bridge as part of this TIP
project. At the request of the City of Rocky Mount, a sidewalk will also be included
along the roadway portion of the project at additional cost to the City. A municipal
agreement between the City and NCDOT will give specific details of the additional
sidewalk, such as location, cost pazticipation requirements, and maintenance
responsibility.
Division 4 Desien Unit, Division 4 Construction
NCDOT will adhere to all requirements set by the Federa] Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) in the amended deed restrictions for the nine Hazard Mitigation Grant
Program properties. NCDOT will not perform any non-approved design or conswction
on these properties. NCDOT will not acquire these properties as part of the right of way
acquisition process; instead, the City of Rocky Mount will retain ownership of said
properties. All applicable environmental and floodplain management requirements will
be adhered to during design and constructio� of this project.
A bus turnout will be added on Country Club Road near the Covenant Homes property
between Hunter Hill Road and Jeffreys Road in order to accommodate the Golden East
bus route in this azea.
Due to the proposed guazdrail after the bridge crossing, access to the Country Club Road
Paddle Trail Access Area will be shifted north of its existing location. As requested by
the City of Rocky Mount, NCDOT will purchase the additional right of way on an
adjacent property to create a twenry foot gravel access road to the paddle vail access site.
U3331 Fnding of No Significant Mpan . I of 2
Apri12008

Division 4 Desien Unit Division 4 ConsttuMion, Hvdraulics Unit
Since this project is in the Taz-Pamlico River Basin, sedimentation and erosion control
measures shall adhere to the Design Standazds in Sensidve Watersheds [15A NCAC
04B.0124 (b)-(e)].
NCDOT will adhere to the Taz-Pamlico River Riparian Buffer Rules during the design
and construction phases ofthis project.
U3331 Finding of No Significant Impact
Apri12008
\\
2of2

�
SR 1616 (Country Club Road)
From US 64 Business to SR 1541 (Jeffrey's Road)
Rocky Mount, IVash County
Federal Aid Project No. STP-1616(4)
WBS No. 34927.1.1
TIP No. U-3331
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Prepared by the Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
In Consultation with
the Federal Highway Administration
I. 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 environment. This FONSI is based on the Environmental Assessment (EA) dated
August 29, 2003, 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 EA provides sufficient evidence and analysis for deternuning that
an Environmental Impact Statement is not required. The FHWA takes full responsibility
for the accuracy, scope, and content of the EA. �
II. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION
The NCDOT proposes to widen SR 1616 (Country Club Road) from US 64
Business to SR 1541 (Jeffrey's Road) in the City of Rocky Mount located in Nash
County (see Figure 1). The proposed project will convert the highway from its current
configuration as a two-lane facility to a five-lane curb and gutter facility throughout the
project. The total length of the project will be approximately 1.4 miles.
The project will include replacing Bridge No. 112 over Stoney Creek with a new
iive-lane, 250-foot long structure. The bridge will have a 5-foot sidewalk on one side.
Additionally, the intersection of Country Club Road and Jeffrey's Road will be
realigned as part of this project.
This project is included in the approved 2Q07-2013 State Transportation
Improvement Program (STIP) and in the Draft 2008-2015 STIP. The current estimated
cost is $16,825,000. This estimate includes $7,825,000 for right of way and $9,000,000
for construction. Right of way acquisition is scheduled to begin in Federal Fiscal Year
(FFY) 2008 and construction in FFY 2009.

III. ALTERNATIVES STUDIED
Four alternatives were discussed in the EA: a"no build" alternative, a mass
transportation alternative, and two widening alternatives.
The "no build" alternative consisted of doing nothing to the existing facility. This
alternative would not improve capacity or safety along Country Club Road in the project
area, which is the stated purpose and need of the project. Road capacity would remain
unchanged, while the traffic demand� would increase substantially. Therefore, the "no
build" alternative was dropped from further consideration.
The mass transportation alternative included the expansion of bus routes and/or
rail service instead of increasing the capacity of the existing roadway. However,
expansion of bus service is not expected to reduce traffic volumes sufficiently enough to
eliminate the need for widening. The mass transportation alternative, without increasing
the capacity of Country Club Road, does not meet the purpose and need of this project
and was therefore eliminated from further study.
Two widening alternatives were considered, Alternatives A and B. Both involve
generally symmetrical widening of the roadway for a"best fit." Both alternatives are
identical, except in the vicinity of the Stoney Creek bridge crossing. Alternative A
consists of widening the roadway to the west as it approaches Stoney Creek and phase-
constructing a new bridge on this west side. Alternative B has the same concept as
Alternative A, except that the new bridge will be constructed to the east to allow for east
side widening of the roadway.
Alternative B was chosen as the recommended alternative because it allows for
increased capacity, minimizes overall impacts to the area, and avoids wetlands on the
west side of the existing roadway in the vicinity of Stoney Creek. The anticipated
increase in trafiic to over 24,000 vehicles per day (vpd) by the year 2020 warranted
widening of the existing two-lane facility to a five-lane facility in order to improve the
level of service. The five-lane section with a center turn lane was chosen as the best
typical sect'ion instead of the four-lane median divided facility for this project because it
has a narrower footprint, which reduces the impact to the FEMA buyout properties.
Also, since the project is occurring in a developed, urban area, the smaller footprint will
decrease the impacts to commercial facilities and the associated parking.
f►J,
�

IV. SUMMARY OF IlVIPACTS
Adverse impacts to the human and natural environment were minimized through
the development of several best-fit alignments. No adverse effect on the air quality of the
surtounding area is anticipated as a result of the project. The proposed project will not
impact any ,properties eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. Th'is
alternative will not encroach upon any known archaeological sites on or eligible for
listing in the National Register. Three business relocations and no residential relocations
are predicted to occur as a result of this proposed improvement, although lack of parking
caused by right of way acquisition may potentially lead to a greater number of business
relocations: Predicted noise level inereases for this project range up to +11 dBA;
however, no noise abatement rneasures are recommended' at this time. '
There are three federally protected species listed for Nash County. The project
will have a"No Effect" for all three species.
There is one Section 4(� resource that will be impacted as a result of this project.
The Country Club Paddle Trail Access site, located on Stoney Creek, will experience a
temporary loss of access during construction. Goordination has occurred between
NCDOT, FHWA, and the City of Rocky Mount to insure that the paddle trail access site
is properly restored to its original function once the project is complete. M_ore
information regarding this Section 4(fl resource can be found in°Section VII.B of this
document.
Table 1 below gives a summary of the resources and impacts due to the
recommended alternative. Figure 2 shows :the recommended alternative.
3

Table 1: Su�unary of Resources and Impacts
Resource Impacts
Areas and Parks
Major Utility Crossings
Historic Properties
(Eligible or Listed on National Register)
Archaeological Sites
Federally-Listed Species within Corridor
100-Year Floodplain Crossings
Prime Farmland
Residential Relocations
Business Relocations �
Hazardous Material Sites
Jetland Impacts
tream Crossings
tream Impacts
foise Receptor Impacts
Jater Supply Watershed Protected Areas
�ildlife Refuges and Game Lands
ection 4(fl Impacts (Parks)
2inority/Low Income Population
Adverse & Disproportional Impacts)
Itility Cost
;onstruction Cost
:ight of Way Cost
Total Cost
* de minimus
0
0
1
0
0
3
0
0
0
1
0
0
3
0
0 acres
1
801inear feet
0
0
0
0*
0
$813,000
$9,000,000
$7,825,000
$17,638,000
�
r
a

V. ACTIONS REQUIRED BY OTHER AGENCIES
A Nationwide Permit will be required with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers due
to impacts to jurisdictional wetlands and surface waters. A Section 404 Water Quality
Certification will be required by the NC Department of Environmental and Natural
Resources. •
5

VI. COORDINATION AND COMMENTS
A. Circulation of Environmental Assessment
The NCDOT approved the EA on August 22, 2003 and the FHWA approved the
EA on August 29, 2003. The approved EA 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
Appendix A of this document. Responses to substantial comments are noted in Section B.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
* U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
* U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
* Federal Emergency Management Agency
State Clearinghouse
* N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources
* N.C. Division of Environmental Health
* N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission
* N.C. Division of Water Quality
N.C. Division of Parks and Recreation
N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries
City of Rocky Mount
B. Comments Received on the Environmental Assessment
1. United States Environmental Protection A�ency
Comment: "EPA has no environmental concerns regarding the project's overall purpose ,,
and need and the alternatives considered as outlined in the EA." .
Response: Comment noted.
Comment: "A summary is contained in the beginning of the EA and addresses
environmental effects of the project on Page ii, Section F. A brief table of
the impacts from the proposed project would be helpful to the reader."
Response: Please see Section N of this document for the above referenced table.
Comment: "According to the EA, approximately 0.16 acres of wetlands will be
impacted by Alternative A. Alternative B would result in a. net loss of 0
acres of wetlands. No compensatory mitigation is being required by
permitting agencies. NCDOT indicates that minimization activities have
been considered and that the lengthening of the replacement bridge over
Stoney Creek from 160 feet to 180 feet has helped."
C�

Response: The bridge over Stoney Creek will actually be lengthened from 180 feet to
250 feet in order to minimize impacts to the floodplain.
Comment: "Stream impacts for both Alternatives A and B are a total of 80 linear feet
and include the lengthening of culverts over the unnamed tributary (UT) to
Stoney Creek and the widening of Stoney Creek."
Response: Comment noted.
Comment: "Page 22 of the EA addresses burning as the main option for the debris
generated during clearing and grubbing operations. EPA prefers recycling
methods, such as shredding and mulching, and making such materials
available to the public for free. Burning is EPA's least preferred option."
Response: Comment noted.
Comment: "Page 25 of the EA appears to have missing words in the 2°d paragraph of
Section e, Traffic Noise and Contour. There are 8 businesses and 15
residences which will have noise level increases under the No Build
Alternative (8 receptor increases would be substantial). The average
increase to these 23 receptors is 7 to 8 dBA. The EA (page 25) indicates
that the maximum predicted noise level increase is +11 dBA. The
maximum number of substantial impacts (from the Build Alternative) is 21
receptors. EPA was unable to identify which of the 21 receptors in
Appendix C, Table N6, will receive substantial noise impacts from the
project."
Response: All impacts are substantial except receivers # 12, 13 and 19. This data
comes from the Traffic Noise and Air Quality report dated August 20, 1999.
Please refer to Table N4 in that report to verify this data. These findings are
based on the old Noise Policy.
Comment: "EPA acknowledges that Alternative B has 1.77 acres of forest land impacts
and Alternative A has 1.86 acres."
Response: Comment noted.
Comment: "It would be helpful to EPA to identify what percentage of each soil (type)
series is located within the proposed right of way (Page 30 of the EA).
Response: According to the Natural Resource Conservation Service Soil Survey for
Nash County, the breakdown of soil series present in the proposed right of
way is as follows:
Udorthents, loamy 17°Io .
Meggett loam, frequently flooded � 3%
Bibb loam, frequently flooded 6%
7

Altavista sandy loam, 0 to 3% slopes, rarely flooded 47%
Goldsboro fine sandy loam, 0 to 2% slopes 27%
Comment: "It is unclear from reviewing the EA when the last actual field survey for the ,�
Dwarf wedge mussel (Alasmidonta heterodon) was performed. Page 41 of
the EA indicates that a visual and tactile search in Stoney Creek was -
performed for 2 man-hours. _.
Response: Mussels and other aquatic life were surveyed using tactile and visual
techniques by NCDOT biologists on July 23, 1999.
2. United States Fish and Wildlife Service
Comment: "Alternative A would widen the bridge on the west side, while Alternative B
would widen the bridge on the east side. Alternative B is the preferred
alternative due to its zero impacts on wetlands (as opposed to 0.16 acres for
Alternative A). The Service supports the preferred alternative. Both
alternatives have minimal impacts to streams (40 linear feet impact each to
Stoney Creek and Unnamed Tributary to Stoney Creek)."
Response: Comment noted.
Comment: "Almost all of the project will occur in a suburban and residential
environment with minimal fish and wildlife habitat available. The only
natural terrestrial community within the project area is the forested area in
the vicinity of Stoney Creek. Alternative B would avoid all impacts to the
bottomland hardwood forest along Stoney Creek, but would impact up to
1.77 acres of mixed pine hardwood forest. However, the impacts to forest
habitat will occur in previously fragmented forest in which the terrestrial
� habitat value has already been degraded by adjacent development. For this
reason, the Service generally prefers widening existing roads to constructing
new ones."
Response: Comment noted.
Comment: "There are three federally endangered species listed for Nash County: red-
cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis), dwarf wedgemussel
(Alasmidonta heterodon) and Tar spinymussel (Elliptio steinstansana). The
EA renders a"No Effect" conclusion for each of these three species. Due to
the lack of habitat, the Service concurs with the "No Effect" conclusion for
the red-cockaded woodpecker. However, the Service does not concur with
the "No Effect" conclusion for the dwarf wedgemussel and the Tar
spinymussel. The EA states that mussel surveys were conducted on July 23,
1999. These surveys are inadequate for two reasons. Firstly, the surveys
are now more than four years old. New surveys should be performed.
Secondly, the surveys only extended 200 feet below the bridge crossing of
8

Stoney Creek. 'The EA states that the stream reach within the construction
limits does not provide habitat for the two mussel species. However, since
stream impacts can affect mussels for a considerable distance downstream
and upstream, simply surveying within the project footprint is inadequate.
A new mussel survey, which extends at least 100 meters upstream and 400
meters downstream of the bridge crossing, should be conducted. Please note
that dwarf wedgemussel has been known to occur in Stoney Creek several
miles upstream of the project site."
Response: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife service has since concurred with the "No Effect"
conclusion on the dwarf wedgemussel and the Tar spinymussel via an email
from Gary Jordan dated 1/3/06 and has determined that no further mussel
surveys need to be performed.
3. NC Denartment of Environmental and Natural Resources
Comment: "Any open burning associated with subject proposal must be in compliance
with 15 A NCAC (2Q.0100, 2Q.0300, 2H.0600)."
Response: Comment noted.
Comment: "Demolition or renovations of structures containing asbestos material must
be in compliance with 15 A NCAC 2.1110(a)(1) which requires notification
and removal prior to demolition. Contact Asbestos Control Group 919-733-
0820."
Response: Comment noted.
Comment: "Sediment and erosion control must be addressed per NCDOT's approved
' program for all land-disturbing activities proposed. Particular attention
must be given to design and installation of adequate perimeter sediment
trapping devices as well as stable stormwater conveyances and outlets."
Response: Comment noted.
4. NC Division of Environmental Health
Comment: "Relocation of water mains must be approved by DENR's Public Water
Supply Section."
Response: Comment noted.

5. NC Wildlife Itesources Commission
Comment: "NCWRC supports the NCDOT preferred Alternative B. This alternative . -
will shift the bridge over Stoney Creek to the east, avoiding any wetland
impacts. The project will cross Stoney Creek and an unnamed tributary to
Stoney Creek."
Response: Commented noted.
Comment: "Records indicate mussel surveys were conducted for these sites in July of
1999. These surveys are in excess of two years old; therefore, new mussel
surveys should be conducted."
Response: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife service has since concurred with the "No Effect"
conclusion on the dwarf wedgemussel and the Tar spinymussel via an email
from Gary Jordan dated 1/3/06 and has determined that no further mussel
surveys need to be performed.
Comment: "Nash County has two federally endangered mussels listed: dwarf
wedgemussel (Alasmidonta heterodon) and Tar spinymussel (Elliptio
steinstansana). Our records also indicate known occurrences of two state
endangered mussels in close proximity to the project: yellow lampmussel
(Lampsilis cariosa) and yellow lance (Elliptio lanceolota). It should also be
noted in Table 11 that yellow lampmussel (Lampsilis cariosa) and yellow
lance (Elliptio lanceolota) are listed as state T/PE. Both of these species are
currently listed as state endangered. NCDOT should conduct a new mussel
survey extending 100 meters upstream and 400 meters downstream of the
proposed crossing."
Response: Both the yellow lampmussel and the yellow lance are now listed as Federal
Species of Concern. Gary Jordan of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) stated in an email dated 1/3/06 to NCDOT that new mussel
surveys do not need to be performed since the USFWS is in concurrence
with the "No Effect" conclusion for the dwarf wedgemussel and the Tar
spinymussel.
6. NC Division of Water Qualitv
Comment: "The document does not include any anticipated impacts to protected Tar-
Pamlico River Riparian Buffers. Please provide updated data that indicates
the anticipated impacts to these resources."
Response: According to the Tar-Pamlico River Riparian Buffer Rules, this project will
have 4800 square feet (0.11 acres) of Zone 1 impacts and 3200 square feet
(0.07 acres) of Zone 2 impacts.
10

Comment: "As proposed, the project requires the replacement of an existing bridge. Is
an onsite detour for the project proposed? If so, are the impacts associated
with the onsite detour included in the impacts listed in the EA? The impacts
should include those to the streams, wetlands, and riparian buffers."
Response: The cunent design allows for staged construction of the bridge, thereby
maintaining existing traffic onsite. No detour bridge is anticipated.
- Comment: "The document recommends Alternative B as the preferred alternative.
However, no discussion that explains the rationale for the decision is
included. Please provide a discussion that details the rationale used to make
the recommended decision. It should include a discussion on the anticipated
impacts to both the natural and human environment."
Response: As the EA mentioned, fewer wetlands will be impacted by Alternative B
(see page 39 of the EA).
Comment: "The project impacts Stoney Creek and tributaries to Stoney Creek. Stoney
Creek is included as a 303(d) listed surface water for impairment due to
� sediment. As such, the project will need to be designed to discharge
stormwater as diffuse flow through riparian buffers at non-erosive
velocities. This requirement will also bring the project in compliance with
the Tar-Pamlico River Riparian Buffer Rules."
Response: These comments will be addressed after the design phase of the project has
been completed.
Comment: "Since Stoney Creek is included on the 303(d) list, NCDOT will need to
strictly adhere to sediment and erosion control Best Management Practices
(BMPs) for sensitive waters entitled "Design Standards in Sensitive
Watersheds" (15A NCAC 04B.0024) throughout the design and
construction of the project."
Response: On the 2006 final 303(d) list Stoney Creek is included for Impaired
Biological Integrity, but no potential source(s) are given. Since
sedimentation is not listed as a cause, NCDOT does not agree that this
qualifies Stoney Creek for the Design Standards in Sensitive Watersheds.
However, since this project is in the Tar-Pamlico River Basin, sedimentation
and erosion control measures shall adhere to the Design Standards in
Sensitive Watersheds [15A NCAC 04B.0124 (b)-(e)].
Comment: "At this time, the NCDWQ agrees with the document's assessment that the
project will not result in increased secondary and cumulative impacts. The
, reasons for this assessment are: 1) that the project is a widening alternative,
and 2) the project is located in an existing urban landscape with established
infrastructure. The addition of two lanes to the existing road is not likely to
stimulate any additional development activity than what would already
11

occur. As such, and even though a 303(d) listed stream is located along the
project, a quantitative analysis of secondary and cumulative impacts is not
required. However, a qualitative assessment consistent with the criteria
agreed to by DWQ will be a required aspect of the application for a 401
Water Quality Certification."
Response: This will be addressed as part of the permit.
Comment: "After the selection of the preferred alternative and prior to an issuance of
the 401 Water Quality Certification, the NCDOT is respectfully reminded
that they will need to demonstrate the avoidance and minimization of
impacts to wetlands (and streams) to the maximum extent practical. Based
on the impacts described in the document, wetland mitigation may be
required for this project. Should the impacts to jurisdictional wetlands
exceed 1.0 acres, mitigation may be required in accordance with NCDWQ
Wetland Rules { 15A NCAC 2H.0506(h)(2)}."
Response: Comment noted.
Comment: "In accordance with the NCDWQ Wetlands Rules { 15A NCAC
2H.0506(b)(6)}, mitigation will be required for ,impacts greater than 150
linear feet to any single perennial stream. In the event that mitigation is
required, the mitigation plan should be designed to replace appropriate.lost
functions and values. In accordance with the NCDWQ Wetlands Rules
. { 15A NCAC 2H.0506(h)(3) }, the Wetland Restoration Program may be
available for use as stream mitigation."
Response: Comment noted.
Comment: "Please be advised that culverts should be countersunk to allow unimpeded
passage by fish and other aquatic organisms. Moreover, in areas where high
quality wetlands or streams are impacted, a bridge may prove preferable. —
When applicable, DOT should not install the bridge bents in the creek, to the
- maximum extent practicable."
Response: These comments will be addressed during the design phase of the project.
Comment: "Sediment and erosion control measures should not be placed in wetlands."
Response: Comment noted.
Comment: "Borrow/waste areas should avoid wetlands to the maximum extent
practicable. Impacts to wetlands in borrow/waste areas could precipitate
compensatory mitigation." ,
Response: Comment noted.
12

1
Comment: "The 401 Water Quality Certification application will need to speciiically
address the proposed methods for stormwater management.. More
specifically, stormwater should not be permitted to discharge directly into
the creek. All stormwater discharges shall be directed to discharge as
diffuse flow through riparian buffers at non-erosive velocities."
Response: These comments will be addressed during the design phase of the project.
Comment: "Future documentation should include an itemized listing of the proposed
wetland and stream impacts with conesponding mapping."
Response: Comment noted. See Figure 2.
Comment: "Based on the information presented in this document, the magnitude of
impacts to wetlands and streams will require an Individual Permit
application to the Corps of Engineers and corresponding 401 Water Quality
Certification. Please be advised that a 401 Water Quality Certification
requires satisfactory protection of water quality to ensure that water quality
standards are met and no wetland or stream uses are lost. Final permit
authorization will require the submittal of a formal application by the
NCDOT and written concurrence from the NCDWQ. Please be aware that
any approval will be contingent upon appropriate avoidance and
minimization of wetland and stream impacts to the maximum extent
practical, the development of an acceptable stormwater management plan,
and the inclusion of appropriate mitigation plans where appropriate."
Response: Comment noted.
C. Additional Coordination with FEMA
Due to the presence of several properties adjacent to the project site that were
acquired as part of the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Hazard
Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP), this project had been delayed from its original
schedule. This project was originally slated to begin right of way acquisition in fiscal
year 2002 and construction in iiscal year 2004.
After extensive coordination with FEMA, consent was given to amend the deed
restrictions and allow NCDOT to widen the road onto the properties in question, with
several stipulations. The requirements set by FEMA on the use of the HMGP properties
are as follows:
� The amendment of the deed restrictions will apply only to the nine parcels
(including the two, two-parcel tracts) that will be directly affected by
construction of the proposed highway improvements.
13

• The amendment of the deed restrictions will apply only to land directly �
under the footprint of the road. The City of Rocky Mount will retain title
to the land and must maintain all of the HMGP acquired property -
consistent with 44 CFR Section 206.434(e) and the recorded open space
land use restrictions, as amended. The restriction of the deed-restricted ,
land is in perpetuity.
• The proposed road must comply with Federal, State, and local
environmental and floodplain management requirements, including FEMA
regulations implementing Executive Orders (EO) 11988, 11990, and
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.
• Changes in the scope of the project and/or alignment of the proposed
highway improvements that will affect other properties acquired with
FEMA grant funds will require prior approval by the agreement
signatories from FEMA, State, and the City. Any changes made without
prior approval will void this approval and amendments to deed
restrictions.
• This detertnination is based on the road as proposed to date and may not �,_
be relied upon in the event of design changes with respect to the project
footprint on the HMGP restricted parcels; the City may request
reconsideration by FEMA in such cases.
D. Public Involvement
In accordance with 23 USC 128, the NCDOT certifies that a public hearing of the
subject project has been held and the social, economic and environmental impacts,
consistency with local community planning goals and objectives, and comments from
individuals have been considered in the selection of the preferred alternative.
A combined informal Public Hearing was held on September 27, 2007 at
Winstead Avenue Elementary School in Rocky Mount, NC. Approximately 28 people
were present for the hearing, including NCDOT personnel.
The recommended alternative, Alternative B, was presented for comments at the
hearing. A five-lane curb and gutter facility with 12-foot travel lanes was presented as the
typical section for the entire project. Since this was an informal hearing, no formal
transcript was prepared. A summary of the comments made during and following the
hearing can be found below.
14

�
E. Comments Made Durin� and Followin� the Public Hearin�
Several comments were received both during and after the hearing. These comments
, are listed below:
Comment: The City of Rocky Mount recommended that NCDOT fully acquire several
properties that will be significantly impacted by the project and as a result,
out of compliance with the City's Land Development Code.
Response: The NCDOT Right of Way Branch will consider this request once right of
way acquisition is underway.
Comment: A bus turnout and pedestrian crossing lights were requested on Country
Club Road near Covenant Homes to service the needs of the residents in that
area.
Response: NCDOT will revise the design to include a bus turnout on southbound
Country Club Road near Covenant Homes. However, after reviewing traffic
counts provided by the City of Rocky Mount, it was determined that there
are not enough pedestrians to warrant pedestrian signals at this location.
Comment: Concern was expressed about the elimination of parking at the Country Club
Square Condominiums and how this would affect the businesses at that
location. �
Response: The NCDOT Right of Way Branch will address this issue during the right of
way acquisition phase.
15

t
VII. REVISIONS TO EIVVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
A. Desi�n Changes
Based on the agencies' comments on the Environmental Assessment and the
comments received from the Public Hearing, two design changes will be made for this
project. The first design change is the increased bridge length over Stoney Creek. The
design of the proposed Stoney Creek bridge has been increased from 180 feet to 250 feet
in length per recommendations from NCDOT's Hydraulics Unit. By lengthening the
bridge, NCDOT will maintain a No Rise condition for the 100-year floodplain of Stoney
Creek.
After reviewing comments received from the Public Hearing requesting a bus
turnout on Country Club Road, NCDOT has deternuned that it is feasible to add this to
the project scope. The Golden East bus route follows Country Club Road and has a
major sfop at Covenant Homes, midway between Hunter Hill Road and Jeffreys Road.
Adding a bus turnout to Country Club Road in this area would reduce traffic congestion
due to bus service and also improve safety for the bus passengers as they get on and off
the bus.
B. Section 4(f1 Propertv
Section 4(fl of the US Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended,
specifies that publicly owned land from a public park, recreation area, wildlife and
waterfowl refuge, and all historic sites of national, state, and local significance may be
used for federal projects only if there is no feasible and prudent alternative to the use of
such land and the project includes all possible planning to minimize harm to 4(fl lands
resulting from such use.
The Country Club Paddle Trail Access site was not previously listed in the
Environmental Assessment (dated August 2003) as a Section 4(fl resource because it was
not in existence at that time. This site is now part of the Tar River Paddle Trail, a 55 mile
length of public access trail system. It is owned and maintained by the City of Rocky
Mount and is located on one of the aforementioned FEMA buyout properties. The
original purchase of the property was funded via a Division of Water Quality grant,
although the actual construction of the access steps was performed by a local Boy Scout
as a service project.
Under the current alternative, the Country Club Paddle Trail Access site will be ,
encroached on by the proposed right of way for Country Club Road and will experience a
temporary loss of access during construction as a result of the widening of the bridge and '
the existing roadway. The area of impact will be approximately 3400 square feet, which
is about five (5) percent of the total site area. Due to the proposed guardrail after the
bridge crossing, access to the paddle trail site will be shifted north of its existing location.
As requested by the City of Rocky Mount (see letter in Appendix B), NCDOT will
purchase fifteen feet of additional right of way on an adjacent property to cieate a twenty �
16

t
foot wide gravel access road to the paddle trail access site. This access road will also
have a paved driveway turnout onto Country Club Road.
Section 6009(a) of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation
Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) amended existing Section 4(�
legislation to simplify the processing and approval of projects that have only de minimis
impacts on lands protected by Section 4(fl. This revision provides that if a transportation
use of Section 4(fl property results in a de minimis impact on the property, an analysis of
avoidance alternatives is not required and the Section 4( fl evaluation process is complete.
NCDOT and FHWA have determined that the proposed use of the land from the
Country Club Paddle Trail Access site will be considered a de minimis impact because
the highway improvements will only have a small impact to the paddle trail site and will
not permanently inhibit the site's function.
C. Traffic Noise & Air Qualiiv Analvsis
1. Traffic Noise
The Traff'ic Noise Analysis for this project, dated August 20, 1999, was
performed in accordance with the "old" NCDOT Traffic Noise Abatement Policy. Noise
analyses on all projects for which the final environmental document is signed after
September 2, 2004 must comply with the "new" NCDOT Traffic Noise Abatement
Policy, effective on that date.
The 1999 analysis included the use of STAMINA and OPTIMA trafiic noise
modeling software. The Code of Federal Regulations Chapter 23 Part 772 (23 CFR 772)
requires that the FHWA Traffic Noise Model (FHWA TNM), or any other model
determined by the FHWA to be consistent with the methodology of the FHWA TNM,
must be used for highway traffic analyses begun more than six months after the April 14,
2004 FHWA TNM 2.5 guidance memorandum. Based upon these considerations, a
revised Trafiic Noise Analysis is being prepared for this project, in accordance with the
current NCDOT Traffic Noise Abatement Policy and using TNM 2.5 software.
2. Air Qualitv
The existing Air Quality Analysis for this project, dated August 20, 1998, does
not address Mobile Source Air Toxics (MSATs). All environmental documents signed
more than six months after the February 3, 2006 FHWA MSAT guidance memorandum
must include MSAT information. Additionally, the existing analysis does not include a
carbon monoxide (CO) microscale analysis, which is now necessary for projects in CO
attainment counties, such as Nash County. The existing Air Quality Analysis found in the
Environmental Assessment for this project also contains outdated conformity
information, which must be conected.
17

Based upon these considerations, a revised Air Quality Analysis is needed for U-
3331. The Traffic Noise & Air Quality Group will provide the revised analysis for
inclusion in the project planning file. �
a. Mobile Source Air Toxics (MSATs)
Recently, concerns for air toxics impacts are more frequent on transportation
projects during the NEPA process. Transportation agencies are increasingly expected by
the public and other agencies to address MSAT impacts in their environmental
documents as the science emerges. Mobile Source Air Toxics (MSATs) analysis is a
continuing area of research where, while much work has been done to assess �the overall
health risk of air toxics, many questions remain unanswered. In particular, the tools and
techniques for assessing project-specific health impacts from MSATs are limited. These
limitations impede FHWA's ability to evaluate how mobile source health risks should
factor into project-level decision-making under the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA). Also, EPA has not established regulatory concentration targets for the six
relevant MSAT pollutants appropriate for use in the project development process. FHWA
has several research projects underway to more clearly define potential risks from MSAT
emissions associated with transportation projects. While this research is ongoing, FHWA
requires each NEPA document to qualitatively address MSATs and their relationship to
the specific highway project through� a tiered approach. A qualitative Tier 2 analysis of
MSATs for this project appears in its entirety in the Traffic Noise & Air Quality Report.
A copy of this report is available on the fourth floor of the Transportation Building, 1
South Wilmington Street, Raleigh.
:

VIII. BASIS FOR FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Based upon a study of the impacts of the proposed project as documented in the
EA, and upon receiving comments from federal, state, and local agencies and the general
public, it is the finding of the FHWA and the NCDOT that this project will not have a
significant adverse impact upon the human or natural environment. The project is not
controversial from an environmental standpoint. No significant impacts to natural, social,
ecological, cultural, or scenic resources are expected. The proposed project is consistent
with local plans and will not disrupt any communities. The project has been extensively
coordinated with federal, state, and local agencies. In view of the above evaluation, it has
been determined that a FONSI is applicable afor this project. Therefore, neither an
Environmental Impact Statement nor further environmental analysis is required.
The following persons may be contacted for additional information regarding this
proposal:
Mr. John F. Sullivan, III, P.E.
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
310 New Bern Avenue
Suite 410
Raleigh, NC 27601-1418
[phone]
Mr. Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
[phone]
KOG/kog
19

Legend
Roadway
Microstation Renderer
/�/ Edge of Pavemenl
% `�.;' Proposed Curb and Guuer
Lane Lines
Lane Arrows
: `•. / Existing Curb antl Gutfer
� \ / Ezisting Edge of Pavemem
Proposed Concrete Sidewa!'�.��.
,' <� � Monolilhlc Island
�_ Li proposed Bridge
�� --- Creeks, Streams and Rivers
. � Delineated Wetlands
PonAs.Lakes
0
�
��Vel���� j I �T 9`.
>i.1'
�r.:���� ; !' ,��
' 'lY � .� y �ei y�
�, fi �, � �. � � � . R.l�,l
'F `k" ; ,,
�/ ~
'` i �.
r� > �°� �,,��� : . �.
`�'•... �1�'s'ir.%^ .\ � i-� �x �.'.\F�.•I�
�� Y' � � i
'fi.� ��*,Y�. . � ���� �.., A•, . � , 1 � � �
1. � ��� � •'�'
-�� t t�'� ���' . � � o � � ' �.�
� � / � � � �� , 1
� �V . y/ i.
y � �c i.i
,� 1 .��� . . • • ' , .�� �� _..
. �
�
� �,._.�
, ;�
� v' • l � � ��� � �
^/ ^ 1 4�y�
O � �� �`
�ii R" a //w♦
9 � ,3 � . R � / . -.�_�..
^ ��,.�_ �� `F/ / �
' ' C / �
1 //�'
f;� ♦ � l�', r //
P�,:l ' 'e 1�' �e i :�� / ., � ,ry�
� �'Y-` . � = � � � r�,.i J�Y
' � . , . i, � /� � �
. � ' � 4 � �6 ��
.� F Y'
..`� ' `t 'iti .': � �' 1 '_..i .� � �� � �.��:� (\� i
>,
�-� <<<
�-� ;, �
.r . � � , w � a . � .� �� r �.r..,t'�� - . �.
.df
�`���� �i
. ,� .
f
/ .l
�r,� �"•
____.,.. -,
t i
/ . �'�'� tn .�l � y A ,: �l � ' � , .. � � �'1 t �f� inr %�� ���
� r�� � �� r � f h �'s'y fi� y,s�,,,,d. 'N'� ,� .
/ k�� y? i y ? o/ ! �37" �i
y, 'i d.f ,cY� fir r r p �'+�a
. • . � .iiit � � ��� �� �i• g_';�� ��� F��{�'���
��r. � � _,� ,�,��
a� ,.� � ,�• /�,�;�}
_ � . s . ,+, . 7rz.,Sl
A � y
s�
y J � .5 � � .. ,w . ' .�r �� ��i�� i
_f7,I � � �' ,.A � � J,�.�,'
r
:' i
#��', /\ � � � � � S P
� ♦/�� i.. . � ) ., � r Ft.If � 1
1. � � �iJ� � _ �"!'o __,. �y5_^.rb �F-�d,it '.�_a��"
�-�
M
v,
-� �'�w �,
� ,�_�
`,:. P:
2
U
i- 6
W O m
2
� Qy
a �W�
ooa�z
3aa
x �
J � 2 j ~
Q vaj�OrL
UZ2VZ
=QOWO
H�y-��
OLL>_�Z
ZOoaw
w
>
a
z
�
wa
Q�
W Q
� �
w W
�Q
�
0
U
W
�
Z�
��:ounty
, NASH
� niv. TIP#
4 U-3331
r✓BS:
34927.1.1
Date
FEBRUARY2008
Figure
L
SHEET 1 OF 3

0
�
E�
��- � � , ' � ��' _� ,� -� r1, 1 ,_ ^` ' -� ' '� �� " 1 >'� � -� �'" � �'�, �, '� �'� ✓--� r � � ^, r.--� � , %� � ,". ' - i f -. {,-"1 � `ti r�` r�, � ;� l
_ _ 1 : �. / � /� , _ � �. \f \� ` �_ 1 - _ . _ . _ . . . . • \,_ � ._ � . , � � _ _ �_ _/ ^ � ., � � _

- �. . ._ .
. .. s; � , ' _ -.�" . . _ � 'i'�, .. _q r � � . -T-'__ ��'R... . _ . _ _ _,T._ _ —.._� . .. ._ --;t"-'r . . �_� -_4
`J dt
Legend ' '�r � ' �, y � ,� r �` � sS r� � ia - �r � ..w� ��/I 7' ? i r #yh yt � ; ` '
� 1 � 1��` • . � •i f�� ��� •;q r ' �� �,� 1 �1�� �T' ` . �� � v� ���� 1 �
Roadway ' � � r , ' : ,,, �i'` '�- - _
"� ,
Microstation Renderer _ ' 1 .,' e� f�� � _ '�: '` � t ,�i � ' � �'� '�[ � , ''* j` 1 =, � ;
' t,� ��N ' yq; .�` ... r � �� � I f�'t�5'}i} .c ''F v�v�e��
/�/ Edge of Pavement � � ' .�`' � ��1 .� a,`"�' . � ,.j� �' ? tR : ,;b �' i, i S�. ; '� '
����; � Pro osetl Curb and Gulle� ��i��^� ' 1 .t �.r �+. � � � ' .�7[.7'!d � � � t ' � .�; � �� � ��� ..� ,':�, -�.� �..� 2
P (�,� !f� ��� ��;� t4c . 4. '� :.� � V
, s���� ;: i1 � � .�, � �,l H�'! Y � '�"�� ' ' .. �. . � . ��� .� Z
LaneLines � " .fy� i,i» � Y .c�`�-� �"` � - - .'� "���'' 1- ¢
, i F�.., i-�,: - 7 p� '��"< �?0� `g� m :! �:o: . •,�- , l� ' Z K
Lane Arrows � � ,�' + - r �+ '� � �.. ,,��,g � � � ` ' ' � w p Oo
�* � � 47 a ,• .. ' r � �
� `�. ' Existing Curb and Guttzr '�� ' � � � �4 :'2"�4 �� '�i .. ' j, �./�':, � � . 'k' �� r ^� �'"� � r � n � El , � .t�F�,` K F �
i\/ExistingEdgeofPavemen; . ���� �"��,.�k��'�� f�. �' � �Fs �..�,� . � `� s i�;'y,-.�� �lxY�� �.�„ ;�� ��� .,������+ wZ�Wa
Proposed Concrele Sidewr:�.; ! ..� '� � � �.F�. � A .�� ..n{�!, ��`,�. ,� 1 � �:�' i �1� _ _ .�r .. .,�'°,� ';'�j o O � a Q
1 '� .4�3 f_• � . .� '� ,� \ .� ; � � t ' �!1 �� . � � ( �. t' a Q S � J
� Monolithiclsland � j f , .. . . .f �.,. �. � � . . " .,�� H C� W 6
Proposed aridge � * �! i. � ,� ✓ ` �� �, 7 � ' ,� �., . , .��' ��� � ' �e' ` � a u=. o w
_ • .
. , � , .
� � - - Creeks, Streams and Rivec; ( �•+ ' ' c- + J� f�,K� � � �� - � � O • ' � � �' rn
��..
� , y � �.. 'r%i' - 5 ,;�.. ¢ O �
.., r�.( � .:�, , � I�. , i'-� �':�- ���� ��-, �,� , '��:a, L..� - � . v��, U2zF'z
Delineatetl Wetlands � �� "r ��~ ' � '� �'� `!,' i �� " �7d _ _ Q O U O
. �, . '� . � � �
� � �y. � i `��� � � � A �`e + ' �1 _ .� . �, � E . FI- � N � K
� ,.,.,,, � F..� �,:� �- i � � �. � '7W` �„�+?" *, � '� , `�d ,�„� 4 .:L�� � e. - o LL > o >
�f /' .. � � ,. ., �/t � _ � . i - a �� ��� � z
� -r � � � ) . � � I, 4.� ,�r ���,�y +$, r '� � •I% °" •��` ./rEw � ' . }l I - . �� P► M Z O o a w
� r //t " ✓�In . i *!-� � �`
�,1 ,y `�f !�� � .f ."✓ , x.., .� . b} A' _ i�+f{• rT",.. M � .F k.
��{�� Y� � � ��i � ���: i r. � } � ' � :.,� 'i .' � � � _ ,,���� -� � . . i � _ .. : V _�`�'i � IJ.�
Sn. . 7'j . 4 c � - � ✓, ' ' �/
'!"� �� r :'�I ...1 �� 1'� ."{+da Y r,� �!` . �• ,'t( .
j k��fr '� `$12' �/ 7�r - y° f_ 9 `i "���.:a� t' �.y . . .\ . �
r �..( 1 .�. �. ' l." ' �S . .� . � H
.. .� �,r ' i !.�° .,� � A'�. i!i' �' ! . .� �' � � w y,;{„�-'t�` . ` ��.,r —��— l - --, � . � � ��� � ` � ��1 .+ Z �
,� y��yj{ Y �Y
(�rn57 �� j'� ! ? �s � ✓, .t'r. ` y, Ki., ��D s� .� � I � M
� �� � � - - 'y „h � _. `_ .... ' . �— �
; +,� .�- �a y�� ��� �, F,� �����akn� � � •..� � a � U a M
�,,� �, a; � s � � ,�. �} . t� � ,r � � Q
t� ��.'� .�i� ya 1F. /` . . � . � f!. j�i:. � %�4� ^ �� ��-�� �a�.�S h.. � i4j 1.'W i �� •��1� � 'r�, ,t �� 4'�� Q � � r
.f .� �°F ��r• :I r,� ' ~ - ^,'L! � � . �...'� �y' � ,� . . -. , . � J O U
� �s�ry ? ��' y�: sT, � ..� � Y �:.,, , -�� :;' �`� , � `� � n'' w a = �
>�, � ^ .. �� � T Y. ���� `.� zYl' . . �� . _ " _ ' ' _ � � (� �.
�I �`i'Y �,� .,.k �' 1 '' . � �..i/ ��..' (� � �- ' � .. - - ZW
, ��°i . �1� ' ^ � — . _ /:� ai - . " , - . W Q Z d
, x, .� /�` Y ! VT �,i ;,� ' �%E., � .'r``s � a� � � . r - �!, :'!0. i+: ,�''�. � {+'1, � a
. � � �'�' � �.. i j I ,,.` ,�-' ." �: �� � �,� ;... �.�„"", �; ' � #� e � �
�s�-f�' +� � ..�� f - � �� � i1l _ a.:r,� ;:` . ��; �: ' �� : � o
' ,::
�x � . e,�.yrh � ;r .. `R _: : � � .� .�� ° r�� q
-'.Sf� .� y,� / - � P �i--w � . .
.: � .' ry' � . -R � w,. �� I.. '. ' , 1 }r . '
� r. / �
_ . .. �
�-�
s ; ..i
_
� �' : _ � —_ .� �� �.�— 1,, ' ' ' + It- f !
r. � ,;�o. � �, ..� � .. � I I r W
� . �� .r .. - ,
�
� ' - -
. . .� �. r�.� ��i . `� ia ,� ,;=, .r � �
t=��, '� � • • . - ,'I�
- -- , �i� �p'�' i _� . � Nl�
'��� .o. � ��� .�7 ..',fi'j � � P1g d ,J',. ��r j Fito,� �: � �S t �I
¢,/,n s F .�,"J � � .�' A �k- 6� r�, . '� i_.'-- • 'Kh11. ,�� "�..� �
��.,�j, . �' � .4[ 1-p., s a.i
•�F�' y e7���� � � � ��'� � � I �. �� '4Q iK � .. . . . �
y. _ .,. �t' P " .'a :.'� ' ' -
�^r. ': :'.� _ �. �_� . . ,.. .I . . � /�.. � ! � � �, ! � ��._ ; � ` /i '� � � .
i
�p C' f Y 'w�. �'-I � .i�. y� � '� � � '� i+'t+
�`:v ����,'.�.,+�..�x.-�.,r'�.- �'F*� � t �, � I ` . � ,� � � ,: � .
�� � 0. i�7�� • " '�V t A � � q�l�T-, ��, � . I uumvNASH
. '
� —,� ;, .+i . ;, (
��!�� � �� f "� �;'�'�' �� }� �; r'i. ',�? .3' � I
-:Y , � .. � , �_ 6 i � � . v TIP#
�'�,,�.: t �- � 4 • a � � �r. +� '� � � �',F�' �` __— � * � r �,�' �I � i 4 U-3331
d. -?r--`--: �iP } 64 'x , ��+. �� ��Y 1 . I� 9��r. - �I '� �!t $ ,� �x`1 � � ,� i v�s34927.1.1
� ,:. � +F �. � �\ . -'� A ■ ��i ' � a �i:i, '��. {"`",
.,r t,��� F'� #`'.`. . . � ��� �� .� . �l1��T,�, a i �a � ���' �': a - . ac . ' I.iale�.
� � _ • � � ��a�'� � FEBRUARY2008
`i _ � : � � �•'1 '^�'. � � 4 "8 .WS".^�r .:�� .:jY
� >• ... . �; I �.7 d: �"0. "� ;1 ,,, � � �;.
' 0 100' 200 400 `''t�` ' ' j ��1 4 4 �. �' ` ` �,� _ � � Figure
e23� - . . - '� . � °.wi I. �� � . .' .- �� �
I� � � �
,r ���, � ' � ' ��:.P - , .�: r� �
Feei � �� s�" . � . �-;;'��. r'� ��� ,:r � � J� SHEET 2 OF 3
.q
., .
. _ � . ,. �
� , . ,
.'_' --___ . �.�_., r`-- _ -. ' � - -:. _
BY:J.TORTORELLA �� `-- '•-- '- -.. •. .' __ _._ __ _. _� --__—.� ___ _� _

�
� � � � , � � "1 V ✓��i � �\ 1 ���1 �� �� " �''\ �'1 �'v _` , �'t ,�� r'�� Y—� /` , i � �'1 � � 1 � �` / �� � �`� t�� `� ���, ��
� � � � - , -- � - " _ l _ -- � ��— ) i �. ) �./ � �� �� ' � � _ � � � ��J � J L1 �� ' - - , % _. � ._ � �J� L � J �� ' _ � ' _ � J _ , o � ' � � . /

—� _a.. ;
'�Fj � �•�.:.
, _ s � �,, ,
r d :�� �
�1����� ,� � ,� �. I .' " 's !," �k;� •yp'a.J..11pkt �. f,
K� ( ,� .> `Sl•4 x� � r. F
-} .. . 3 ! r - ��1` < <✓�a S ' a r a, .
�IL . 0 �t 1E. ...�� � ': . � j � a }p� �� y
s'�'� �s�.. y - - �(�'�� , � +. '`r� `e ..' ��R` 2..:�4' d � �s ° ��'
�' �f
�i' C ..., n
�� i = � c
� ,��� �!�� __ � �' I.1 .�1, .`� � � .. '�b}.
� �� _ f
,� , � . ��: ,. . ., P: s
e � �'� �• y�'+�'r ' i ' . : '� 4u f ':r `
i�, �� C� �' Y - ti�., f �I _ :�1` f°� � � ', t � r� �
�.d �! •i!,� ��� �r� �. ;e. . 97 . jj'�, . - �.± �� �dy � � � �, 1 .
19H 7 � Wv
f� �" ,M'rt � .. � � � $�
�� ,' '+� , , r. - � .r� �
�t , � � �,' ttN , . , t3t sra, � +yra3 � r�n. � " ;4
xe � ,. `�p _ : ,N;,. - F � � {�.. i , �i ' �. � / `+��. .
� �: � ��,� .�,� �� 1� n'�''� , � �.���. ,� ��j��
� �r 'y�
.y - � Cr � A �"' ' ' � i(� i i��l�l.. i ,'�} r ����.�• "�l
�_� �,� ��r ' ". ��+'"�Y l3 i'bS �,��� i Y" � . ,
� ? � . .. �'A 9� �t�. �'� � �'�, �l t�` �i�:
�e�y �� y y� � � d �`,� `� �r ..
.�t ¢ >� ' �n . M i � � r A� �
�a S��7S�� .�� . . F�I .� ' t� �1 �,,� J. � i J I ,.y, . e nt��
r 'l � ~� . p � ��� �
"Y � 'L � � �, �� v aa i � " : r w;`
t„ x "4� j� ii,1 =. t' v � . r �b'�" i
' 1 li I n E� 5�
~ �
s�l 'i. � ``.� � . � �^ �t,'.,�f�i� ��ii I
�����/�� � ' � .+ ' �' 3 i � . 1 . , �p � . g� ��
� � .., ♦ s9 •��:'� 1 r�"Y' ��.'- �� 19 i,pii �� 1�� '�''>s i{ " ':���
e,}� i11� lf.� J'.� h! q .: .
1� �` �Y► . 1� ��..1 ;' � "`#4 �+.iJ�,IS, -;t; .� • � � Si � :. � ,.
�ii i ry��11 ' , - �w� � '�i�r . . :�p ��� �
i
� _ r ' �� � � ., r n
��" � -- - � � , .
1 � ,- . l � _ _ —� .. .
.1 ,�� ��.q�� �. i!=1� , _..__ _ � A r ���a
�, �� �� � ,
• .� � �, •i , � �, �� �,Si, ��
_-./� �s � . � a� r ,
' �m� �� a,;
, , y . _.I� >� » ' � �.,. MI �M y ` E t a'i.
w �-E �,�p
� a ��j�� .4.� - ' ;,�5a � • `'� e�����;T��,�
/: � py ���
� � �� : �� P ;'�f�L� �" 3'
. 1�My "3�� 3 - r,-.;�•' ��. _,�i �� �
� � ' , I��' � ��
.� : .._. .�fjr_ .� - �'�,� ♦� ' � r � .���:.
� ,�
., �,� a��'b� w' w'r• r��4' ' r. _,�
91 l � � � . � . � ' � � l ..�-jf1%j, �'�r �
k �` h�
'� , �,/ ` I i `��'�= p . �;i" �#' `
I�� �i,'f� � � _.�':n�y1x�
,� y
'�ia � / Y r � f[Y
4 ('� , ,�', �r`-., ' _.+
"' �
��i � I✓�. y AC
j + �
dR\ �_ � Y'� . ��i1s: . F�"
�. �. . . ,..-i. - - . �.
� ,; g , q� F . 1 '�
�t �--� " ;�a � y � '�
;�;; � , �
,�,'`;`; f �, .. �: F.,
,. . . ,
•� .
�; �` �, i
i �1� 1 ._� s' 7� �"��� :y�;. � � 'r.�, - o R .
r �'� p' .
'^t. sT!.. q.a �,. �
.,-- _ . _. - �w r�1 �'e���-- - _ _�
i .. �i_ I GF?TUR2LLA �
r:
���
�7����
'��� �
�, - � � - •
�+ ,,a�c, , i • - �
a�. . �; � ��;� ' -�
,, � � . ��
�� ` . �-�. �:
',��
� i ^
,r, y�w. +�# �yT 7r . - �
0 100 200 400
� ,.s�._. `- . r -�_�','
t'" �� "n �' •
y r � ,
Y � •
i
� �����,:, �' � '�
�A ' �`! ``
�'� �� ���
/ �,
��x x
i'
� -_
'� r �li�'. �� !�
� �.i . . / .vu
R�
�'�.'r . `' �
,: y
` �
� �'� � 1 T _ - /
'' "� �> , �` ' ` ��.
n�� . +/�� ✓',.�� .9 I;d�-'�Y `
v.� � ' .r��r-y \ . . � � , ,t,
_ . ° k- - . �
..t i ,.�� ..c . s
� r�
�; .. . _ ;,.
�e;,:
4�� ' � I- .V, i
� I��
L.����,W
Roadway
r�iicrostation Renderer
�,/ Edge of Pavement
� Proposetl Curb and Gutter
Lane Lines
lane Arrows
� Existing Curb and Gutter
��. ! Existing Edge of Pavement
Proposed Concrete Sidewalks
�'� Monolithic Island
Proposed Bridge
Creeks, Streams and Rivers
.. _ _, Delineated Wetlands
Ponds, Lakes
/` ;,¢
2 S�.P �4
.�i
_
U
Z
W 0 m
z�
� F- y
a �W�
oo�aQ
= J
Z Fi��j Q
Op=Wz
�' a LL 0 W
UO
Z Z � Z
=¢OWO
F � y � �
O � > K Z
zooaw
W
�
Q
Z
LL � M
a� ��
� a � ~
JW o�
Q� cn�
W W Za
a� �
0
U
W
�
Z�
Counry.
NASH
Dw TIP#
4 U-3331
W8$:
34927.1.1
Date:
FEBRUARY2008
Figure
2
SHEET 3 OF 3

�
�
�� � '� "'� �^� r� � � . "'\ i� y"� '\, f� •'� �-� /� i-� _'� /`� �', "`t '-� ,� , r� ,� i� r' . � -� �'� '�. '�� '�1 ?' -�� , �� ✓�`�
� , � . , . � . � , � , _ � , ) , � , r� � . , �

��« "_ , � �`ian � .��.�, . '�^ � i .� . • � � . ' %.. 5 . . , �•
T�:3 � "�. .�t' ,_,� � � ;i� �r''� . � �G � ' �—
, � r� r. . �:oF+� � � . . �: , .. . �� k' ._,ZONE X � ZONE X ,-
` � � � ' . ZONE X I (~.i ° _ "
• _ � ,
ZONE X� i , ,,� ° r;i�-` ZONE X� �. }` '�-J � c ' GRID NORTH
% .,� t .,
. ` ., " . , . '�. � ' ;.I , . t \'y' � �` SCALE 1" = 500' (1 . 8,000)
, ',j:' . � o soo ioao
, ,,J . . . , � • ti..y � , ZONF AE . /// _ � �� � � FEET
. � � � me � . .. . ' ?; � �',;.�. . � � JJJ � -
. . ' . . on�� �� � f •
ZONE AE �.�i;r I< no .. � _ �� � ; r � . oss „- f �'''
�...•. � �� - ' '`+� . . . �� . r ` � f�~ � . \ ~��_.� � �
.. _ � `` . � . . . \
ii �,`� ;\ � .' " ! _� � �- '` . �.� \ �' . + #'-- �� ZONE .X , , •.i
%�� � ;F
�p... -�,' . � �_� a_ . '\. Ii, �. 9�s'�', mo , ' �L
. -�_ . . �' 'o^ r �. . , n
-Y�.� a1 . �_�j .. .. .
�
ti , � _ '. _ ,.. . - �> . '—
/ �:'S.'
� a
��. . � � , �� .
�_ _ , . < i � �e>
� �,.:q' �, \\ �.. ` I,{y� .' ., I I�' 1 ZONEAE . f�\ ��
� _ �-� `�'`�.y� \ \ , ' � f G
� �k , i
� � �' \ / '�r'�. . � T '.'c• i . r- '� j� �y • � :r � _'J�L�tl" PANEL �840J
' h. _ � 1` \ Y. . / /� Y\; JS � � . � -_
c ,�, �/ rv. ��- k f�. t., �' r��1 J �.� I �;i• � FIRM
� '� � ( 5 FLOOD INSURpNCE RATE MAP
E ' a � �� ,i � . � � , _,—�
' � K [ � � � ' � � . ` � � \ �� � �`� L' NORTH CAROLINA
. • . � � �1.! �: �1 � ��y� � - . .. � � � 3'�1� � �
LCC:CNL� • _ �. I . .� I � � . . � [� PIIMEL 3840
.
: . �
� �iexx r uww .,am ar.La u,xu . � " � �.�� � � � ' n ��� �«,.,
i'
• ` ' Uk Jl�C�•�Y 41 I.I.V VJV 'JII �I.IY
..I - h I n .' Ir�Kf 1 C q� CH.r L ltVtll �
I \•
1r 60. 4�u ��f ' ii[`. 2
I� � �.� � _ ir . .' � . _ - \' \ • . � �NT4».
Is1 ,. fs� v t . nw r • 'f r . � ' �_ � , :ra Rr. \ i .�./ � WMNJ4IY \JYtlllt �c<n ti..l-I�
. e , J. Y. ,��.J . . f � � . % ro , r n ,, / `.i, � i . . .«.�.�. . _ . .
,
. _ . .
. .
.
xrnw ,. . . . y. _.. 100 KS_ �•• \• , . ,` � �� / . (_"
... • • . � • � � . -�. �`�
"�> i3 �...�
� mx c . � � . w..� - �. � IS , ' � � G
q-� .n � . ' r �. � � • • � ti� i r- � .
�, . � � 4r. � ; p� . y ' .. � � �. . , . . iJd�
f`' . w .., n Y� �,., Y`Yu k •:� : — � � . . � �
�- � � t- -r -. Y �� .� �
� ,�'_ , �. � M ►r,. . _ , � � �
;, �, �. � : f E, - =:� ,�
� ,w.s. r�w w��awa� . ♦� �- M .� � r7. _ \ x. �. i.. i
� p.t � � �' � ��-:�.4'M� .. �Ul
rasK i......e..��...n...,..n..�.cri� • ���` .+•� � vi` .��.. '� i. . i fL�1 i I JJ IL� �.�� � t �' a' � O
y� � ,T:�- ` ��� ip 'yr r L?'�(�����I �'Jl C.,����lr��.�, �� � ,. , . � �
�:., �.�.nw� �in� m mw w , .P� �. � " . i . � . . ),41. .1 T— M� �
�w... . - , � ' ._
w� � � . f '� � � �
{ ,� .� w �.... •.....� . CiTr + �''�� � 1\ ,..,'" � r i.;� �—� ..�
.-... w�., rw.. n.v,.�...... m. ,�.� v+.
.
.
_., e..,�.�.w...� ..-� .. ; �. - ,� -- --.,
� ::
� .� .., -E-. . . ..�. . r� . .. J � t.,^.".'w.�..,,,. y iry.ww n�_�.
,,. . e� iaam Ntw� �F✓ t t � L .' � � I I n um
� ti,. � . �.,.,. .r a. .. � �v p .� � �rk \ � .
1'� _":,�'.M.,�;�.daw..e.'.::':�..,... �!R :'� • , - i4.' , � c-;� EFFECTIVEOATE M�PNUMBEA
is�,� ;�-', "" " , � iF ;- , • P � i tir u ,. •- � � �,; ��. � NOYEYBER 3, 2004 311038�0001
I� m sw � ����. �� �i - .�je � e . � n7._.� cc'.�V���� ��t � ` � .; � t
{ji� ,w ....r. � a —n.. � ♦ '� i � � � �. ' r i _ .�. H.^( [ �/ h-\ , � , � O
I �a .�,, .�...rw.,K«.w�..w . .�.. i ��j .. . . . . : .�� •�. � . try�, �7r{(�:�y/'� �
�� .��woenwievw�wsm��M��w.. .�,)A.�A •` •• � . -� II '�iCl�� l�� � .. 'T�' I.IJ � -.�[l \Y
� � , • �ti. . . t o ' s,. . - � _ �. � � c�7 �-, - .. .
f. nire�w�vt raninio .vw ,rmrv� � �+'�" . xo • � � �C -' • �� Stvle uf \orth l-u...i u
�` ...,...,..�,mn..�.., �._. ......_. e1 � •� . . ' .- r �
.�.« .. �.... - ! . . .� � � �--' Fcd<r¢I Emergenq� .VaniFemen" :lgcnr:
. - t �'Y • . - I
- �... �. a...� r... �., ����.' .n� , � _ �,�i . . . .l . . , ,- �:� �
i'.":'.:» �'.; a'+. " . .' . r �.,�' , � '� - o.s ZONE AE
.._. ., ee.a. �. ' . � �� . ' . a�3 � ' —_'
�t � . . . a i�.�.u� �`eesN+�r `� .. ` � .�� � r a � � � : . � . I /� i i✓'.r '�, • � ` "�,� � t.
9<� _.. .. .�,.�... _ �.II�' 0��� � . . �ti� � . ^ve"' �JL I YI � ', � � •• , ..
,:��._....�.��M t..� �� .�� . � . FIGURE 3A
— �'��,...� ,,.. [tock'}• Mount - -� :?�1. . . �� ? l zc7rve x, �9 ,���= .t'� . .
. •
. . ,. ,
� ,�,_,... 37D092 ,,' ' .-.
� r -- --� � � . oo�
� w.. k ; w-........, . � � . r� �� � ZONE X. . ., .
�x� wv . . yw,�� . , ., . � \ �60
,...... :' �,� M ......� . ' - ZONE X
.
, .
r� rwnr� µ^ - � t �sI . . . ��i`'� r•� � , - .J� . �C - a ofr iai caYefal*� ic. tneaxv cnnncedlloctlmao I.
.. n. aw� ro � `- � �'' .^ ^°�� �� �x eC u5 na F M � Or uoc ➢. s o does �tY roAec1 cnea�.res
A evf�u ^+�,y�^�N '�' y^r a��. t��m� IfA�� tijj � .. ��"-. ^� � �n MiFnay�u ttt. �a4 uCxequvMlu:rm:lsf o t�v
I. 8 e. ...., rw. �.. 1 � ..�. .�[ -VY.4 �n� �� , . . . .� . . . . . p� n+ rrcr.n
�-H •vl� 4�utr _ _ Ii.4.. ,(�� i.F\".t_ �_�anlUetlmap5c�cok[he'FENAFIpOGMaP�Stadetrwlo�xllcY.R..aqoe

i�. I . • . ' . � ' "�, _ . ..� _ r - � � � ~i -. 1 i a' � :.
t �4 .. r.'�y-.} �'t� Y � � F'. �'
� .
. �. �s. �� L FJ _ �"},_, .. �y� x '
� ,�' �`` �pi ' h , "� . ,� ' 1• �` � '�i y � 'I � �
,P � i � � �
;) d -,aII • . �+ ' � I . �l" r . i � �� . r�c�7rF�.'�r ti �u,• �'�i +-. �,�. _'i �`•y � � • �
, � . ' ��'kR ���'''� , � � ..i!� "'4"' ��,tR{- +�.� �'� '� � ,� � ', • ����� "'��� �
�`� n y"�,. �,'� . �� '`r� �rk. �-
a� � ��� � � Y Y
, 4 ��i P �y� 5 � � �•,� . � �, � � •'��� 1 YI . A1� �.
i�VE l�: ,�y 3.�,°.���� �' ` �� �y ��.` � F : �� �
r �`
� �i-, � � * � . �; ,�s r � ' � ' .� r
����� i .. ,fi ' .� �.b �" '�F L.;I��' �C •ay sa.:1, ' I � ��}: 4,.i�� ' y�Y �'� � � I'�
- � �' i� , `� ��*-0fi, i , ; �,'qj= . . -�
.. r. � � eA . �.'�'�I�::Y:L' 1�.iyl:il� `�•'�.� �j�y F r,- '. � R � a
' � ,4 ��� � � . . � i �; r'7
���, x �, . . �, Y,-.. 1 ..� ,r I� s�.
1� . ��r._ c1��`.�,,,�y : ?�!IL�:1Z M � �5 hr1� �� �. �+) Yti. „ �� �,�_.
':�� � �'�' � S �i� "� a - y� . �� S - e: � ��'� ot .. �}��� `� , . �-II
.R ' -- ..��':+.. , �.'�' � � �� ... :�VM,, '� �, 4.wv ��,�t1�' � . �,f � � ��' 1� �� �'�
�-: . �- , .. ~ i F '� � .k` ,�1 . �.=
.k 1 '
� � h � u _ . , ! �. " � �' w' � �' , r 5
i . ,� . - �� . � �� � y . � , .�.� r * ` ' :. 7 ' '�
I � i , i �i � ;� . �+ � �,. � ' � *�1' �
I'�` {,
. F�� '.. ;' - �t x � � R� :', � ' .� 1' *. �'� ' i 7Yi �. ,��`� � $`���� 5 �`-_
4 .. 4' , +> �' ��4 � E��' 4 �-1 � �
� ; \, � , • � � > �+ j " �
Nl� � �M � a_ _ � • - . ' � 4 . '�. , . , �.i 1�' ' �. 1 k . �"' y�4 "� . ' �' ' �-'
� ry 1`� �� f, � r�. ��' � F f�hti` , '' � � � �'rlrr'�. . � +�7� i � r.
. ' b _ . ' �'. �if�. k '1. •
�� �, « y � ; ' '«.� F . , ,�u; r �- �y, •.
•: f '�_ • r'�����y ��� ���� �� ,� �' �,�. ��
� d��.� . ' �. �- � � ��f n �?i�� ��1� � � ti
/'�7 5� ` . l .i r .
�" ,�(,�r � ��!,%' J�� t .. .. g 4� � �
�4. d�' ' �' . . .. r le F .i, 9lllt.l � . � :�; ; �i . "'' . I`; ." ` � . . r �ly� i�+- . . .� ��
�"� t i � /'
,M ,� +� .�` i wF r, � . .
r.
w � � i ,. ti l��;� -4 � � ' q , , y'pa: ;�= _ �
�
_ � LLC [\1.-i ��� �� . sf`r. �•h"5 � ��� c;p.� ... $ . s.K1` �. � �'.. ,.� ' . ... 4' ^ ,��.,I
� � " �,f�y� ��`". ��� i. . �
w'
�
%4YJ .. i.. i . a .. �. .� �w. . -F�� �i� ', ' ' ' . � �'`�,+{/"��•"��
r . - � . � ♦ l. .
0.a uM'..' pr MI ! W�44
Nr' bq Ne . } • • ' . ��
~w.�+ n.a � .n � w � E " � dn. . i - � �I �Ij ;. , � � -.: a �' . - kL J . , - �41� � . i� � i � :�33�•� . _ � �Tl- 7vs�, �_
�n�... . �ad�r.n. ...� .. . �', ��' � ♦ � g, IF s � � _fA 4 � y�'. �• < I 4`��. ' � 1 ,� � � ' � `
mw K ,e, e .a. ' .1+.. T ` �f�• � � � ' .��� % � j . . � . L ��f1
iawM •.,�,."'�.....�,.e � . .. .. .�' .��. �+i t ' � � 1 i�k „ J .. . �{ ' * vy• ' `�� • ,. �p- t
.a..� �` tl '�,:� `a:'.:_... �. _M M.�..: �...:.�".� : s i"� t� `�r� • r � �S � ;W�' n . "� � �14 , � +� �,1 , �, t ., r ' 7 C NF X`' , _
:�:'X....� ... �� '!�, � �'Z �'t f� .�x �,� �r •,���a.,� 1�+y, ,+` : � •� { �Y�� �+,
LY�Y V h^ M^�~O.Fn�Y�wM1.�tl�i'��41Tr. � �I � . � . . .
M..,_, � a q i'dir+ <�e �� s , 4 L v-` �. �� . 1 �6 4 I� . �
F. M�N u�r�nn �m� wrh 1 � �L � � J � C� I
::. nq M�.'� , ...,.«..:' �,f . ,� l.kt +� y '!. - . ; '�`'� .as ;' f � ,{'-%.�', m rr.+� ,j� , � '�. � ��
m� u. � � .'�+.m w, `.. � �vm umwd m.�. , + �1 r!� 1. i TJRxr�►.f .4 , � ���`*'r't � � �% ��t' L' i � � � 41. ` 1 . � ' h�" �, : •. �j" �` I� -+ f �' �
v.s �� ... �e �..., w..i r....., e� r<iw.. . - ' i . � ♦. • � �•• #� e�{� + ..�-P qMr w.+ � _ tj �S y- + s3.86�1 A ,�, �� -I.*Y �..� _
-�1 4�'�. �,� �y,•�"i i�,.. 'y� I�.� � .��I"4 [�_. � ':+� � �� _ . � ..
� � [xuh��n�� uirn. n »YM !i �i. � ' L f � � 1• h' �}ly, � � � l d � r� � � 1F ,� /j� ' T r� ' 1
�y......%Ys �.�e'.�.�...W.�..b� el..uw... �c � � .. t�,l i ! ' Y 'I.�R. ���- ���t' ��'�4�. rI '� y��. 1 /' � •�_ . .. _��
i ,.l.'t � `'.. �D �� 1.. � _. ' ��_ __ r �+_ �`'`y� ' +' +
� a.w wex,o ..xe... L�r .,�11�,." : i�. �" 1�� � i� ��' F ' ' 1F � : r�� E • �- .
� � . r v� [ t.fMi j '� �{� �� ' �;t�. 11 � i �� � � , �
mn . ...� aW.. w-n ,.... N i � f r: �
�' � �. �„ ...,,, � . _ -�1 4' � , � '� � e" � . �,
...� ^, :::...�..w'i: �:....�..,� ....., �.. tt S� ' t , „�.' . � • �� � .. • � i �¢ ,, ��. . y� 1 'ye� j � i�.� . � � � � + '•
� ,.,,��. �.... :;u � _:�� • 4 �.-, . F �.w~* - �� � /�* �.~.�,� '� ' "♦ �i��,. : p y'�'-:� -M,�ra " rti` ; �
�aw . ,. .r.r ,. u,. _..w ..... •w�• ' �M'' �� . �y , 1 •�il h .f� i � ♦ � ..� ,Ir y ` . a I 1 .
w., � :"i......'..w,.....ao.r�n. . F -'�' ..� ��._ . �.f3" �. '�w�� . _ . � � .� ��..,��.�� . .,.�;�: . `�.
� \ 4 �lMYIF M1c5{.µlll(15 aY51M CIIMS MN � �4 1 1�I� 1. � : � . � jR�_
L� (N M6[ -llllfCl(I) AR(45 �IICy ' � � { . � , ~~�. _ . Y �� � � ��� � �� � � . �
� R. �1.� 4 • . �; �
.e. �......s.. . ; ....� _.....�..�. � c�. a... �..e.... � i _ � �\ �t.-�I"y_ . . . • � ,1'1� . / l � - � . " ,��y�t �'s
„ .....�,w.. ^wr..,....a.. ��t'�R," ..a�. s � 2'F, + � 1� .. '. - `5 � . � � *� - ` �.1 � +�'" ���� J ' 'I � � �� 4 - � # . ,d'.
— . � •.e.�u,' -�we'�.� � F� 4'I�' �� . l- � .� r4 . �_ 4 ±: i f• � r�-.�_ _. �' "�.-�� ' �rr '
. ..+.. r....a � � 1 {i't i
-+..�m..a.,�`ewn��siw.d'r~.+"�..�.���.. � T.'e '' � � ._r-� . y� �. y i 'T;��. Mis� n F i I
r.�e� �. �.n �r..��. i. . �. ��: � � ' � � j�.i� ..� '�~ -Y.i ^u'i l � � a.. ar.. �1t'' . � �i�a 9�t �� fy��"� .I
.c� �i.. e.� rn..n.M... ..... u.......w.�w. . ,. � � � ..
m •� �. �� ` �� ,Y 5 � ��
��...,.. e w..an •.�-.a. �..�.. .., . ..� { - � � . T . . . � � . . - y y _ Y " � � _ � . . i. t, .. !Y � � i' � ! 's !'.� , i
�. _._ �,.� .. , < rJ � , � .:
a-- --�; �__,,.. �^' ,�` � �c>��r r. � . .'�i--r _ �:1 �4 � ' �"'�I
"Y' • '� . ` } � �. i� I
� �i.....� � v . p . . ,* _ • �1 �� .•_ f f .� � r�� � -� 6 . 1.�'�
m�- vsu .wr �-++r .� � �. . I . . . • ; . 1 �3 au ' � �I
rr..« u'�II�}h . y r. . . ..,� i{ � � I� � � ..�' �
... . ... . ' r .s .
/� _ � � __ _ '.
�nw• . hW . i . a.�- . �� � � • � '
�NM�. � ♦ � " � .. _ . 1.. . . � . .. {
,.:.`��, " � a . ��',' � _ _ . A,� r�-�� ��` £i:•4E 1f � � i
_ °� � � I
. _ . � � � . .., } ��� � �- t
bub�b i.".�w�.`.... s. �� e.e.n... a� •� _ 4n+ �' 1 ��
�.�.. ..,.� ... iu. - _ . e
•vi- e..w� ty� e s �� � -ar�. . . '1, �e'� I . / , . a � . . t�-�1 ��} �
7 . �'� � .: � � ...:-:a%:����aJ`S:_'. +��i��y,�- . ._ � fr� % . ','f 't . _ � _ . . � F � . :�i� +� f"-
�•� �'y:'
.s.f ��` f
r„H1C� N44�Tti
ss�.�1�E 1• ■ 5[[�Pl • I 1
� sw
� _ Ui4fU !
tm��'EE�
riFtt 3�47J
f � 6Ai11
�eau �w�uwNxa� �rE �r�e
htti1t7'N l.�ltl'Ll�w!l
P11E1 #NI
��._ � ... • 41. .a_
r+�
�IAG �S �3'. :f_ �
�+n � e �� o
,..Aw _ , ��_� .-
Fi�ICIf� D�� YYr�viFi
�Onraet a � v�.:arcu
( f �
�' y ����rr �
i 4M�� �,. y� •
� ��
9fw n! S .. ,
I.,��.11-:-t�cg�. � U, �� � . ,.
FIGURE 3B
. . �. •cfu � }u�.nv1 . •• y
. .� v.yaelpW��1'�t
. - w v., a.. r m� r:.��

�Vritten Cornments on
Environmental Assessment

� Ja�teo sr�T�
s,
S � ri
Z ��
r
�~r�� PROSEG�\O
October 27, 2003.
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
REGION 4
ATLANTA FEDERAL CENTER
61 FORSYTH STREET '
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303-8960
Dr. Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D. �
- Environmental Manager Director, Project Development and Environmental
:- Analysis Branch
N.C. Department of Transportafion
„ 1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548 � ,.
� NO IIS �Q
FOOZ 0� 1�p
SUBJ: EPA Review of the Federal Environmental Assessment for the SR 1616
(Country Club Ro�d) Improvements, Rocky Mount, Nash County; Federal
Aid Project No. STP-1616(4), State Project No. 8.2321601, T.I.P. Project No.
U-3331
Dear Dr. Thorpe:
Pursuant to Section 309 of the Clean Air Act, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) has reviewed the referenced North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
Environmental Assessment {EA) for the SR 1616 (Country Club Road) Improveinents from US
64 Business to SR 1541 (Jeffrey's Road), in Rocky IVlount, Nash County. The EA addresses the
No-build alternative, mass transportation and two widening construction alternatives (Alternatives
A and B). The length of the proposed widening alternatives is ap,proximately 1.4 miles. A 5-lane,
curb and gutter facility with a lengthened bridge (to 180 feet) and a side-walk on one side is
NCDOT's recommended alternative (Alternative B). The aligninent chosen is a"best-fit" with the
use of symmetrical and widening to one side in, order to minimize potential impacts. This project
is a non-Merger Team project.'
EPA offers the following comments on the EA.
It appears that NCDOT and FHWA have streamlined some of the sections of the EA.
� EPA has no environmental concerns regarding the project's overall purpose and need and the
-, alternatives considered as outlined in the EA.
► SUMMARI'
A sunimary is contained in the beginning of the EA and addresses enviroiunental effects of
the project on Page ii, Section F. A brief table of the impacts from the proposed project would
be helpful to the reader.
Intemet Address (URL) . http://www.epa.gov
Racycled/Racyclabla . Pdnted wRh Vegetable Od 8ased Inks on Recyded Paper (Mlnimum 30 / Postconsumer)

► AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
* Wetland Impacts: According to the EA, approximately 0.16 acres of wetlands will be impacted �__
by Alternative A. Alternative B would result in a net loss of 0 acres of wetlands. No "
compensatory mitigation is being required by pernutting agencies. NCDOT indicates that ���
minimization activities have been considered and that the lengthening of the replacement bridge ��,
over Stoney Creek from 160 feet to 180 feet has helped achieve this goal. "_\'
`� J
* Stream ImDacts: Stream impacts for both Alternatives A and B aze a total of 801ineaz feet and
include the lengthening of culverts over the unnamed tributary (UT) to Stoney Creek and the
widening of the bridge over Stoney Creek.
* Air Ouali �t�lmpacts: Page 22 of the EA addresses burning as the main option for the debris
generated during clearing and grubbing operations. EPA prefers reeycling methods, such as
shredding and mulching, and making such materials available to the public for free. Burning is
EPA's least preferred option.
* Noise Recentor Impacts: Page 25 of the EA appeazs to have missing words in the 2°d paragraph ;'� )
of Section e, Traffic Noise and Contour. There aze 8 businesses and 15 residences which will �
have noise level increases under the No-build Alternative (8 receptor increases would be '
substantial). The average increase to these 23 receptors is 7 to 8 dBA. The EA (Page 25) '� \�
indicates that the maximum predicted noise level increase is + 11 dBA. The maximum number of '` `
substantial impacts (from the Build Alternative) is 21 receptors. EPA was unable to identify which ,�
of the 21 receptors in Appendix C, Table N6, will receive substantial noise impacts from the /
project. �
* Forest Imnacts: EPA acknowledges that Altemative B has 1.77 acres of forest land impacts and
Alternative A has 1.86 acres.
* Soils Information: It would be helpful to EPA to identify what percentage of each.soil (type)
series is located within the proposed right of way (Page 30 of the EA).
* Threatened and Endangered Species: It is uncleaz from reviewing the EA when the last actual
field survey for the Dwarf wedge mussel (Alasmidonta heterodon) was performed. Page 41 of
the EA indicates that a visual and tactile seazch in Stoney Creek was performed for 2 man hours.
' _�

=/ ♦
► SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES
. . EPA requests some clarification of issues for the proposed project, including: noise
receptor impacts and threatened and endangered species. EPA would also prefer that NCDOT
actively pursue more environmentally-friendly options for vegetati�e debris generated during
clearing and grubbing opera"tions. We appreciate the opportunity to comment on this EA. Should
you have questions regarding these comments, please feel free to contact Christopher Militscher
of my staff at 919-856-4206. •
Sincerely,
._Ti/ ' f
r�u��� �f >�1��,�
Heinz J. Mueller, Chief
NEPA Program Office
Office of Policy and Management
r-�

�O� y�r,�`.�� �.��..��..o. � . �...�,:.�, .....,.���..�
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
\0 G North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources,
� � Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
> � . _ � Division of Water Quality �
Q -� - Coleen H. Sullins, Deputy Director
Division of Water �uality
MEMORANDUM
To: Melba McGee
From: John Hennessy
"1
; :
��C /�
L�
` January 6, 2004
Subject: EA comments on proposed improv�ments to Country Club Road (SR 1616) from US 64 Business
to leffreys Road (SP. 1541), Rocky Nlount, Nash County. State Project No. 8.23216Q.1, TIP U-
3331, DENR Project Number 04-0105. •
This office has reviewed the referenced document. The Division of Water Quality (DWQ) is responsible for the
issuaii�c of tne Se��tion 401 'vJater Quality Certification for activities that impact Waters of the U.S., including
wetlands. It is our understanding [hat the preferred alternative, as presented in ttie'EA, will result in impacts to 80
linear feet of streams as described below:
Stream Hame River Basin Stream Classification(s) Stream Indes Number
Stonev Creek Tar-Pzmlico (030203) Class C NSW (303(d)) 28-68
UT Stonev Creek Tar-Pamlico (030203) Class C NSW (303(d)) 28-68
The D:�'Q oi`ers [he following comments based on review of the aforementioned document:
A)
�
The document does not include any anticipated impacts to protected Tar-Pamlico River Riparian Buffers.
Please provide updated data that indicates the anticipated impacts to these resources.
As proposed, the project requires the replacement of an exis[ing bridge. Is an onsite detour for the pxoject
proposed? If so, are the impacts associated with the onsite detour included in the impacts listed in the EA?
The impac[s should include those to streams, wetlands, and riparian buffers.
C) The document recommends Alternative B as the preferred alternative. However, no discussion that
explains [he rationale for the decision is included. Please provide a discussion that details the rationale
used [o make the recommended decision. It should include a discussion on the anticipated impacts to both
the naturai and human environment.
D) The project impacts Stoney Creek and tributaries to Stoney Creek. Stoney Creek is included as a 303(d)
listed surface water for impairment due to sediment. As such, [he project will need to be designed to
discharge stormwater as diffuse flow through riparian buffers at non-erosive velocities. This requirement
will also bring the project in compliance with the Tar-Pamlico River Riparian Buffer Rules.
��A.
NCDENK
N. C. Division of Water Quality 1650 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 [phone]
Customer Service: i-800-623-77a8

O�GG W a T �RQG
� r
> _{
o -�
E)
F)
Gj
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
" Division of Water Quality
• Coleen H. Sullins, Deputy Director
Division of Water �uality
Since Stoney Creek is included on the 303(d) list, NCDOT will need to stric[ly adhere to sediment and
erosion control Best Management Practices for sensitive waters entitled "Design Standards in Sensitive
Watersheds" (15A NCAC 04B .0024) throu�hout design and construction of the project
.�
At this time, the NCDWQ agrees with the document's assessment that the project will not result in
increased secondary and cumulative impacts. The reasons for this assessment are: 1) that the project is a
wideninC alterna[ive, and 2) [he project is located in an•existing urban landscape wi[h established
infrastructure. The addition of two lanes to the existing road is not likely to stimulate any additional
development activi[y than what would already occur. As such, and even though a 303(d). listed stream is
located along the project, a quantitative analysis of secondary, and cumulative impacts is not required.
However, a qualitative assessment consistent with the criteria agreed to by DWQ will be a required aspect
of the application for a 401 Water.Qaulity Certification.
Aiter the selection of the preferred alternative and prior to an issuance of the 401 Water Qua[ity .
Certification, the NCDOT is respectfully reminded that they will need to demonstrate the avoidance and
minimization of impacts to wetlands (and streams) to the maximum extent practical. Based on'the impacts
described in the document, wetland mitigation may be required for this project. Should the impacts to
;uri�dictional we[lands exceed 1.0 acres, mitigation may be required in accordance with NCDWQ wetland
Rules { 1�A NCAC 2H.0506 (h)(2) }.
In accordance with the NCDWQ Wetlands Rules { 15A NCAC 2H.0506(b)(6)}, mitibation will be required
for impacts of b eater than 150 linear feet [o any single perennial stream. In the event that mitigation is
required, the mitigation plan should be designed to replace appropriate lost functions and values. In
accordance with the NCDWQ Wetlands Rules (15A NCAC 2H.0506 (h)(3) }, the Wetland Restoration
Program may be available for�use as stream mitigation. .
Please be advised [hat culverts should be cauntersunk to allow unimpeded passage by fish and other aquatic
organisms. Moreover, in areas where high quality wetlands or streams are impacted, a brid�e may prove
preferable. When applicable, DOT should not install the bridge bents in the'creek, to the maximum extent
practicable.
Sediment and erosion control measures should not be placed in wetlands.
Borrow/waste areas should avoid wetlands [o the maximum extent practicable. Impacts to wetlands in
torrow/waste areas could precipitate compensatory mitigation.
The 401 Water Quality Certification application will need to specifically address the proposed methods for
stormwater management. More specifically, stormwater should not be permitted [o discharge directly into
the creek. All stormwater discharges shall be directed to discharge as diffuse flow throu�h riparian buffers
at non-erosive velocities.
Future documentation should include an itemized listing of the proposed wetland and stream impacts with
corresponding mapping.
N. C. Division of Water �uality 1650 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27899-1650 [phone]
Customer Service: 1-300-623-7748

\O�� W A TFRQG
� �
> �
O �
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources '
, Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director . .
. - • - Division of Water Quality
' Coleen H. Sullins, Deputy Director
, Division of Water Quality
N) Based on the information presen[ed in the document, [he magnitude of impacts to wetlands and streams will
require an Individual Permit application to the Corps of Engineers and corresponding,401 Water Quality
Certification. Please be advised [hat a 401 Water Qu�ality Certification requires satisfactory protection of
water quality to ensure that water quality standards are met and no wetland.or s[ream uses are lost. Final
permit authorization will require the submittal of a formal application by the NCDOT and wri[ten
concurrence from the NCDWQ. Please be aware that any approval will be contingent on appropriate .
avoidance and minimization of wetland and stream impacts to the maximum extent practical, the
development of an acceptable stormwater management plan, and the inclusion of appropriate mitigation
plans where appropriate.
The NCDWQ appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on your project. Should you have any questions or
require any additic;nal information, please contact 7ohn Hennessy at [phone]. ��
cc: Mike Bell, Corps of Engineers
Gary Jordan, USFWS
Travis Wilson, NCWRC
John Hennessy, NCDWQ
File Copy
c:�ncdot\T� U-3331\comments\U-3331 comments.doc
N. C. Division o( Water Quality 1650 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 [phone]
Customer Service: 1-800-623-7748

United States Department of the In
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, Norrh Carolina 27636-3726
October 16, 2003
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Project Development and Environmental Analysis
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
Dear Dr. Thorpe:
This letter is iri response to your October 10, 2003 letter requesting comments from the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (Service) on the Environmental Assessment (EA) for the proposed
widening of SR 1616 (Country Club Road) from US 64 Business to SR 1541 (Jeffrey's Road) in
Nash County, North Carolina (TIP No. U-3331). These comments are provided in accordance
with provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16 U.S.C. 661-667d) and section 7 of
the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543).
Two almost identical build alternatives are described in the EA, with the only difference
occurring at the Stoney Creek bridge crossing. Both alternatives would provide a five lane
facility with widening generally occumng symmetrically from the existing alignment. Both
alternatives would replace the existing 160 feet long bridge over Stoney Creek with a 180 feet
long bridge. Alternative A would widen the bridge on the west side, while Alternative B would
widen the bridge on the east side.. Alternative B is the preferred alternative due to its zero
impacts on wetlands (as opposed to 0.16 acres for Alternative A). The Service supports the
preferred alternative. Both alternatives have minimal impacts to streams (401inear feet impact
each to Stoney Creek and Unnamed 'Tributary to Stoney Creek).
Almost all of the project will occur in a suburban and residential environment with minimal fish
and wildlife habitat available. The only natural terrestrial community within the proj ect area is
the forested area in the vicinity of Stoney Creek. Alternative B would avoid all impacts to
bottomland hardwood forest along Stoney Creek, but would impact up to 1.77 acres of mixed
pine hardwood forest. However, the impacts to forest habitat will occur in previously fragmented
forest in which the terrestrial habitat value has already been degraded by adjacent development.
For this reason, the Service generally prefers widening existing roads to constructing new ones.
There are three federally endangered species listed for Nash County: red-cockaded woodpecker
(Picoides borealis), dwarf wedgemussel (Alasmidonta heterodon) and Tar spinymussel (Elliptio
steinstansana). The EA renders a"No Effect" conclusion for each of.these three species. Due to

the lack of habitat, the Service concurs with the "No Effect" conclusion for the red-cockaded
woodpecker. However, the Service does not concur with the "No Effect" conclusion for the
dwarf wedgemussel and Tar spinymussel. The EA states that mussel surveys were conducted on
July 23, 1999. These surveys are inadequate for two reasons. Firstly, the surveys are now more
than four years old. New surveys should be performed. Secondly, the surveys only extended 200
feet below the bridge crossing of Stoney Creek. The EA states that the stream reach within the
construction limits does not provide habitat for the two mussel species. However, since stream
impacts can affect mussels for a considerable distance downstream and upstream, simply
surveying within the project footprint is inadequate. A new mussel survey, which extends at
least 100 meters upstream and 400 meters downstream of the bridge crossing, should be
conducted. Please note that dwarf wedgemussel has been known to occur in Stoney Creek
several miles upstream of the project site.
With the exception of its treatment of endangered mussels, the Service believes that this EA
adequately addresses the existing fish and wildlife resources, the waters and wetlands of the
United States, and the potential impacts of this proposed project on these resources. Future .
documentation and correspondence should correct the deficiency regarding the federally
endangered dwarf wedgemussel and Tar spinymussel. The Service appreciates the opportunity to
review this project. If you have any questions regarding our response, please contact Mr. Gary
Jordan at [phone], ext. 32.
Sincerely,
��1����
Garland B. Pardue, Ph.D.
Ecological Services Supervisor
cc: Chris Militscher, USEPA, Raleigh, NC
Travis Wilson, NCWRC, Creedmore, NC
John Hennessy, NCDWQ, Raleigh, NC
Mike Bell, USACE, Washington, NC
David Franklin, USACE, Wilmington, NC

�
� ?`�o�t� �arolina �lild�Z�e Res��xc�s ��mm�ss�o� � �
MENIORAND�TiYI
- ' TO_
,�_. FRO�:
r'. .
, DATE:
�.h�irlcs R Fullwecrd, F,xzcuti�c� Director
Me2ba alctcGee
Q.ff..�,c� af Lenislative and Intergavern�t,e�ital .a..ff.airs, DENR
�
Travi$ �yilson, Higf�way T?.roject �oordf� r����- f'
Habitat �onsezvati�n Pro� ��n '� ` '�1
Novem�er .13, ZQ43
�UBJ£�T: iJQ.ctb� �arolin� Department of. Tra�zsportatian (NCDO'I'} Environmcntal
.�sst�sment (E��} for'the pzoposed widening of SR. .l.bl. �(Country Club �oad)
fro.m US� � Business t4 SR 1541 {yeffrey's .Raac1} in Nash County, North
Cazolina. TIP No. U-3331, SCH Proiect No. 04-0105.
Staff biologists with the N. C. Wildlife Resourc�s Comrnissiot� h�ve reviewed the subject
EA and are famili.ar with habitat values in the project area. Tl�e puzpv�e of t�is review w�s ko
asscss project i.r�pa�ts tv fis1� and wil.dlif� r�sources. �ur comments are provided in accordancc
� with e��,ii� p.rovisions of the ATationa] Environmental Palicy Act (42 U.5:C. 4332{�)(c)) and the
�'ish and Wildlife Coorclination Act (�t$ Sk�t- ��1, as am�ndad; 1G U.�.C. 6b1-667d}.
NCDOT proposes to widen existirig SR ] G.ib tv a five lane curh and gu.tter facility ineludin.g
replacernent af the bridge pvez� Stoney Cree1�. The totai pr�ject length is .a�5�irox.imately 1.4
miles: Estimated impacts f�t' the NCDOT preferred alternative are 80 liner feet of impacts to
jurisdictional streams, an.d no wetland impaets
We have reviewed tb.e data in the E,�, �1C�V�� supports the �iCDOT prcferrec� alternati��e
$. 't'tai.s alt�mativ� wi]1 shi:f� th� Bri�gc over Stoney Creek t4 the ��e�t, avoiding any wctland
irn�acts. T'.he project will cross Stoney Creck and �.n unnamed tcibutary to Stoney �re�;k.
Records indicate mussel svrs,�eys wer2 coa,�u�ted for t'l�ese sites in July of 1999, these survey are
iva exe�ss o�two y�ar.s ald, thc�farz n�w mussel surveys should be conducted. Nash County ha.5
two feder.�lly endangcred mussel ai3ted: dwarf wedgemussel (t�.lasmidonta:heter�d�rz} and�Tar
spinymussel (E1liptio �teiii.�t��.sazza�. Ovr rtcords also indzcate kno�rn accurt�nces flf h�ro state
endangered muss�Is in �Iose praximit�� to #he projecr 3�ellow lampmussel (Z,ampsilis eariosa)
' Mailin.gAddr�ss: Divis.ion of inl.and Fishcrics * 17? 1 Iviail Sen�ic�: Ccntcr � Ralei�h, NC: 27f,99-1,7�1
. Tolc�hone: (�19) 73�-363i ext.231' • Fa�c: (`71�}'1S-7b�3

��� � �iovember 13, 2(303
� and yeli�w lance (Llli�tie l�nc�alot�), it should also be notcd in T3ble 1 l ye.11ow lampmussel
�Lampsilis cariosa) a.zad yello�v lanca {ElIi�tip tancec�,lota) are list�� as state T/PE, both of thcse;
sp�cies arc clurentIy listed as state endanger�d. I�TCDpT should �onduct a new mussel sun�ey
extending i 0� meters upstreazn and 400 meters downstream of the proposed crossings.
Thanl: you for the op��rtunity to comment on this EA. �f we can be of any further
assistance please call m� at (919) 52$-9886.
�c: Garp Jordan, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Ser�icc, Raleigh
John Hennessy, DWQ, Raleigh
Eric �lls�'ri�ye3', U.S. .�r. my Corps of En�ineers, Raleigl�
, ,-

U.S. Departrnent of Homdand Security'
Re�ion IV
3003 Cliamb.leeTuckcr Rc�ad
Atlu�ta. Ga 30341
� cf�iM
so�`�e ;. ' i i
�'� °�' FEM
3= i
�f �,�
�4 f.,�p�6�
August 10, 2006
Mr. H. Douglas Hoell Jr.
Direct�r, Division of Emergency Management
North Carolina Departmenf of Grime Control and Public Safety
4713 Mail Service C.enter -
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-4713.
,� SiJB7ECT: City of Rocky Mount Request for Deed Amendment on Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
- � (HMGP) Deed Restricted Property
Dear Mr. Hoe1L•
; As requested by the North Carolina Division of Emergancy Management (NCDEM) in your letter of August
� 16, 2005,. we have consid'ered the use of affected deed restricted properties for the construction of ,
+mprovements to North Carolina Deparlment of Transportation {NCDOT) administered portions of the
Federal-aid highway system in the city of Rocky Mount, NC. The Federal Emergency Ivfanagement A�ency
�' (FEMA) consents to amendment of the deed resh�ictions. This consent is subject to the restrictions identified
herein, and fol{owing written confumation and concurrence as required below. This consent will be
applicable to the f411owing parcels to clarify that construction of the propQsed b�gt►way improvements is
allowed given ttre unique and particulaz circumstances of fliis case: �
136 Cove Drive
� l40 Country Club Road (two parcels under common address)
520 Country C�ub Road
530 Country Club Road
542 Country Club Road (two parcels under common address) .
650 Country Club Road '
_� ' 654 Country Club Road � •
Ths amendments are subject to the following stipularions:
A. The amendment of the deed restrictions will apply only to the nine parcels (two, twaparcel tracts, as
noied above) that vril] be directly a�'ected by construc�i�n of fhe proposed hi�,'�way improvemzn�s.
'These parcels are identified and described in Attachment A-1 through A-?.
B. The amendment of the deed resh-ictions ruill apply only to land directly under the footprint of *.he
,- road. The City will retain title to the land a��d must maintain all of the fIIviGP acquired property
+" � consistent with 44 CFR § 206.434 {e) and the recorded open space land use restrictions, as amended.
` The restricrion of the deed-restricted �land is in perpetuity. �
� ,� ,
`` C. The proposed road must comply with Federal, State, and local environmental and floodplain
,-� management reguirements, including FEMA regulations implementing Executive Orders (E�)
-' 11988, 11990 and Secdon 404 of the Clean Water Act_
,� . _ � � � � ,
w,. ��_fer�a.gov

D. Changes in the scope af the project and/ or alignment or ��t�e pru�5�+u ,���a���� ��►�� � a•A,�=•Y�- •-•�-
wi11 affect other properties acquired with FEMA grant funds will require pnor approval by the
agreement signatories FEMA, State, City. Any chanSes made wit6out prior approval wi.]1 void this
approval and amendments to deed restrictions.
E. This determination is based on the road as proposed to date and may not be relied upon in the event
of design changes with respect to the project footprint on the IIIviGP restncted parcels; the City may
request reconsideration by FEMA in such cases. �
Under the Stafford Act, any land purchased with HMGP fun�s must be restricted to open space use in
perpetuity. The deed-Testricted property is not eligible for any disaster assistance for any purpose from any
Federal source. .
Enclosed are the draft legal documents for amending the land use restrictions and for allowin� the use of the
referenced deed-restricted properties for the construction of the proposed highway improvements. VVe
request written conf'irmation from the State and from the City that each party concurs with and agrees to the
understandings and stipulations in this conditional determination. We also request that the State and the City
review the enclosed draf� legal documents for accuracy with respect to the af�ected parcels, ta ensure the
legal form of the documents is not in conflict with jurisdictional requirements of the State and the City, and
to identify appropriate sigaatories for the Agreement.
When we receive the requested concurrence, we will proce�d to finalize the Agency determination and
prepare the deed amendment documents. Shouid you need any further clarification on this issue please
contact Dan Shirk, Lead Mitigation Specialist, at 770-220-5403.
, FnC�nc�irPc
� �-�,� , � _
' _'� � � � � ' ` �-
, �°� � '.�":� , "� ,! z� _� .' `' ' ' _� _} � 1° ; E ;�,

- t - _,.. . _ ... � .....� .. � ...... � . � , �... � - -� — —
����� Department of Environm?n' ai1C� jE]�ilJf�� R250UtC25 Projec� Number: �""''' �� ' ``�'Due Dat�; ;.��_
�� ,
r
� 1NTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEiN - PROJE�t COT�IMENTS �
After reviPw of this projeR it has been deterrnined that the DENR permit(s) and/or apprnvals indicated rnay nead to be obcained ia order for this preje
to c�mply yvith North Carolina Law. Questions regarding these permits should 6e addreszed to the Regional OfScz indicated on the rmverse of ihis fo+:
A!I applica6ons, information and guidelines relative to these plans and permits are available from the same Aegional Ofii�e,
PERMIA
� Ptimrittn construct & operate wastevrater treatment
facilitie� sewer system extensions & sewer systertu
not dixharging inio siate surface wate+s.
Q i+IPOES-permit to discharge into su►face water and/a Application 180 days before begin a�tivity. On-sife inspection preapp�K�n
permittooperateandtonstruccwastewate+facilities conferenceusual.Additionally,abminpermitto.consmxtwastewat�ytreahnent
d'eschaiging into state sur(ace waters. faciGty-grantetl aker NPDES. Heply time, 30 days after rrceipt of plans or issue
of NPDFS permiFwhichever is iater.
- -=----- -----_ . _ . .. .._.,.. .. .
--- .YVaier USe PertniY " �- -- . _� .. -�PPlication technical conference usualiy necessary-- �
0 .
� •' � Well Cautruction Permit Cvmplete appiication must be ►eceived and permit issued prior tn the
insiallation of a well.
\ o Dredge and FII Permit Application copy must be served on each adjacent riparian' property owne�.
flo-site inspection. Preappllcation conference usual Flling may require Easemen�
to Fill from N C De rtmen[ of Ad i ist ti d Fed 1 � ed
SFECIAL APPtltAT10M PR4CEDURES or F�QUIREMEN� '
Appli�cion 90 days befoce begin construction rn award oi consiruction
contracts: OrrsBe inspection. Post�ppfication technical conference usual.
_ . _Pa m n ra on an era r ge and Fill Permit
� Pnmit to conrtruct & operate Air Pollution Abatement '
facilities and/or Emission Sources as per 15 A MCAC . . �►/q
i1 . (2Q.OlOQ2p.0300.2H.0600)
'� Arry opm buming associated with subject prvposal
- must be in compliance with 75 A NCAC ZD.1900 '
� Oemol'rtion or ceno�rations of structuies containing ',
asbestos materia) must be in compliance with ' •
15 A NCAC 2D.11) 0(a) (1) which requires notification N/A
and remaval pr'ror to demolition_ ContacE Asbestos
C�ntrol Group 919-733-D820.
� Complex5ource Permitrequired under 75A NCAC
ZD.OSi30
�, The Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973.must be properfy addressed For any land disturbing activity. An arosion & sedimentation
control ylan will be required if one or mor,e acres to be disturbed Plan fited with proper, RegionaF Office (Land Qvality Sectionj at least 30
days before beginning activiry. A fee of 540 for the first acre or any part oF an acre. ,
� The 5edimentation Pdlution Control Act cf 1973 musCtre addressed with respeci ta the referenced local Ordinance.
� hlining Peimit On-site inspection usual. 5urety bond filed witfi DENR. Bond amoun; varies wrth
rype mine and number of acres of affected land. Any are mined great�r than
• o�e ave must be permitted. The appropriate bond must be received be'{cre
the permit can be issued.
� I North Carolina 9urning pe�mit
Nortnal Process Ttr,
�tatutory Time tirr,
30.da}r
(90 days)
90-120 days
(N/A)
30 days
IWA)
% daiYS
(15 days)
SS days
(90 days)
60 days
60 d ays
f90 d ays}
20 days
(30 days)
30 days
30 days
{60 days)
On-site inspection by N.0 Divisiort of Foresf Resourres if permit exc� 4 days � 1 day
inVA)
�I Special Gcound Uearanc 08�ming �ermi[-�Z couniies � Or►-site inspection by N.C.Division oF Forest Resources required 'if rti�e ttian Frve 1
in �oastal N.Lwith organic soils acres of grou�d clearing activities are involved. Inspections should•� requested j � day
at least ten days before actual burn is planned.' j (r��A)
� I Oil Refining Facilities
N/A
40- 1?Odays
{�/�j
� Dam Saiety Permit if permit required,apptiCation 50 days beFore oegin consiruction. Applicant
musthireM.C:qualifiedengineerto: prepareplans,inspec2construction,c>r:i(y
construction is according to DENR approved olans. May also require �rmit undar
mosq�dto convol program,and a�bOd permit from Corps of Engi��r> I 30 da�s
An inspettion of site is necessary to verify Hazard Classification. A minimvn (60 daysl
fee of 52L�0.00 must a<companq the appli�ation. An additional processing fz�
based on a percentage or the total project cost will he required upon completion. I

PEzrniTs
� I Permit to drill explora!ory oil or gas well
� i Geophysicai 6cploration Permit
� I. 5tate Lakes Construction Permit
�' A01 Water Quality Certifiotion
� I CAMA Permit for MA7C)R development
� CAMA Permit for MINOR development
__ __
SPECIAL AP?�}�AT10N "rROCEDURES or REQUiRE�b1ENT$
file surety bond oF$5,000 with DENR running co State of N.C. cond'qional that any
well opened by drill operaror shall, upon abandonmenc, be plugged acmrding
to DENR rulgs and regulations.
Application filed with DENR at least 10 days pria to issue of permit. App�i�ation
by letter. No.standard application Form.
Application fees based on structure size is charged. Must include descriptions
& drawi�gs ofstructure & proof of ownership d riparian property.
N/A
5250.00 fee must atcompany application
550.00 fee must ac.Company applicatian
� I 5everal geadetiCmonumenu are located in or near the project area. IF any monument needs to 6e moved or destroyed, please notify;
N.0 Geodetic 5urvey, Boz 27687 Raleigh, N.G 27671
❑� Abandanment of anywells, if required rnust 6e in ac�vrtlance wi[h Title 15/l Subchapter ZC0700.
. _l
Norrt�al Proc�ssTit�
(Sta�ut� �me Lin3,`
���
10 days /- �
(Y/A}
10 days
(N/A) _
1 S - 20 days
(N/A)
SS days � � '
(130 days) �
6o days
S 130 days)
22--�__
(25 days)
�� Not�cation of the proper regional office is requested if'orphan' underground storage ta�la {UST51 are dacovered during any eecavation op�retion.
�+ Compliance with 15A NCAC 2H 1000 (Coastal5tormwater pules) is required.
I- �
45 days r
(N/A) �—
Qthertom�nents (attach additional pages as necessary, being czrtain to cite comment authorKy) ' ' " - �
�^ �j !.
5i ��'u?" �,i�.i�.� � �T�;i?i �^'�G�r-1 ;� �- f�;L�•. ia � ^� �:L'��v .�� � �wv' i j 15%a d��i:�fL�u1 f�„�
� �, i ��j �`� ./� �_ 1
���'"�� � V L...��(:>- j'�� �.'-',�'''?j ,%" a'lil�� ,% �"� �-!'"'i�"v^-i I�Y' 1. �6 C-L. t. r'� J
C.-.- �%->a — rJ e 5 i L/`-�� i��::
/ 1 "1� {/J / �'!'-% f �`"t'� ��fZ-.n, �r%i`IZ�'l�G�si.r��"j�� j`�` !l ��+V G� 6JJ jK6; 5 �j ' iif2 .
��� �.�,�,� -� �7� >I G,� � ! �� � ��.��-�� N �: �� ,�.�;zL:,: ����-�:- ,� .
-�z-r �r�--n-�
�i�� 1 J'^.1��: ....� T�,_�{•i��l1W +� /i �G-tJj!yi i� j C..�i� L L/� i/�7?��f>_` ��.;Si�—+�-�
� ' <...'�'T���'+.__
.'�''23�I '>>`�/�7�!'�.� �= L.�J IZS��-"� �
REGiONAL �FF9CE5 � �
Questions regarding these permits shoutd be addressed to the Regional Office marked below.
� AshQville RegionaD Office ❑ Mooresville Regior�ai �D#fice ❑ YflilmingtonR�ional Of#ice
59 Woodfin Place 919 North Main Street 1�7 Cardinal Drive Extension
Asheville, N.C.28801 �Ulooresville, N.C.28115 V`/ilmington,N.C.28405
(3Z8) 251-6208 [phone] [phone]
❑ Fayettevii�Q Reg�onal Office � ❑ Ralei�h Regional Offic� ❑ W�nstan-Satem, Re9io�a) pff�P
2�5 Green 5tfeet, Suite 714 3800 Barrett Drive, P.O. Box 27687 585 Waughtown 5treet
Fayetteville, N.C.283�1 Raleigh, N.C. 27511 Winston-Salem, N.t.27107
(910) 48fi-1541 (919) 571-d700 (335) 771-4o�J0
O LVashingtan Region�! flffice
943 Washington.5quare 1�1a11
Washingion, N.�.27889
(�52) 94b-6481

'! -- =:.—=_-=-� ..==- -_ ___—= _ � . .
. ,
,... , � r� i..
; ;..,�; ;; J ;.,- ::. _ .; f.
, . ;, :� `
`�DEPARTMcNT OF ENVIR�NMENT AND
NATURAL RESOUgCES
D1VISION OF ENVfRONMENTAL HEALTH
'?��� �^' ! � �• Project Number
,� `
��,/���
County
. �. ��, J f.�
1Inter-Agency Project Revi;/ew Response
\ � . � � / ^,I � �-! C'i"! � J �—L 't
%1;`; % 1�( ,7_" ..4�;'. T�.. `<� � '%'� .,
Projeci Name % t��i ��i�r I Type of Project �,f ������'.��y�I. -���t I�/,r� .
J � ii�i .L j1LL`F.Lj �,L' L�Z�- .�J C{` I ti%%' � L%� i'
, . . , �
Comments provided by: , ' ` � j� � � j� :' r^/tiJ �.vJ���
�'�� :� %� 7 ��, �i � , :..�—.�. c-i
❑ Regional Program Person ' ��i, '�., �`•`-� .:� �.�t-.= % /Q.`�.�1 t�f�,
.�`_`�.�.- �
❑ Regional Engineer for Public Water Supply Section
❑ Central Office program-�.erson �i 1 �
f+; .� i .- �n f /� �� ' �i r r, � ��' /�� � � Z.
Name: `".? �".,,a. f�y; :r _'�.:�#- _��'- Date: y , � ..�
� _. - .�-' : , �- � �
, � : � -\ 7 y— ! ._ � 1 �.���
Telephone number��" :' I� �� �-=�` '� i� - t-°- l U(�'
:.�_ -
Program within Division of Environmental Health:
❑ Public �Nater Supply
❑ Other, Name of Program:
R�sponse (check all applicable):
❑ No objection to project as proposed
❑ No comment
❑ Insufficient information to complete review
❑ Comments attached
[�-- "�lSee comments below
�} ^ j' .�-..-- i"—�
'-� � I - {- + i . :..i
' i�� �'�tJ I�ti• �'L'i�✓' �.__� %I
� 'C_./1•r' ��''� i `.
��t
�=�; `_ I;`1; �.,,y
., ,;; �;�; „��,� s�' `..
� ;�� _
r.�_._ � 1
�,%` � r�; �-...�„''� � � �''�.5�-�C"� t�,,�
�7 il; ._ lrJ
j� \
Return to:
Public UVater Suoply Section
Environmental Review Coordinator
for the
Division of Environmental Health
1
,�1�i..{.�;� f l-�;.__
; _,� _ "_ : �' i :iF:;—�;M �
;, i� i; • , i :,;s
�JijJ� -.., i?_ ,± i` I..
d',�: �.�,...._....r.....�-.......--.._...-.-:..' ii��i
i f �.';
i •'-. � S — P `
` ��1`.11i� �r � �I�..�il , G �
V . _ ;
1
��.....,.......,... _.....�__�._.....__.,,...i
� ���Ji7L'. .;P! i.. . `..�..Fi.',w� '. %; •..� ���
�,. _..-.�___.._-...�m....._.._.�.._��,_.�...._..i

" a't� i_ r% :;v�-
:�
, � .:� i,. �'� L
� `��'�,.
�' '��EPARTMENT OF ENVlRONMENT,�ND
.. �i! Cl ��1. �� �. �I.,l,i
°� �" ' NATURAL RESOURCES
'� �' � -,:
°o s�� �' ��,iV1SION OF ENVI�ONMENTAL HEALTH
"�� ; �
'�`��''� Inter-Agency Project Review Response
, _ _ j i
�a�5�•H `
Project Name
Type o� Proj
Project Number
County
❑ The applicant should be advised that plans and specifications for all v��ater system
improvements must be approved by the Division of Environmental Health prior to the
award of a contract or the initiation of construction (as required by 15A NCAC 18C
.Q300et. seq.). For information, contact the Public W�ater Supply Section, (919)
733-2321.
❑ This project will be classified as a non-community public water suFply and must camply
with stata and federal drinking water monitoring requirements. For more information the
applicant shouid contact th2 Public Water Supply Section, (919} 733-2321.
❑ If this project is constructed as proposed, we will recommend closure of feet of
adjaceni waters to the harvest of shell�ish. For information regardirig the shellfish
sanitation program, t;�e applicant should contact the Shellfish Sanitation Section at (252)
726-6827.
❑ The soil disposal area(s) proposed for this project may produce a mosquito breeding
probiem. For information concerning appropriate mosquito control measures, tne
applicant should contact the Public Health Pest Plla�agement Section at [phone].
❑ The applicant should be advised that prior to the removal or demolition of dilapidated
structures, a extensive rodent control program may be necessary in order to prev2nt the
migration of the rodenfs to adjacent areas. For information concerning rodent control,
contact the local health department or the Public Health Pest Management Section at
[phone].
❑ The applicant should be advised to�contact the local health department regarding their
requirements for septic tank installations (as required under 15A NCAC 18A. 1900 et.
sep.). For information concerning septic tank and other on-site waste disposal methods,
contact the On-Site Wastewater Section at [phone].
❑ Tha applicant should be advised to contact the local health department regarding the
sanitary facilities required for this project.
❑ If existing water lines will be relocated during the construction, plans for the water line
relocation must be submitted to the Division of Environmental Health, Public Water
Supply Section, Technical Services Branch, 1034 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North
Carolina 27699-1634, [phone].
❑ For Regional and Central Office comments, see the rev2�se side of this form.
Reviewer
Section/Branch
Date

Section 4 Coordination -
��
Letter from Cit oi
Y
Rock Mount �
Y

c
�
. o* .
� ,
J -
- �� ROCKY �
� ,
MOUNT DEPARTMENT OF
�oA.� =•wa���A ENGWEERI
April 16, 2008 � '
0
� Ms. Kristine O. Graham, EIT �
` Project Planning Engineer •
NCDOT �
1548 Mai1 Service Center -
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548 � -
RE: Country Club Road Widening Project U-3331 '
Dear Ms. Graham:
.-�� Within the limits of TIP Project U-3331, the City of Rocky Mount cunently has vehicular access onto
Country Club Road for our paddle trail access site at Stony Creek. It will be necessary to maintain
� vehicular access to this site from Country Club Road as part of the widening project.
` Per our recent meeting, NCDOT proposes that the vehicular access be shifted northward along the west
' side of Country Club Road and run behind the future guardrail back to the paddle trail site. The City of
Rocky Mount will need an additional 15' of right-of-way (see attaehed preliminary plan) to
accommodate turning movements into the relocated access behind the guardrail. It is our understanding
that NCDOT will acquire the necessary right-of-way and construct the new vehicular access as part of
;� , Project U-3331. A 20' wide gravel.access will need to be constructed with a paved driveway turnout
onto Country Club Road.
If the right-of=way cannot be obtained, then the City ofRocky Mount requests that a break in the future
' guardrail be provided for a driveway at the City's existing paddle trail access.
' Should you need additional information, please call me at [phone].
' Sincerely; '
��"'�..-..r—
��Z��: v.� - �
Stephen J. Ye man, PE, PTOE
Assistant City Engineer — Transportation
Attachment
cc: Peter Varney, Assistant City Manager
Brad Kerr, PE, Director of Engineering �
',^' Dale Smith, Director of Parks & Recreation
. David Griffin, Outdoor Recreation Program Coordinator
� Jerry Page, PE, NCDOT — Division Project Manager ,
,;
, ..
331 South Franklin'Street • Post Office Box 1180 • Rocky Mount, North Carolina 27-80?-I 180
Telephone (2�2) 972-1121 • Fax (2�2) 972-1176 • Website: www.roc�ymountnc.gov
e

.
i----------------------------------�-r----------------------------��6-------- ---_---------------- — - ----------------�
�
� W� ;
' GRAPHIC SCALES � N �
; 4 PRELIMINARY PLANS ;
' SUBJECT TO CHANGE WITHOUT NOTICE '
i5O 25 O 5O lOO DATE FEBRUARY 20 2008 �
� i
�
� PLANS �
� z ��TY �F ROCKY A• DONALD STALLINGS et al �
MOUNT DB 1697 PG 569 N 21'48'4�
a N DB 176 � �
i N a O P 52 Z EIP 89.96' i
N I
I �
I
I ��� �s � O � I
I � •� F � a
^' D CITY OF '
' s N��`9 � N ROCKY MOLI
� � ? F` � � i
; �,9- � �� � DB 187T PG U
� � � � '� �
� i
a � / � �
I � �/ �N I
� �... ,r� S 33°OS'18' W EIP
� � O� - � � � / T---- I R�J ,r-� 70.00' i
.W
� /.
�ONEy CREEK
� -
I � p5• 42 p2
'� H 26^5� ROBERT . RHAM J
i DB SIPG 387
� � �3
�
i �
� � �� �
i
i
�
W/LT i�� �
- -" � *� .,tF
�
� �� �o�
� I r �
�---�—C-----�----�----�-�---�—
i--------- —��—�
sR i�rr m�urrr�,� r �
' ' ' � � -
— i s � j�
�
i 5+�s � � . . • - -- – �n i r m _ ��• ,`'.
LGRAU 350 __ ---- ----� � --t—' — -- \
� . ���p`�F'� � `� �0��
„
� . . ' .`L� 4.�' �J
_______________________ ___c_ __..5_."�l_._ ___________ ___ ,�
/ � �
/ � �
/ � y
� '
, � I
1
�
CONC
--�-----.
0
� �`�TE
� �I5' RCP
.
�—�
--F----f------F-
---F-- i Q
J��i�` / \
� � � ��, �
_-' �/ �O\
Qroj�• �lW
Z
�-�� — —F-
i
i
— �