20120296 All Versions_Complete File_20060118

M ,
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
January 18, 2006
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 in response to your request for comments from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(Service) on the potential environmental effects of the proposed widening of US 13 from US 158
near Winton to US 158 in Tarheel, Hertford and Gates Counties, North Carolina (TIP No. R-
2507A). These comments provide scoping information 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).
Extensive forested wetlands exist along the existing US 13. Based on a January 4, 2006 field
inspection by Service biologist Gary Jordan, it appears that some of the road widening could be
accommodated by previously cleared right-of-way. However, substantial linear wetland impacts
are still likely. Because of the value of the swamp forest to wildlife species, the Service is very
concerned with the potential impacts. It appears that some of these impacts would occur within
the Chowan Swamp Game Land. If these impacts are unavoidable, the Service recommends that
compensatory mitigation options adjacent to the Chowan Swamp Game Land be explored.
Strong consideration should be given to obtaining mitigation sites that could be transferred to the
Game Land for protection and management in perpetuity.
Another consideration regarding the Chowan Swamp is the significant number of black bears
(Ursits americanus) in the area. Widening US 13 to four lanes and potentially increasing the
posted speed could lead to greater black bear mortality via road kill and increased direct, indirect
and cumulative effects to bear habitat. Increased black bear road kill also translates to increased
danger to the traveling public. The environmental analysis of the project must address the issue
of black bears and means of avoiding and minimizing impacts to the species. If the
environmental analysis determines (through animal collision data or through observation of
black bear crossing points) that black bears are crossing the existing US 13 in significant
numbers, consideration should be given to constructing large wildlife crossings. However, the
flatness of the terrain and other considerations may limit the opportunity for such crossings.
In addition to impacting habitat for black bears, many other forest species will likely be affected
through the direct loss of forest habitat and through increased forest fragmentation. The effects
of forest habitat fragmentation usually extend well beyond the project footprint and can lead to
local extirpation of forest interior species and wildlife species which require large home ranges
or that travel extensive distances for all or part of their life. Roads often act as physical barriers
to wildlife movement and/or cause significant wildlife mortality in the form of road killed
animals. Forest fragmentation can lead to increased predation of some species and increased
brown-headed cowbird (Molothrus ater) parasitism of the nests of neotropical migrant birds.
Habitat fragmentation also often facilitates invasive and/or nonnative species colonization of
fragmented lands.
For road improvement projects such as widening, realignment, bridge replacement and culvert
replacement, the Service recommends the following general conservation measures to avoid or
minimize environmental impacts to fish and wildlife resources:
Wetland and forest impacts should be avoided and minimized to the maximal extent
practical. Areas exhibiting high biodiversity or ecological value important to the
watershed or region should be avoided. Proposed highway projects should be aligned
along or adjacent to existing roadways, utility corridors or other previously disturbed
areas in order to minimize habitat loss and fragmentation. Highway shoulder and median
widths should be reduced through wetland areas;
2. Crossings of streams and associated wetland systems should use existing crossings and/or
occur on a bridge structure wherever feasible. Bridges should be long enough to allow
for sufficient wildlife passage along stream corridors. Where bridging is not feasible,
culvert structures that maintain natural water flow and hydraulic regimes without
scouring or impeding fish and wildlife passage should be employed;
Bridges and approaches should be designed to avoid any fill that will result in damming
or constriction of the channel or flood plain. To the extent possible, piers and bents
should be placed outside the bank-full width of the stream. If spanning the flood plain is
not feasible, culverts should be installed in the flood plain portion of the approach to
restore some of the hydrological functions of the flood plain and reduce high velocities of
flood waters within the affected area;
4. Bridge designs should include provisions for roadbed and deck drainage to flow through
a vegetated buffer prior to reaching the affected stream. This buffer should be large
enough to alleviate any potential effects from run-off of storm water and pollutants;
Off-site detours should be used rather than construction of temporary, on-site bridges.
For projects requiring an on-site detour in wetlands or open water, such detours should be
aligned along the side of the existing structure which has the least and/or least quality of
fish and wildlife habitat. At the completion of construction, the detour area should be
entirely removed and the impacted areas be planted with appropriate vegetation,
including trees if necessary;
6. If unavoidable wetland or stream impacts are proposed, a plan for compensatory
mitigation to offset unavoidable impacts should be provided early in the planning
,e
process. Opportunities to protect mitigation areas in perpetuity via conservation
easements, land trusts or by other means should be explored at the outset;
7. Wherever appropriate, construction in sensitive areas should occur outside fish spawning
and migratory bird nesting seasons. In waterways that may serve as travel corridors for
fish, in-water work should be avoided during moratorium periods associated with
migration, spawning and sensitive pre-adult life stages. The general moratorium period
for anadromous fish is February 15 - June 30; and
8. Best Management Practices (BMP) for Construction and Maintenance Activities should
be implemented.
Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act requires that all federal action agencies (or their
designated non-federal representatives), in consultation with the Service, insure that any action
federally authorized, funded, or carried out by such agencies is not likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of any federally-listed threatened or endangered species. A biological
assessment/evaluation may be prepared to fulfill the section 7(a)(2) requirement and will
expedite the consultation process. To assist you, a county-by-county list of federally protected
species known to occur in North Carolina and information on their life histories and habitats can
be found on our web page at bttp://ne-es.fws.gov/es/countyfr.html .
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program database indicates two relatively recent
occurrences of the federally endangered red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis) near the
project area. If suitable habitat occurs within the project vicinity for this or any or federally
listed species, surveys should be conducted to determine presence or absence of the species. For
the red-cockaded woodpecker, the survey for cavity trees should extend out 0.5 mile from the
project limits.
If you determine that the proposed action may affect (i.e., likely to adversely affect or not likely
to adversely affect) a listed species, you should notify this office with your determination, the
results of your surveys, survey methodologies, and an analysis of the effects of the action on
listed species, including consideration of direct, indirect, and cumulative effects, before
conducting any activities that might affect the species. If you determine that the proposed action
will have no effect (i.e., no beneficial or adverse, direct or indirect effect) on listed species, then
you are not required to contact our office for concurrence.
We reserve the right to review any federal permits that may be required for this project, at the
public notice stage. Therefore, it is important that resource agency coordination occur early in
the planning process in order to resolve any conflicts that may arise and minimize delays in
project implementation. In addition to the above guidance, we recommend that the
environmental documentation for this project include the following in sufficient detail to
facilitate a thorough review of the action:
1. A clearly defined and detailed purpose and need for the proposed project, supported by
tabular data, if available, and including a discussion of the project's independent utility;
,'
2. A description of the proposed action with an analysis of all alternatives being considered,
including the upgrading of existing roads and a "no action" alternative;
A description of the fish and wildlife resources, and their habitats, within the project
impact area that may be directly or indirectly affected;
4. The extent and acreage of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, that are to be impacted
by filling, dredging, clearing, ditching, or draining. Acres of wetland impact should be
differentiated by habitat type based on the wetland classification scheme of the National
Wetlands Inventory (NWI). Wetland boundaries should be determined by using the 1987
Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual and verified by the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers;
5. The anticipated environmental impacts, both temporary and permanent, that would be
likely to occur as a direct result of the proposed project. The assessment should also
include the extent to which the proposed project would result in secondary impacts to
natural resources, and how this and similar projects contribute to cumulative adverse
effects;
6. Design features and construction techniques which would be employed to avoid or
minimize impacts to fish and wildlife resources, both direct and indirect, and including
fragmentation and direct loss of habitat;
7. Design features, construction techniques, or any other mitigation measures which would
be employed at wetland crossings and stream channel relocations to avoid or minimize
impacts to waters of the US; and,
8. If unavoidable wetland or stream impacts are proposed, project planning should include a
compensatory mitigation plan for offsetting the unavoidable impacts.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to comment on this project. Please continue to advise us
during the progression of the planning process, including your official determination of the
impacts of this project. If you have any questions regarding our response, please contact Mr.
Gary Jordan at [phone], ext. 32.
S' ce
ete ert}amin
Ecoloeal Services Supervisor
cc: Bill Biddlecome, USAGE, Washington, NC
Travis Wilson, NCWRC, Creedmoor, NC
Chris Militscher, USEPA, Raleigh, NC
Brian Wrenn, NCDWQ, Raleigh, NC
,ws*A?rv
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
4'f "V
-9 9
yt,91?i? ?
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY LYNDO TIPPETT
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
December 22, 2005
MEMORANDUM TO: Ms. Christina Breen
Division of Water Quality/Wetlands
FROM: Ew Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Director
Project Development and Environmen al Analysis Branch
SUBJECT: US 13 from US 158 near Winton to US 158 in Tarheel, Hertford and
Gates Counties, State Project 6.079002T, WBS Element 35488.1.1,
TIP Project R-2507A
This is to inform you that the Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch is
starting the project development, environmental and engineering studies for the proposed US 13 from
US 158 near Winton to US 158 in Tarheel. The project is included in the 2006-2012 North Carolina
Transportation Improvement Program and is scheduled for right of way in fiscal year 2010 and
construction in fiscal year 2012.
The project calls for the widening of US 13 from US 158 near Winton to US 158 in Tarheel.
Attached for your review and continents is the vicinity figure for the proposed project. We would
appreciate any information you might have that would be helpful in evaluating potential environmental
impacts of the project. If applicable, please identify any permits or approvals that may be required by your
agency. A scoping meeting will be scheduled with NCDOT staff to discuss the proposed project in more
detail. In order to include your comments in our materials for this meeting, we would appreciate your
response by February 6, 2006. If you would like to attend the scoping meeting, please notify the project
engineer.
It is anticipated that a state funded Environmental Assessment will be prepared for this project.
This document will be prepared in accordance with the State Environmental Policy Act.
If you have any questions concerning the project, please contact Jay McInnis, Project Engineer,
of this Branch at [phone], Ext. 249. Please include the TIP Project Number in all correspondence
and comments.
GJT/plr
Attachment
MAILING ADDRESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
WEBSITE: WWW.NCDOT.ORG
LOCATION:
TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
RALEIGH NC
I I .
I I i
IN,
WATF Michael F. Easley, Governor
F
O RQG William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality

January 20, 2006
MEMORANDUM
To: Melba McGee, Environmental Coordinator, Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental
Affairs
From: Brian L. Wrenn, Transportation Permitting Unit, NCDWQ
Subject: Request for Scoping Comments for the Proposed Widening of US 13 from US 158 in
Hertford County to US 158 in Gates County, State Project No. 6.079002T, WBS Element
35488.1.1, TIP Project No. R-2507A, State Clearinghouse Project No. 06-0209.
This office has reviewed the referenced document. The Division of Water Quality (DWQ) is responsible
for the issuance of the Section 401 Water Quality Certification for activities that impact Waters of the
U.S., including wetlands. Based on a preliminary review of the project study area, tributaries, wetlands
and riparian buffers associated with the following named streams could be impacted by the proposed
project:
Stream Name River Basin Stream Classification Stream Index Number
Folle Branch Chowan C; NSW 25-4.5
Chowan River Chowan B; NSW 25
Buckhorn Creek Chowan C; NSW 25-2
DWQ has the following comments:
Project Specific Comments:
1. A large amount of riverine wetlands are located northeast of the Chowan River in the project study
area. DOT should avoid and minimize impacts to these wetland areas. This may include narrower
travel lanes, steeper fill slopes, retaining walls, bridging, reduced median widths, etc. It is unclear
from the scoping notice if the existing road would be widened to a multi-lane facility. Currently, the
US 13 is a major bike route in the area. DWQ assumes that US 13 would continue to function in this
capacity. DWQ supports the construction of bike lanes and access when balanced properly with
potential impacts to streams and wetlands.
2. Because this project will be constructed in coastal counties and will disturb more than one acre of
land, it will require a state storm water permit. All storm water plans should be designed to meet the
requirements of 15A NCAC 2H .1005. All storm water BMPs in the project area should meet the
requirements for Nutrient Sensitive Waters of the State.
General Comments:
1. DWQ prefers spanning structures. Spanning structures usually do not require work within the stream
and do not require stream channel realignment. The horizontal and vertical clearances provided by
bridges allows for human and wildlife passage beneath the structure, does not block fish passage, and
does not block navigation by canoeists and boaters.
Naturally
Transportation Permitting Unit Naturally
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone] /FAX [phone] / Internet: httg://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetiands
An Eaual nnnnrtunity/Affirmative Antinn EmnIovP.r- 50% Racvrled/10% Post Consumer Paner
January 20, 2006
Page 2
2. In accordance with the Environmental Management Commission's Rules 115A NCAC
2H.0506(b)(6) }, mitigation will be required for impacts of 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 Environmental Management
Commission's Rules ,J 15A NCAC 2H.0506 (h)(3) }, the NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program may
be available for use as stream mitigation. A discussion of potential mitigations strategies should be
included in the EA.
3. Bridge deck drains should not discharge directly into the stream. Stormwater should be directed
across the bridge and pre-treated through site-appropriate means (grassed swales, pre-formed scour
holes, vegetated buffers, etc.) before entering the stream. Please refer to NCDOT Best Management
Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters
4. Live concrete should not be allowed to contact the water in or entering into the stream. Concrete is
mostly made up of lime (calcium carbonate) and when in a dry or wet state (not hardened) calcium
carbonate is very soluble in water and has a pH of approximately 12. In an unhardened state concrete
or cement will change the pH of fresh water to very basic and will cause fish and other
macroinvertebrate kills.
5. Sedimentation and erosion control measures sufficient to protect water resources must be
implemented prior to any ground disturbing activities. Structures should be maintained regularly,
especially following rainfall events.
6. Bare soil should be stabilized through vegetation or other means as quickly as feasible to prevent
sedimentation of water resources.
7. Sediment and erosion control measures should not be placed in wetlands.
8. Borrow/waste areas should avoid wetlands to the maximum extent practicable. Impacts to wetlands in
borrow/waste areas could precipitate compensatory mitigation.
9. If foundation test borings are necessary; it should be noted in the document. Geotechnical work is
approved under.General 401 Certification Number 3027/Nationwide Permit No. 6 for Survey Activities.
10. All work in or adjacent to stream waters should be conducted in a dry work area. Sandbags, rock
berms, cofferdams, or other diversion structures should be used where possible to prevent excavation
in flowing water.
11. Heavy equipment should be operated from the bank rather than in stream channels in order to
minimize sedimentation and reduce the likelihood of introducing other pollutants into streams. This
equipment should be inspected daily and maintained to prevent contamination of surface waters from
leaking fuels, lubricants, hydraulic fluids, or other toxic materials.
Thank you for requesting our input at this time. The DOT is reminded that issuance of a 401 Water
Quality Certification requires that appropriate measures be instituted to ensure that water quality
standards are met and designated uses are not degraded or lost. If you have any questions or require
additional information, please contact Brian Wrenn 919-733-5715.
January 20, 2006
Page 3
pc: Bill Biddlecome, USACE Washington Field Office
Garcy Ward, NCDWQ, Washington Regional Office
Chris Militscher, USEPA
Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Gary Jordan, USFWS
File Copy
Lr_PAI ?i?iwA, - r....... v........._ - ------ --- ------ --- - --
Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs-
Project Review Form
ojed Number. Ccwnty. Dale Received: Vase Respocsse Due (firm deadline):
? (o- Oa-U?i 1-1ER"t"?V2t7?GAi?S I I s1 G? l I3a ?b
as project is being reviewed as indicated below:
tegional Office Regional Of oe Area In-House Review
7 Asheville m Air Ri Soil & Water Ck Marine Fisheries
3 Fayetteville •19 Water V Coastal Management
:1 Mooresville I® Groundwater im Wildlife ? Water Resources
? Raleigh ;kLand Quality Engineer ? Environmental Health
0 Washington ? Recreational Consultant X Forest Resources ? Solid Waste Mgmt
? Wilmington ? Land Resources ? Radiation Protection
? Winston-Salem XParl:s & Recreation ? Other
99 Water Quality
JJ014nr HENNI=may ?.
? Groundwater
? Air Quality

Manager Sign-bMegion: Date: 1n-House Reviews Agency:
Response (check all applicable)
? No objection to project as proposed.
? No Comment
lo Insufficient information to complete review
? Otber (specify or attach continents)
RETURN TO:
Melba McGee
Environmental Coordinator
Office of LeglslAtive & Intergovernmental Affairs
Jq
?6' ?v
;.fl„
l.su7-
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
MEMORANDUM TO:
FROM:
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
December 22, 2005
?jj h4
la?
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY
Ms. Chrys Baggett, Director
State Clearinghouse
Department of Administration
Fol Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
SUBJECT: US 13 from US 158 near Winton to US 158 in Tarheel, Hertford and
Gates Counties, State Project 6.079002T, WBS Element 35488.1.1,
TIP Project R-2507A
This is to inform you that the Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch is
starting the project development, environmental and engineering studies for the proposed US 13 from
US 158 near Winton to US 158 in Tarheel. The project is included in the 2006-2012 North Carolina
Transportation Improvement Program and is scheduled for right of way in fiscal year 2010 and
construction in fiscal year 2012.
The project calls for the widening of US 13 from US 158 near Winton to US 158 in Tarheel.
. Attached for your review and comments is the vicinity figure for the proposed project. We-would
appreciate any information you might have that would be helpful in evaluating potential environmental
impacts of the project. If applicable, please identify any permits or approvals that maybe required by your
agency. A scoping meeting will be scheduled with NCDOT staff to discuss the proposed project in more
detail. In order to include your comments in our materials for this meeting, we would appreciate, your
response by February 6, 2006. If you would like to attend the scoping meeting, please notify the project
engineer.
It is anticipated that a state funded Environmental Assessment will be prepared for this project.
This document will be prepared in accordance with the State Environmental Policy Act.
If you have any questions concerning the project, please contact Jay McInnis, Project Engineer,
of this Branch at [phone], Ext. 249. Please include the TIP Project Number in all correspondence
and comments.
GJT/plr
Attachment
MAILING ADDRESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
WEBS/TE: WWW.NCDOT.ORG
LOCATION:
TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
RALEIGH NC
f ,.
III
L? Cam.
I i
l ?
NNI

Permit Review Meeting
September 16, 1993
1. Description of Project: US 13, from SR 1457 near Winton
to the Virginia State Line (17.5 miles), Hertford-Gates
Counties, State Project No. 6.079002T, TIP Project No.
R-2507. Widen existing two-lane roadway to a four-lane
divided facility.
2. Reasons for Presenting Project at Meeting
3
4
5.
j
e /
impacts in early planning stage.
C. Answer questions and receive suggestions to
further minimize impacts to wetlands
a. Substantial amount of wetland impacts (150 acres).
b. Discuss what NCDOT has done to minimize
Status of Project
a. SEA - Complete, awaiting comments.
b. SFONSI - scheduled for January, 1994 completion.
C. R\W acquisition and Construction for first 4
miles scheduled for 1995 and 1996, respectively.
Remainder of project (13.5 miles) scheduled for
post year (after year 2000) R/W acquisition and Ij
construction. I„
Purpose of Project
a. Improve safety of existing two-lane facility.
b. Heavy volumes of truck traffic (20 of all
traffic) combined with two-lane road with narrow
shoulders creates unsafe facility.
C. Accident rates range from average to above C
average for two-lane road, with unusually high 61)
fatality rate. Major accident types - run off
road, rear-end, some head-on.
d. Proposed improvements will reduce likelihood
of these type accidents by eliminating unsafe
passing situation and separating travel lanes with
median.
Minimizing Impacts
a. Proposed improvements will utilize existing
pavement throughout project - no new location
sections.
b. Proposed 46' median is the smallest median
_ - - -- - --
possible, without _Acompromisin_ sa_f_et_y-.- A 60'
median is more desirable for drainage and safety;
however, due to large amount of wetlands in area,
the narrower median is proposed.
C. Construction moratorium at Chowan River from

r
Feb. 1 to May 15.
d. Existing 84' bridge at Buckhorn Ck. to be
replaced with longer (110') dual bridges at
existing location.
ESTIMATED IMPACTS TO TERRESTRIAL COMMUNITIES
Communitv Acres
Roadside 25.3
Agricultural Field 28.5
Successional Field 11.2
Cutover 42.6
Mixed Bottomland Forest 92.7.--
Cypress/gum Swamp 7.8*-
Yet Pine Flatwoods 25.1
Mixed Pine Upland 47.4
Pine/Oak Sand Ridge 8.4
Young Regrowth 54.9
Total 343.9

GATES-HERTFORD
COUNTIES
I Reynoldson I + Drum Hill I T Corap,
?_N. CAROLINA 3 z 'Gates
1 Como i` G S A T E S I
258 Roduc Buckland I 32
(( 1 'y 13 3 3 37 ; 158 15
o urfreesb ure $ nDUry
I 2 Mapleton
a a 158 3 13
atesville { 1 S1oYI Park
+ Winton \ s Trotville
37 Sand-,
y
r Tunis Hok. -
Menol 4sl 6 Cofield
Union
• H E 3 T/ate' F O a
I s a Jon 3 a *Ahoskie wl Harrell itI
6 k 7 10
Ire 1 1 - - 8 /
10
VIRGINIA STATE LINE' R. END
i 1r.L u;2 .1 PROJECT
,,
•_-__?__ __?: LI r1 1)lt U .. , uas
DIU ? 1 •r
J IM , L. 0 iffi . 124i o LISS}
r O x all
s
a Il Da. C(aa 111 'r
n liU ')IQ Qed S 13 n /'
3 t` I a .1112 =SO; \ .a Hos.nm •? ?.
\\ '? '?f GATES COUNTY H1'
X1 m.
•."<\ I ioT-P.r P.1\ G. X:y I10; d/
)MOB? 1! ll= Wa."- G?3
o.l
1 .?? lu
% tl'IIITf.OAX /'nCO5/N ,X ,
v !l;t - llvd
S._ ULU
3
.? ,a\" kx4-,
1212 aM-Tr 00
IIo
J /
1 __ IIr 1?Si ? Rud„rn V
? ? __ r LL12
. h.el lP
Ill/. ;
Whu. Oak Eew
1
' 1-122 C-- HIOh 1U,r '31'1' 1111 3 L l ' ,? c'.
f. I l3 1111
v SI ~ 37 .• 11 Lo C -_d'
arc .1
Ila IM ISk
i Siory. 4 ? L21 L! ? .? i.l ' LLL! ? I•l q
LUX _ IL-1 UiA
..>l ' 10 11 ti .] Ew. 1 I _i.3 ' Ila-
1.1\1!;E / FA1jO .Y 1) 11LX 1' T. ^
l? L la GATESVIILE1:31 n01
1 { !.k ,-1 e..Xd•
' •nl ,''e 11?3J ? rv rw.36)
14 11U 1 \ a(\ LLU i w 3 y?
.r3 ??' •y0
_)• r I.O. r3a .y am; cl- 9Os
L_. r s
.i -I- ON
171_ Y."
up3 .?,?``? ' \
d
:;i%L4o ?l. it C.
1 ?i?,? ?• - it ?
^? Ill ie1 ''?-,c,?•, .?: `4 -.
\
BEGIN
COFI EID ". HERTFORD COUNTY',.
catil, d. PROJECT
17
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
US 13
FROM SR 1457 NEAR WINTON
TO VIRGINIA STATE LINE
GATES-HEARTFORD COUNTIES
T. I. P. NO. R-2507
FIG. 1
/"
APPROXIMATE IMPACTS TO WETLANDS
Site Location Acres
1 Just south of US 158 2.0
2 Just south of Chowan River 3.4
3 Just north of Chowan River 54.8
4 Just south of SR 1200 12.-
5 Just north of SR 1132 1.3
6 Just north of US 153 at Tarheel 11.7
7 At SR 1121 54.0
3 At SR 1211 0.7
9 Just south of VA State Line 8.1
TOTAL 149.2
I It.
-- . -- j1 1- I I 1 1,
plon,
RIVE/? ?• ?" ?, N,? e?_,««?Y -?,j ? -- -T'?-- y ' -:? ?I ?• ?\ n \ -- V
S1, y
-Vi
_ 7t C \
21
-i:. - ? ^\, ';,?:,?.??;??=','?-?---.„?.?:..-?_- _..?•_- __ - ?`__ - -_= r -_ ."=' =_ _ ?_.= __ __-?• ,?-?? may.. ?\
? i. il' lU? ? ? lua) _
ld;
l',? •. -- 1,.1 • '?? .. , •}..:: •i,?? ??; • '.p ` •' \,. NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
i _ - --- '• >::,l,`y • TRANSPORTATION
•wr'14 -
r • F; j• , r / t y• DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS _
oi.
PLANNING AN
t ` F ;?h 13. D ENVIRONMENTAL
,., I , ;' •,•• .•:.;•..;1' ??..- .?( ? •-.. ?.m ..:L BRANCH
S i \ :s?• •7=: ? i? l °? ?? _ ?'i??j. ,? ,F' R 2507
/ Wlm.n WETLAND SITES.
?? ?,I: /' /-!JI ,. ,./- •? Win, . ?
,_, ? .?• __ -•-- ':- ;--->L-... ;-- ? •??--*-- •. SHEET 1 OF 3 _
BEGIN PROJECT ?'

A
Ilk ?x
ala - , _ _. S-i6 n-s
j '.a• • ?'° r - r.r / ?/ I ` Cam ?/ ` l

Whiteoak \Pocosin ?-- / I N
( 1 e:: - c V
wc-
Jon
s r-
F
y
` J: c
•'F. Roduco u uu/
L
Tarh?l
'
Riddick? ` ?• \ I i a, ;,• P .? J.r %
•i„S ? f
v? /11 i -. White
Oak
,;; ?- ,?0? - 1 \I t?.• ,_^r- l I ?_ ?
71 `` ^ /? /[•1111)1 1r1
G ?? • J _.-- Iles ^ ? ? 1 \?G1? 1•? ?• ?` ?I` / `o y ? <?\
r Cem Jr,

••

=

= PN 4

"I
--.?( f -? c m,.

%,

° NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT O
TRANSPORTATION

DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
--

-
.14
BRANCH

IIO ?`?f
??, -??
-
7; j':i
=? ?-"• `
?`' ° ??
. - 2507
WETLAND SITES
` .
J r -
2 OF 3
SHEET

.'. 1 'IXOSIT i ` Q
e 4
FIG. 5

Cunnrh Ch 1 j.1 ?/VV/ - ^??? (\?\ ? d '`r; / I _ 1 / ? J
41 ?l
x-...r
- r _- - -
4 c.
t? 0
Pittmantown.i 'Some
?.. .:5 dot O Q' dp
u
SJt
J` • t n `'? -' \ , ,'? ?? __ / l., /l, ?'r it - ` ! '' ti`i `
?, \l :9 END PROJECT
- ---- - ?•rP._f _ bIRGFNLI\
~? 'C<m zz _ _NGP7H CA._RO --• - C<-
?, GATES f
Ch O.k/
:?]J 1.,',V (?, ?f )Ili
•Reynoldson ?c<m °? - -
•-. -. Cre t?lt - - ss /
' II. ,off / _ - t' - S.namll?l ''`' ?• ///? I.
-
GIs
-`/ Sara r Crossroads '
FIG. 5

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
MEMORANDUM
September 27, 1993
F15TA
ID EHNR
To: Melba McGee
Through: John DorneqN7;1
Monica Swihart
From: Eric Galamb e()
Subject: EA for US 13 Widening From SR 1457 To Va Line
Hertford-Gates Counties
State Project DOT No. 6.079002T, TIP #R-2507
EHNR # 94-0149, DEM WQ # 10363
The subject document has been reviewed by this office. The Division of Environmental
Management is responsible for the issuance of the Section 401 Water Quality Certification for
activities which impact of waters of the state including wetlands. The subject project may
impact 149.2 acres of waters including wetlands. DOT should develop a mitigation plan for
the wetland impacts. The mitigation plan should be submitted to DEM for review and
comment.
The document states that Atlantic White Cedar is present in the east side of US 13 north of
the Chowan River. DOT proposes to widen on the east side of. US 13 at this location. DEM
does not use NWI maps for regulatory purposes, however, review of the Winton NWI quad
shows wetlands adjacent to US 13 on the east side with non-wetland area adjacent to the
west side. Therefore, DEM cannot yet agree that DOT has avoided the wetlands to the
maximum extent practicable. DOT should provide information to DEM that wetlands have
been avoided to the maximum extent practicable especially at this location. As has been
stated by COE and DEM representatives at our monthly meetings with DOT, DOT's ownership
of the right-of-way in no way influences the avoidance requirement.
If the proposed project prevents the use of streams by anadromous fish, the 401 Water
Quality Certification would have to be denied unless the culverts.are replaced by bridges since
culverts would remove significant uses. Therefore, DOT should coordinate with the Division of
Marine Fisheries to determine if the anadromous fish would be affected. Conclusions of the
coordination should be forwarded to DEM with the 401 Certification application.
Questions regarding the 401 Certification should be directed to Eric Galamb in DEM's Water
Quality Planning Branch.
ncl3wide.ea
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunffy Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
e M. SPATE °
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT, JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
August 23, 1993
Mr. Eric Galamb
Div. of Environmental Management
N. C. Dept. of Env. Health & Nat. Res.
P. 0. Box 29535
Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535
Dear Mr. Galamb:
AU6 2 11993

R. SAMUEL HUNT III
SECRETARY
SUBJECT: State Environmental Assessment for US 13, from SR 1457 near Winton
to the Virginia State Line, Hertford and Gates Counties, State
Project No. 6.079002T, TIP Project No. R-2507
Attached is a copy of the Environmental Assessment for the subject proposed
highway improvement. It is anticipated this project will be processed with a
"Finding of No Significant Impact"; however, should comments received on the
Environmental Assessment or at the public hearing demonstrate a need for pre-
paring a Draft Environmental Impact Statement you will be contacted as part
of our scoping process.
Copies of this Assessment are being submitted to the State Clearinghouse,
areawide planning agencies, and the counties, towns, and cities involved.
Permit review agencies should note it is anticipated Federal Permits
will be required as discussed in the report.
Any comment you have concerning the Environmental Assessment should be
forwarded to:
Mr. L. J. Ward, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
N. C. Division of Highways
P. 0. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Your comments should be received by `78, 1993 If no comments are re-
ceived by that date we will assume you have none. If you desire a copy of
the "Finding of No Significant Impact," please so indicate.
Sincerely,
• O • 7yaj oil
L. J. Ward, P. E., Manager
LJW/plr Planning and Environmental Branch
9
V ,
US 13
From SR 1457 Near Winton
To The Virginia State Line
Hertford-Gates Counties
State Project No. 6.079002T
T.I.P. No. R-2507

Administrative Action
State Environmental Assessment
N. C. Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
In Compliance with the North Carolina Environmental Policy Act
For further information contact:
Mr. L. J. Ward, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
N. C. Department of Transportation
P. 0. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
[phone]
H
C? W124 J_,?
ate L. J. Ward, E., Manager
Planning an Environmental Branch
US 13
From SR 1457 Near Winton
To The Virginia State Line
Hertford-Gates Counties
State Project No. 6.079002T
T.I.P. No. R-2507
State Environmental Assessment
July, 1993
Documentation Prepared in Planning and Environmental Branch By:
,2. L 7- 2'e- 93 ???unnrrrr
S. Eric Midkiff ?
?.•???H CApoJ""'
Project Planning Engineer ?
SS;?,;Y!?'?•?

•
c
? ?//?1 ? : 6
J
-
x
Lubin V. Prevatt, P. E., Assistant Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch - NCDOT
C r-.?' W' VV

Summary
State Environmental Assessment
Prepared by the
Planning and Environmental Branch
of the
North Carolina Department of Transportation
''1 1. Summary of Special Project Commitments
a. Wetlands
The proposed improvements will impact approximately 149.2 acres
of wetlands. A final determination regarding mitigation requirements
will be made in coordination with various environmental review
agencies during the final design phase of the project. Possible
wetland mitigation measures are discussed in Section IV- C of this
report.
b. Special Permits Required
The Division of Coastal Management, N.C. Coastal Area Management
(CAMA) Program will require a major development permit due to the
project's effect on areas of environmental concern (AEC's). The U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers will require Individual 404 permits for the
non-AEC wetlands and surface waters impacts. In addition, a North
Carolina Division of Environmental Management (DEM) Section 401 Water
Quality General Certification will be required prior to issuance of a
CAMA Major Development permit and an Individual 404 permit due to
anticipated discharges into "waters of the United States".
A U.S. Coast Guard bridge construction permit 33 CFR 114 and
115, will also be required for the construction of the Chowan River
bridge, under authority of the General Bridge Act of 1946 as amended,
and the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1946 as amended.
C. Geodetic Survey Markers
The North Carolina Geodetic Survey will be contacted prior to
construction regarding the relocation of survey markers.
d. Hazardous Materials
Seven sites were identified near the project area as possibly
containing underground fuel storage tanks. These tanks will be
further investigated for possible fuel leakage during the right of
way acquisition phase of the project.
e. Coordination with State of Virginia
Approximately a 1500-foot transition, from the proposed
four-lane divided facility to the existing two-lane roadway, will be
constructed in the State of Virginia. NCDOT will coordinate proposed
improvements in Virginia with the Virginia Department of
Transportation.
f. Construction Moratorium at the Chowan River
A construction moratorium on the Chowan River bridge will be in
effect from February 1 to May 15 to avoid hindering spawning efforts
and larval survival of anadromous fish species.
g. Endangered Species
The red-cockaded woodpecker occurs within the project
boundaries. Further foraging habitat analysis surveys will be
conducted to determine if removal of trees along this section of
US 13 will have a detrimental effect on this species. The results of
these surveys will be reported in subsequent environmental
documentation.
2. Description of Action
The North Carolina Department of Transportation proposes widening
US 13 to a four-lane, divided facility with a 46-foot median. The project
begins at SR 1457 near Winton and ends at the Virginia State Line (Figure
1). The proposed improvements will also require a transition (from the
proposed four-lane, divided roadway back down to the existing two-lane
facility) for approximately 1500 feet into Virginia. The total
recommended cost for the proposed improvements is $38,350,000 including
$26,500,000 for construction and $11,850,000 for right of way.
3. Summary of Beneficial and Adverse Environmental Impacts
The proposed improvements will allow more efficient vehicle operation
and reduced travel times, resulting in road user cost savings. Traffic
safety will be enhanced. Additionally, the proposed improvements will
encourage economical development in the area.
Approximately 183 acres of additional right of way will be required.
It is anticipated 61 residences and 7 businesses will be relocated as a
result of the project. The proposed improvements will impact
approximately 149.2 acres of wetlands and 116 acres of prime farmland.
Three noise receptors experienced substantial noise level increases as a
result of the proposed improvements, while a total of 37 receptors
approached or exceeded FHWA Noise Abatement Criteria.
4. Alternatives Considered
a. Four-lane divided facility
b. "Do nothing" alternative
c. Alternative modes of transportation
5. Federal, State, and Local A encies Contacted at the
Beginning of the Study
U. S. Department of Agriculture - Soil Conservation Service
U. S. Department of the Army - Wilmington Corps of Engineers
U. S. Department of the Interior - Fish and Wildlife Service
U. S. Department of Transportation - U. S. Coast Guard
U. S. Department of Commerce - National Marine Fisheries Service
U. S. Geological Survey
Environmental Protection Agency
N. C. Department of Administration - State Clearinghouse
N. C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
N. C. Department of Cultural Resources
N. C. Department of Crime Control and Public Safety
N. C. Department of Public Instruction
N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission
Mid-East Commission
Albemarle Regional Planning and Development Commission
Hertford County Commissioners
Gates County Commissioners
Mayor of Winton
6. Basis for Environmental Assessment
On the basis of planning and environmental studies, it is not
anticipated that this project will have a significant detrimental effect
on.the quality of the human environment. The proposed project will cause
no significant changes in route classification and land use and is not
controversial in nature. The project has been reviewed by appropriate
federal, state and local agencies, and no objections have been raised. No
major objections to the project were voiced at the informational workshops
held on January 15, 1992 and November 5, 1992. Therefore, it is concluded
that a State Environmental Assessment is applicable to the project.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
- I. NEED FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
A. General Description of Project . . . . . . . . . . . 1
B. Project Status and Historical Resume . . . . . . . . 1
C. Existing Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1. Length of Roadway Section Studied . . . . . . . 1
2. Route Classification . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3. Existing Cross Section . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
4. Existing Right of Way . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
5. Speed Limits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
6. Access Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
7. Bridges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
8. Drainage Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
9. Traffic Data . . . . . . . . . . . 3
10. Horizontal and Vertical Alignment . . . . . 3
11. Intersecting Roads and Type of Control . . . . . 3
12. Adjacent Land Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
13. School Bus Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
D. Capacity Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
E. Accident Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
F. Project Terminals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
G. Thoroughfare Plan . . . . . . . . 5
H. Benefits to the State, Region and Community . . . . . 5
II. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
A. General Description 5
B. Length of Project 6
C. Cross Section Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
D. Design Speed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
E. Access Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
F. Intersection Treatment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
G. Right of Way . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
H. Required Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
I. Special Permits Required . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
J. Changes in the State Highway System . . . . . . . . . 7
K. Multiple Use of Space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
L. Bikeways . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
M. Airports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
N. Cost Estimates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
III. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION . . . . . . . . . . . 8
A. Alternative 1 (recommended) . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
B. "Do Nothing Alternative". . . . . . . . . . . . 8
C. Alternate Modes of Transportation . . . . . . . . . . 8
TABLE OF CONTENTS
f

PAGE
IV. SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS . . . . . . . 10
A. Social Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
1. Cultural Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
a. Archaeological Resources . . . . . . . . . 10
b. Historical Architectural Resources . . . . 10
2. Neighborhood Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3. Relocatees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
4. Land Use Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
a. Existing Land Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
b. Existing Zoning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
C. Proposed Land Use . . . . . . . . . 15
d. Project Consistency With Local Plans . . . . 16
B. Economic Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
C. Env ironmental Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
1. Biological Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
a. Terrestrial Communities . . . . . . . . . . 17
b. Aquatic Communities . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
C. Protected Species . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
1. Federally Protected Species. . . . . . 30
2. Federal Candidate Species. . . . . . . 33
3. State Protected Species. . . . . . . . 33
2. Water Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
3. Jurisdictional Wetlands . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
a. Permits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
b. Mitigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
4. Soils . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
5. Flood Hazard Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
6. Farmland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
7. Traffic Noise . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
8. Air Quality Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
9. Stream Modification . . . . . . . 52
10. Hazardous Materials and Geotechnical Impacts . . 52
11. Geodetic Survey Markers . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
12. Construction Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
V. COMMENTS AND COORDINATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
A. Comments Received . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
B. Informational Workshop . . . . . . . . . 56
C. Coordination with the State of Virginia . . . . . . . 56
D. Public Hearing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
TABLES
Table 1 - Bridge Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Table 2 - Accident Rates . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Table 3 - Additional R/W Needed . . . . . . . . 9
Table 4 - Impacts to Terrestrial Communities . . . . . . 25
Table 5 - Federal Candidate Species . . . . . . . . 33
Table 6 - Approximate Impacts to Wetlands . . . . . . 37
Table 7 - Hearing: Sounds Bombarding Us Daily . . . . . . 41
Table 8 - Noise Abatement Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . 43
Table 9 - Ambient Noise Levels . . . . . . . . 44
Table 10 - FHWA Noise Abatement Criteria Summary . . . . . 46
Table 11 - Traffic Noise Level Increase Summary . . . . . 48
Table 12 - One Hour CO Concentrations . . . . . . . . . . 51
MAPS AND ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure 1 - Vicinity Map
Figure 2 - Proposed Improvements
Figure 3 - Projected Traffic Volumes
Figure 4 - Proposed Cross Section
Figure 5 - Wetland Sites
Figure 6 - 100- Year Flood Plain Limits
APPENDIX
Comments Received . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-1
Relocation Report A-34
Informati onal Workshop Press Release A-35
Air Quali ty Input Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-37
US 13
From SR 1457 Near Winton
To The Virginia State Line
Hertford-Gates Counties
State Project No. 6.079002T
T.I.P. No. R-2507
I. NEED FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT
A. General Description of Project
The North Carolina Department of Transportation proposes to widen
US 13 to a four-lane, divided facility from SR 1457 near Winton to the
Virginia State Line. The--project it 1-oc-ated.U,?,$n .Hert,f?rd?? rand Gates , a
Counties and is approximately 17.5. miles long.' The project area is shown
in Figure 1. The proposed improvements are shown in Figure 2.
B. Project Status and Historical Resume
The proposed widening of US 13 is included in the 1993-1999 NCDOT
Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). Right-of-way acquisition and
construction are scheduled to begin in Fiscal Years 1995 and 1996,
respectively. The TIP includes a total funding of $ 36,400,000 for the
project, including $ 11,850,000 for right-of-way and $ 24,550,000 for
construction. The total estimated cost for improvements recommended in
this report is $3$QOO.Q; including $ 11,850,000 for right-of-way and
$ 26,500,000 for construction.
This portion of US 13 is on the Intrastate System and is part of a
corridor serving Bertie, Hertford, and Gates counties, connecting Virginia
with US 17 at Windsor. The four-laning of this highway will encourage
economic development in the counties served.
Providing additional travel lanes to the studied portion of US 13
will alleviate current traffic congestion along the studied portion of
US 13 and provide a safer facility. A relatively large number of truc'?s
(19% of Average Daily Traffic) are frequent users of the this section.ofo
US 13.' The combination of slow-moving vehicles and the existing two-lane
facility subjects the other road users to long delays and a low level of
traffic service. The existing single lane per travel direction does not
allow safe and convenient passing of trucks traveling at lower speeds.
Also, the lack of turn lanes and the relatively high operating speeds
increase the risk of rear-end collisions.
C. Existing Conditions
1. Length of Roadway Section Studied
The length of the studied section of US 13 is approximately 17.5
miles.
2
2. Route Classification
US 13 is classified as a rural principal arterial.
3. Existing Cross Section
The pavement width varies from 20 to 24 feet. Grassed shoulders
along the project vary from 4 to 14 feet.
4. Existing Right of W
From SR 1457 to just south of SR 1128 the existing right-of-way
width is 320 feet. From just south of SR 1128 to US 158 the
right-of-way is 60 feet. From US 158 to the Virginia State Line the
right-of-way is 100 feet.
5. Speed Limits
The posted speed limit is 55 mph throughout the project.
6. Access Control
Access is controlled from SR 1457 to 2200' south of SR 1230.
There is no control of access along the remaining portion of the
project.
7. Bridges
Existing bridges along the project are described below in
Table 1.
TABLE 1
BRIDGE DATA
Clear Suffi- Estimated
Bridge Feature Date Roadway Bridge ciency Remaining
No. Intersection Built Width Length Rating Life
32 Chowan 1972 40' 1121' 72.8 30 yrs
River
9 Buckhorn 1922 28.3' 84' 52.9 10 yrs
Creek
8. Drainage Structures
In addition to the bridges described above under item 7, the
following drainage structures exist along the project.

- One 54" reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) at tributary of Mill
Branch
3
Two 42" reinforced concrete pipes (RCP) at Flat Branch Creek
tributary
- Three 42" RCP's at Flat Branch Creek tributary
Three 120" corrugated metal pipes at Mill Swamp Creek
9. Traffic Data
i
Projected 1996 traffic volumes along the project range from
2,500 vehicles per day (vpd) to 6,800 vpd. Projected volumes for the
design year (2016) ranges from 5,600 vpd to 12,300 vpd. Truck
traffic will comprise approximately 19 percent of those volumes (15%
TTST and 4% Duals). Projected traffic volumes, major turning
movements, truck data, and design hour data are shown in Figure 3.
10. Horizontal and Vertical Alignment
There are two curves in excess of 3 degrees and no grades in
excess of 3%.
11. Intersecting Roads and Type of Control
All highway intersections are at-grade and are stop sign
controlled.
12. Adjacent Land Use
Degree of roadside interference along this portion of US 13 is
light to moderate. The majority of development consists of
residences with a few scattered businesses.
13. School Bus Data
Six school buses travel the section of US 13 in Gates County
from the Hertford County Line to the Virginia State Line. Currently
no school buses travel the section of US 13 from SR 1457 to the Gates
County Line.
D. Capacity Analysis
The concept of level-of-service is defined as a qualitative measure
describing operational conditions within a traffic stream and how these
conditions are perceived by motorists and/or passengers. A level-of-
service definition generally describes these conditions in terms of such
factors as speed, travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions,
comfort, convenience and safety. Six levels are defined for each type of
facility for which analysis procedures are available. They are given
letter designations from A to F, with level-of-service A representing the
best operation conditions and level-of-service F representing the worst.
4
The projected traffic demand along US 13 during peak hour periods is
680 vehicles per hour (vph) for the year 1996 and 1230 vph for the year
2016. A capacity analysis was performed for the years 1996 and 2016 to
determine the level of service (LOS) at which the existing two-lane
highway would operate with no improvements. This analysis indicates that
with. no improvements, US 13 would operate,at_ LOS,,C;,y;;t1996 and LOS D in..
20x;
A capacity analysis was also performed to determine the level-of-
service at which US 13 would operate under the proposed impr©vements.#
Again, this analysis was performed for the years 1996 and-20,16. This
analysis indicates that the improved facility- wou14 °operate-at LOS Agfor
both years.
E. Accident Analysis
Table 2 presents a comparison of accident rates along US 13 in Gates
and Hertford Counties and the statewide rates for rural two-lane "US"
routes. The rates shown for US 13 were obtained from studies conducted
from September, 1988 to August, 1992. The statewide rates were obtained
from studies conducted from 1990 through 1992.
TABLE 2 ACCIDENT
(per 100 million RATES
vehicle miles)
Average Statewide
Rates alon g US 13 Rates for Rural
Accident Type Gates County Hertford County Two-lane US Routes
All Accidents 138.54 83.93 167.0
Fatal 6.83 0.00 2.5
Non-Fatal 79.20 46.16 80
2
Nighttime 34.15 16.79 .
46.2
Wet Conditions 44.88 8.39 41.5
The overall accident rate along the subject project in Gates County
was lower than the statewide average. However, Fatal and Wet conditions
rates were higher than the average.
Approximately forty percent of the 142 accidents recorded along US 13
during the three-year study period involved vehicles running off the road.
Twenty-one percent of the accidents were rear-end collisions. The
proposed improved alignment, extra lanes, widening of pavement, and paved
shoulders will reduce the likelihood of these types of accidents. Also,
the addition of extra lanes will allow passenger cars to safely pass
extremely high volumes of slower moving truck traffic.
5
In Hertford County, all accidents rates were below the statewide
averages. Eleven of the twenty accidents through this 2.7 mile stretch
occurred at the US 158 intersection.
F. Project Terminals
South of the project, US 13 consists of a two-lane facility with .a
pavement width of 24 feet and shoulder widths of 8 feet. North of the
project, located in Virginia, US 13 consists of a two-lane facility with
22 feet of pavement and 4-foot shoulders.
G. Thoroughfare Plan
The proposed improvements to US 13 are consistent with those
recommended in the Hertford County Thoroughfare Plan adopted by the North
Carolina Board of Transportation on May 8, 1992. An approved Thoroughfare
plan for Gates County does not exist. The project was coordinated with
Gates and Hertford County officials.
H. Benefits to the State, Region, and Community
US 13 serves Bertie, Hertford, and Gates counties, connecting
Virginia with US 17 at Windsor. The four-laning of this highway will
encourage economic development in the counties served. Additionally, the
proposed improvements will relieve the frequent delays experienced by area
residents and through motorists due to slow moving vehicles. The
additional travel lanes will allow more efficient vehicle operation
resulting in reduced road user costs. Safety along this facility will be
improved.
In addition to TIP Project R-2507, two other projects make up the
US 13 Intrastate Corridor. TIP Project R-2205 will provide a multi-lane
facility from NC 42 to Winton with a bypass of Ahoskie. TIP Project
R-2506 will complete this multi-lane corridor by providing a multi-lane
facility from US 13 Business, north of Windsor, to NC 42. Project R-2507
will be the first step in completing the US 13 Intrastate Corridor which
is vital to the economic development of Bertie, Hertford, and Gates
Counties.
II. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
A. General Description
The North Carolina Department of Transportation recommends that US 13
be widened to a four-lane, divided facility. The widening will be
accomplished by adding a 46-foot median and two additional travel lanes
adjacent and parallel to the existing facility. The project begins at
SR 1457 near Winton and ends at the Virginia State line.
6
B. Length of Project
The approximate length of the project is 17.5 miles.
C. Cross Section Description
The proposed cross section consists of four 12-foot lanes (two lanes
per direction) with a 46-foot median, 2-foot paved inside shoulders, and
4-foot paved outside shoulders (see Figure 4).
f
D. Design Speed
The recommended design speed is 60 MPH.
E. Access Control
Access will be controlled only from SR 1457 to 2200' south of
SR 1230.
F. Intersection Treatment
All intersections will remain at-grade and stop-sign controlled.
Some intersection realignment may be necessary to improve safety along the
project.
G. Right-of-Way
The proposed improvements will require approximately 200 feet of
right-of-way. From the beginning of the project at SR 1457 to 2200 feet
south of SR 1230 the existing right-of- way is 320 feet. No additional
right-of-way will be required for this section. From 2200 feet south of
SR 1230 to US 158, the existing right-of-way is 60 feet. Approximately
140 feet of additional right-of-way will be required along this section.
From US 158 to the end of the project at the Virginia State line, the
existing right-of-way is 100 feet. Approximately 100 feet of additional
right-of-way will be required along this section. The proposed widening
will transition from side to side in order to minimize impacts to existing
development and natural resources. Table 3 on page 9 describes the amount
of right of way needed to each side of US 13 for the proposed
improvements.
H. Required Structures
An additional 1120-foot bridge is proposed across the Chowan
River, east of the existing bridge, to accommodate widening.
- Dual 110-foot bridges are proposed across Buckhorn Creek. The
existing 84-foot bridge will be removed.
- One 54 inch reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) is proposed at the
tributary of Mill Branch, replacing the existing 54 inch RCP.
7
- One 60 inch reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) is proposed at the
Flat Branch Creek tributary crossing, replacing the existing two
42-inch RCP's.
Two 8-foot x 8-foot reinforced concrete box culverts (RCBC) are
proposed at the other Flat Branch Creek tributary crossing,
replacing the existing three 42-inch RCP's.
- Three 9-foot x 9-foot RCBC's are proposed at the Mill Swamp
Creek and Riddick Swamp crossings, replacing the existing three
120-inch corrugated metal pipes.
I. Special Permits Required
The Division of Coastal Management, N.C. Coastal Area Management
(CAMA) Program will require a major development permit due to the
project's effect on areas of environmental concern (AEC's). The U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers will require Individual 404 permits for the non-AEC
wetlands and surface waters impacts. In addition, a North Carolina
Division of Environmental Management (DEM) Section 401 Water Quality
General Certification will be required prior to issuance of a CAMA Major
Development permit and an Individual 404 permit due to anticipated
discharges into "waters of the United States".
A U.S. Coast Guard bridge construction permit 33 CFR 114 and 115,
will also be required for the construction of the Chowan River bridge,
under authority of the General Bridge Act of 1946 as amended, and the
Rivers and Harbors Act of 1946 as amended.
J. Changes in the State Highway System
No changes in the state highway system are anticipated.
K. Multiple Use of Space
There are no plans to utilize the right-of-way for any other purposes
except public utilities, which will be allowed use of the right-of-way
within certain limitations.
L. Bikeways
The need for special accommodations for bicycles along the project
has not been identified.
M. Airports
No airports or other aviation facilities are located within the
project area.
8
N. Cost Estimates
Construction: $26,5009000
Right-of-Way: 11,850,000
Total: $38,350,000
III. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION
A. Alternative 1 (recommended)
The recommended improvements call for widening US 13 to a 4-lane,
divided facility with a 46-foot median. The widening is to utilize the
existing alignment and pavement to the extent possible to minimize the
potential environmental impacts resulting from this action. This is to be
achieved by constructing a 46-foot median, and 30-foot pavement (to
accommodate two 12-foot lanes plus 2-foot and 4-foot paved shoulders)
parallel, and adjacent to the existing pavement. The existing pavement is
to be widened to 30-feet, and its outside shoulder and side slopes are to
be rehabilitated to current standards where needed (see Figure 4).
The proposed widening will transition from side to side in order to
minimize impacts to existing development and natural resources. Table 3
on page 9 describes the amount of right-of-way needed to each side of
US 13 for the proposed improvements.
In addition to the improvements described above, minor improvements
are proposed to US 13 in the State of Virginia. The proposed improvements
will require an approximately 1500-foot transition (from the proposed
four-lane facility to the existing two-lane roadway) into Virginia. At
the Virginia State line, the proposed improvements require approximately
180 feet of right-of-way (80 feet extra right of way needed along the west
side of US 13). In Virginia, the required right-of-way will be
transitioned down to the existing 100 feet. This transition will be
accomplished in the 1500-foot taper starting at the Virginia State line.
B. "Do Nothing Alternative"
Although this alternative would limit adverse environmental impacts
that are anticipated to result from the project, there would be no
positive effect on the traffic capacity and safety of the highway.
Therefore, this alternative is not recommended.
C. Alternate Modes of Transportation
No alternate mode of transportation is considered to be a practical
alternative. Highway transportation is the dominant mode of
transportation in the area, and the project involves widening an existing
highway.
9

TABLE 3 ADDITIONAL R/W NEEDED FOR
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
Extra R/W Extra R/W
Needed Needed
From To West East
SR 1457 2200' south of No additional R/W
SR 1230 needed for entirely
east side widening
2200' south of SR 1128 30' 110'
SR 1230
SR 1128 1500' north of 100' 40'
NC 137
1500' north of SR 1128 30' 110'
NC 137
SR 1128 1700' north of 0' 140'
SR 1122
1700' north of US 158 30' 110'
SR 1122
US 158 5600' north of 0' 100'
US 158
5600' north of 4400' north of 80' 20'
US 158 SR 1221
4400' north of SR 1202 20' 80'
SR 1221
SR 1202 700' north of 100' 0'
SR 1202
700' north of 4800' north of 20' 80'
SR 1202 SR 1215
4800' north of Virginia State Line 90' 10'
SR 1215
10
IV. SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
A. Social Effects
1. Cultural Resources
a. Archaeological Resources
This project was coordinated with the State Historic
Preservation Office (SHPO) in accordance with the procedures for
compliance with the North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (GS
113) and the North Carolina Historic Commission (GS 121.12).
NCDOT staff archaeologist performed an archaeological
investigation of the project area. As a result of this
investigation, one archaeological site was found to be
significant.
The significant site is the archaeological component of the
Riddick House, which is a historic property already considered
to be potentially eligible for listing on the National Register
for its architectural significance. The grounds surrounding the
house contain artifacts and possibly features that have
potential to contribute information about the history of the
site. Therefore, the Riddick House site is considered to be
archaeologically significant and potentially eligible for
listing on the National Register. However, the proposed highway
improvements will not require additional right-of-way from the
site. All improvements will be accomplished on the opposite
side of US 13 from the site.
Three other historic properties; the Story House, the
Pipkin-Savage House, and the Freeman House (State Line House)
are architecturally significant and have been identified in the
archaeological study. Each of these properties may contain
preserved archaeological remains. However, the proposed highway
improvements consist of widening US 13 on the opposite side of
the existing roadway from these properties, avoiding these
properties entirely. Therefore, no archaeological investigation
was conducted within the limits of these properties.
As a result of the investigation, it has been determined
that the proposed improvements to US 13 will not disturb or
adversely affect significant archaeological sites.
b. Historical Architectural Resources
This project is subject to compliance pursuant to North
Carolina General Statute 121-12(a) which requires that if a
state action will have an adverse affect upon a property listed
in the National Register of Historic Places, the North Carolina
Historical Commission will be given an opportunity to comment.
11
The area of potential effect on historic architectural
properties was delineated, and this area was reviewed in the
field. The North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office
was consulted. These efforts revealed one property listed in
the National Register and three properties listed in the Study
List.
The State Line House (Freeman House), which is located on
the state line of Virginia and North Carolina, was entered on
the National Register of Historic Places on September 23, 1982.
The Thomas B. Riddick House is located just north of
SR 1214. This house was placed on the State Study List on
April 14, 1988.
The Pipkin-Savage Farm is located at the intersection of
SR 1218 and US 13. This property was placed on the Study List
on April 14, 1988.
The Story Family Farm is located at the intersection of
US 13 and SR 1200. This property was placed on the Study List
on April 14, 1988.
The proposed improvements consist of widening US 13 to the
opposite side of the existing roadway from these properties,
avoiding them entirely. Therefore, there will be no adverse
effect from this project on any historically significant
property.
2. Neighborhood Analysis
The proposed project is located in Hertford and Gates Counties.
Hertford County is in the northeastern section of the state and is
bounded by Gates, Chowan, Bertie, and Northampton Counties and the
state of Virginia. According to the 1990 Census Report, Hertford
County has a population of 22,523.
Gates County is also located in the northeastern section of the
state and is bounded by Camden, Pasquotank, Perquimans, Chowan, and
Hertford Counties, and the state of Virginia. According to the 1990
Census Report Gates County has a population of 9,305.
The proposed project is in a rural environment. The neighborhood
characteristics consist of the following:
In Hertford County where the proposed project begins at SR 1457,
the development consists of woodlands on both sides of existing
US 13. This pattern continues into Gates County across the Chowan
River until it reaches SR 1131. Between SR 1131 and SR 1128
development is sparse. There are a few rural homes that set back
from the existing alignment. Also, there is a developed area by the
name of New Israel in this section. Near SR 1230 is a business that
services and sells Electrolux Products. A residential home is next
12
door. Both of these dwellings are on the west side of the existing
highway facility. On the east side in the same general area is a
cement block church building that carries the name, God's Healing
Cathedral; Jesus.
In the vicinity of SR 1128 there are approximately five to six
residential homes on the east side of existing US 13. At NC 137,
there are farm homes that are set back from the existing facility.
One of the major farm crops in the area appears to be cotton.
Between SR 1128 and US 158, residential development increases.
In this area an ABC store is located near the intersection of SR 1201
and US 13. North of the US 158 and US 13 intersection the
development becomes sparse once more and woodlands become more
prominent. Just south of SR 1221, God's Acre Trailer Park is located.
Rural development increases again between SR 1202 and SR 1211.
Between SR 1215 and SR 1214 is a minority neighborhood located
primarily on the west side of the existing facility.
The proposed project ends at the Virginia State line. There is
an abandoned two story white framed house located on the west side
and in close proximity to the existing highway facility near the
State line.
The majority of residential homes and businesses along the
proposed project are set back far enough from the existing facility
to eliminate having to be relocated. It is anticipated two churches,
God's Healing Cathedral and New Israel, will be impacted due to the
proposed improvements. The minority neighborhood between SR 1215 and
SR 1214 is in close proximity to the existing roadway. The proposed
widening will be located to the opposite side of, the existing
facility from this neighborhood to eliminate the possibility of
relocation of those structures. The proposed project will not
disrupt community or neighborhood cohesion due to the sparse and
spread out development throughout the project area.
3. Relocatees
It is anticipated 61 residences, 7 businesses, and 2 churches
will be relocated as a result of the project. Twelve of the
residential relocatees are tenants, while fifteen of the them are
minorities. Adequate replacement housing will be available for
homeowners and business owners; however, the proposed improvements
may cause a shortage of rental property in the area. The opportunity
exists for rentals to become available and for tenants to become
owners. Compensation will be made available to qualified tenants who
wish to purchase instead of rent property. Also, Last Resort Housing
will be considered. By helping tenants to become owners and through
Last Resort Housing efforts (if required), adequate replacement
housing will be available for owners and tenants in the project area.
The following businesses will be displaced by the proposed
improvements:
13
Powers Tire and Auto Service - 4 employees
ABC Package Store
Corner Hi Grocery
Tarheel Bar-B-Que
Triangle Drive-In
Marsha's House of
Doris and Roger's
- 2 to 3 employees
- 2 to 3 employees
- 4 employees
- 4 employees
Flowers - 4 employees
Kitchen - 4 employees
The following churches will be displaced by' the proposed
improvements:
God's Healing Cathedral - 10 to 15 members
New Israel Church - 5 to 10 members
A relocation report for this project is included in the appendix
(page A-34).
It is the policy of the NCDOT to ensure that comparable
replacement housing will be available prior to construction of state
and federally-assisted projects. Furthermore, the North Carolina
Board of Transportation has the following three programs to minimize
the inconvenience of relocation:
*Relocation Assistance,
*Relocation Moving Payments, and
*Relocation Replacement Housing Payments or Rent Supplement.
With the Relocation Assistance Program, experienced NCDOT staff
will be available to assist displacees with information such as
availability and prices of homes, apartments, or businesses for sale
or rent and financing or other housing programs. The Relocation
Moving Payments Program, in general, provides for payment of actual
moving expenses encountered in relocation. Where displacement will
force an owner or tenant to purchase or rent property of higher cost
or to lose a favorable financing arrangement (in cases of ownership),
the Relocation Replacement Housing Payments or Rent Supplement
Program will compensate up to $22,500 to owners who are eligible and
qualify and up to $5,250 to tenants who are eligible and qualify.
The relocation program for the proposed action will be conducted
in accordance with the Federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real
Property acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (Public Law 91-646), and
the North Carolina Relocation Assistance Act (GS-133-5 through 133-
18). The program is designed to provide assistance to displaced
persons in relocating to a replacement site in which to live or do
business. At least one relocation officer is assigned to each
highway project for this purpose.
The relocation officer will determine the needs of displaced
families, individuals, businesses, non-profit organizations, and farm
operations for relocation assistance advisory services without regard
to race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. The NCDOT will
schedule its work to allow ample time, prior to displacement, for
14
negotiations and possession of replacement housing which meets
decent, safe, and sanitary standards. the displacees are given at
least a 90-day written notice after NCDOT purchases the property.
Relocation of displaced persons will be offered in areas not
generally less desirable in regard to public utilities and commercial
facilities. Rent and sale prices of replacement property will be
within the financial means of the families and individuals displaced
and will be reasonably accessible to their places of employment. The
relocation officer will also assist owners of displaced businesses,
non-profit organizations, and farm operations in searching for and
moving to replacement property.
All tenant and owner residential occupants who may be displaced
will receive an explanation regarding all available options, such as
(1) purchase of replacement housing, (2) rental of replacement
housing, either private or public, or (3) moving existing
owner-occupant housing to another site (if possible). The relocation
officer will also supply information concerning other state or
federal programs offering assistance to displaced persons and will
provide other advisory services as needed in order to minimize
hardships to displaced persons in adjusting to a new location.
The Moving Expense Payments Program is designed to compensate
the displacee for the costs of moving personal property from homes,
businesses, non-profit organizations, and farm operations acquired
for a highway project. Under the Replacement Program for Owners,
NCDOT will participate in reasonable incidental purchase payments for
replacement dwellings such as attorney's fees, surveys, appraisals,
and other closing costs and, if applicable, make a payment for any
increased interest expenses for replacement dwellings. Reimbursement
to owner-occupants for replacement housing payments, increased
interest payments, and incidental purchase expenses may not exceed
$22,500 (combined total), except under the Last Resort Housing
provision.
It is a policy of the state that no person will be displaced by
the NCDOT's state or federally-assisted construction projects unless
and until.comparable replacement housing has been offered or provided
for each displacee within a reasonable period of time prior to
displacement. No relocation payment received will be considered as
income for the purposes of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 or for
the purposes of determining eligibility or the extent of eligibility
of any person for assistance under the Social Security Act or any
other federal law.
Last Resort Housing is a program used when comparable
replacement housing is not available, or when it is unavailable
within the displacee's financial means, and the replacement payment
exceeds the federal/state legal limitation. The purpose of the
program is to allow broad latitudes in methods of implementation by
the state so that decent, safe, and sanitary replacement housing can
be provided.
15
4. Land Use Planning
a. Existing Land Use
The land uses within the project area are generally rural
in character, comprised predominantly of farmland and woodlands.
Large wetland areas are located in the vicinity of the Chowan
River. Much of that area around the river is owned and managed
by the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission.
Development is sparse throughout the length of the project.
Some single family residential development has occurred along
US 13 south of the crossroads community of Storys, located at
US 13 and NC 137. Another small crossroads community, Corner
High, is located near the intersection of US 13 and SR 1201.
North of US 158 the land use is mostly agricultural.
Residential structures are scattered along the roadway, with
some relatively new residential development at the intersection
of US 13 and NC 37. Several old farms, including farmhouses and
related out-buildings, are located near the Virginia state line.
b. Existing Zoning
Most of the project area within Hertford County is zoned
Residential-Agriculture District, which permits residential
development on lots at least 20,000 square feet in size. The
only non-agricultural zoning in the project area occurs at the
intersection of US 158 and US 13, which is zoned Heavy
Industrial. A county-owned industrial park, comprising
eighty-eight acres is located at the intersection.
Gates County has not adopted a zoning ordinance, due to the
relatively slow rate of growth. The County does however,
enforce various performance controls, such as subdivision
regulations.
C. Proposed Land Use
Both Hertford and Gates Counties are located within the
coastal region regulated by the state through the Coastal Area
Management Act (CAMA). Therefore, both counties have adopted and
regularly update land use plans which conform to CAMA
guidelines.
The 1990 Hertford County Land Use Plan Update indicates
that economic development is the most important issue facing
local officials. Strong public support exists for attracting
new industry to the county.
According to the 1990 Hertford County Land Classification
Map most of the project area in that county is designated as
Rural. Land in the Rural category generally has very low
population densities and dispersed residential development. Most
of Hertford County falls in the Rural category.
16
The intersection of US 13 and SR 1457 is classified as
Community. This category provides for relatively low density,
mixed land uses which meet some of the housing, shopping, and
employment needs in rural areas. Crossroads communities are
typical of this category.
Land use in Gates County, like Hertford County is primarily
agricultural and forestry. According. to the North Carolina
Forestry Service, forest lands account for approximately 71.6
percent of the county. Most of the forest lands are in
commercial production. There are very few other employment
sources with little manufacturing and no major commercial
center. The county has only one incorporated town, Gatesville,
which has a population of less than 500 people. Significant new
development is not expected, although the county may eventually
experience limited suburban development due to its proximity to
the rapidly growing Virginia Tidewater area.
The Gates County Land Classification Map shows that most of
the project area is classified as Rural. The wetlands
associated with the Chowan River and managed by the North
Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission is designated as a
Conservation area. This category provides long-term management
and protection of significant natural areas.
d. Project Consistency With Local Plans
Due to the sparse development throughout the project area
transportation has generally not been an important issue in
Gates or Hertford Counties. Both county's land use plans
describe their highway network as adequate. However, the land
classifications within the project area does not preclude
improvements to US 13. Therefore, it may be concluded that the
project is compatible with local plans.
B. Economic Effects
During the month of July 1991, Hertford County had a total Labor
Force of 8,910. Out of this total, 8,090 persons were employed. This
left and unemployment total of 820 or 9.2 percent. Gates County, on the
other hand for the same period of time had a total Labor Force of 3,960.
Out of this total, 3,850 persons were employed. This left an unemployment
total of 110 or 2.8 percent (statistics taken from North Carolina
Preliminary Civilian Labor Force Estimates Preliminary Data for July
1991).
The proposed action will not have an adverse impact on the economy.
The proposed widening will increase convenience, comfort and safety of
travel. This will in turn yield an economic benefit of reduced costs both
in the area of time savings and operating expenses. Existing businesses
17
along the proposed project will also
and accessibility. In addition, the
encourage further economic development
C Environmental Effects
realize an improvement in visibility
proposed four-lane facility will
in the area.
1. Biological Resources
a. Terrestrial Communities
Roadside, Agricultural Field, Successional Field, Cutover,
Mixed Bottomland, Cypress/Gum Swamp, Wet Pine Flatwoods, Mixed
Pine Uplands, Pine/Oak Sandridge, and Young Regrowth Pine are
the ten terrestrial communities found in the subject project
study area. There is some degree of overlap between
communities, particularly with the faunal components. Numerous
terrestrial animals are highly adaptive and populate a variety
of habitats, therefore many of the species mentioned in this
section may occur in any number of the different community types
described. Specific community types may occur numerous times
throughout the alignment, with slight variations from location
to location. All of these community types have had some degree
of human impact (i.e. logging, farming, residential
development). Animals that were visually observed or ones that
identifying signs were noted during the site visits are denoted
by (*) in the text.
Roadside Community
This maintained community occurs along US 13 and is
composed of saw grass (Cladium jamaicense) coastal bermuda
(C ny odon dactylon) finger grass (Chloris ep traea), silverling
(Baccharis halimifolia), winged sumac (Rhus copalina), poison
ivy (Toxicodendron radicans), Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera
japonica), trumpet creeper (Campsis radicans) and morning glory
(Ipomoea sp.). Ditches existing along the roadside are
semipermanetly flooded. Juncus (Juncus effusus), spike rush
(Eleocharis microcarpa), cattail (Typha angustifolia) and
knottweed (Pol_ygonum sp.) occur here.
Although plant succession is suppressed by human activity,
numerous opportunistic animal species utilize these areas
primarily as. a foraging habitat. This includes various species
of birds and mammals which feed on seeds, berries and roots.
These species include the Carolina chickadee (Parus
carolinensis), northern cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis),
rufous-sided towhee (Pipilo erythropthalmus), and eastern
cottontail (Sylvilagus floridanus).
A large number of insects are attracted to this habitat.
The dense weeds are fed upon by grasshoppers and other insects.
Honeysuckle flowers attract pollinating insects (bees,
18
butterflys), and the disturbed soils of this habitat harbour
numerous worms and other burrowing invertebrates. These
invertebrates are preyed upon by various species of snakes, such
as black racer (Coluber constrictor) and smooth earth snake
(Virginia valeriae), a small secretive snake, which is rarely
seen above ground. The five lined skink (Eumeces fasciatus), a
small lizard common throughout the state, forages on small
insects in this habitat and can often be found under trash and
other debris along the roadside.
Birds such as American robin (Turdus migratorius)*,
Carolina wren (Thryothorus ludovicianus)* and white-throated
sparrow (Zonotrichia albicollis)* feed on the many insects and
earthworms attracted to this type of habitat. The house wren
(Troglodytes aedon)* is a common winter resident of brushy areas
and thickets particularly in residential areas along roadsides,
often nesting in gourds or birdhouses.
The eastern harvest mouse (Rt hrodontomys humulis), which
feeds primarily on seeds, and the house mouse (Mus musculus),
which consumes a wide variety of food items, including insects,
grains, and animal material, are also common occupants of this
habitat. These mice often build their nests along the road
shoulder out of grass and discarded paper/cardboard.
Virginia opossum (Didelphis virginiana)*, and raccoon
(Procyon lotor)* frequently forage nocturnally in these
habitats. On poorly lighted rural roads, these animals are
often roadkill victims. Consequently roadkills attract a large
number of scavenger species including turkey vulture (Cathartes
aura)*, black vulture (Coragyps atratus)* and common crow
(Corvus brachyrhynchos)* as well as domestic dogs and cats.
The ditches along the roadside are semipermanetly to
permanently flooded in some areas and range in depths from one
inch to two feet. Various species of frogs (Rana sp.)* and tree
frogs (Hyla sp.) inhabit these water bodies during developmental
(tadpole) life stages. The livebearing eastern mosquitofish
(Gambusia affins)*, which has been introduced into many areas of
the United States, for mosquito control is very abundant in
these ditches.
Agricultural Field
Approximately 25-30% of the project area has been cleared
and drained for agricultural purposes. Soy bean, peanut, cotton
and corn are the major crops grown in this area.
Numerous rodents occur. in farm fields and are considered a
nuisance by farmers, because they feed on roots, leaves and
fruits of the cultivated crops. The eastern kingsnake
(Lampropeltis etulus), and eastern milk snake (L.triangulum
triangulum), which feed in this habitat on small rodents, are
19
welcomed inhabitants by the farmers. The common grackle
( uiscalus quiscula)* feeds in very large groups in crop fields
on sprouting corn and other grains as well as insects and worms.
These birds, also disliked by farmers, are often shot at when
they flock in the fields.
Because of the open nature of the field habitat, birds of
prey, such as the red-shoulder hawk (Buteo lineatus)* and
American kestrel (Falco sparverius)* along with the grey fox
(Uroc on cinereoaarr9enteus) are some of the predatory animals
whi c eed in this habitat on small rodents, birds, and bird
eggs. Hawks usually soar above the open field to spot their
prey, where as the kestral hunts from a perch of some kind
(powerline, tree limb). The grey fox will also consume insects
and fruits, particularly in the summer months.
White-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus)* feed heavily on
agricultural crops, particularly corn and soybeans, often
resulting in great economic losses to the farmers. In these
cases legal and illegal removal of deer occur.
Successional Field
Numerous fields in various stages of succession occur
throughout the project area. These are fields which have been
used for agricultural purposes in the past, but presently are
uncultivated. In addition to remnants of the cultivated species
(corn, grains, soybean etc.) various successional plant species
are becoming dominant. These include broomstraw (Andropogon
sp.), dog fennel (Foeniculum vul are), lespedeza (Lespedeza
sp.), Queen Anne's lace (Daucus carota), blackberry (Rubes sp.)
and rabbit tobacco (Gnaphalium obtusifolium). Numerous other
herbaceous species likely occur in this habitat and would be
evident during spring and summer months.
The faunal organisms which utilize this habitat for various
purposes are likely to be found in the agricultural fields and
roadside habitats mentioned earlier. Because this community has
undergone successional stages, and thus is more complex, animal
diversity and populations are expected to be greater than in the
other two community types. Rodents, which utilize the dense
forbs in this habitat for cover and nesting, will particularly
be more abundant here.
Consequently with a larger number of rodent species, ground
predators, particularly ones which use sense of smell rather
than sight to hunt (snakes, grey fox), are expected to be more
abundant than predators which rely on sight (hawks).
Ground-nesting birds such as the rufous-sided towhee, and
the popular gamebirds; mourning dove (Zenaida asiatica) and
bobwhite (Colinus virginianus) utilize the thick overgrowth to
nest and feed on weed seeds and insects. The brown-headed
20
cowbird (Molothrus ater)* is a common resident of the coastal
plain, which feeds in old fields on grains, seeds and insects.
This species does not construct nests, rather it lays its eggs
(usually one at a time) in nests of other birds such as the
rufous-sided towhee and solitary vireo, and then removes one of
the hosts' eggs. The host bird broods the foreign egg until the
young bird leaves the nest shortly after hatching.
Cutover
Forestry is a major land use operation in the project area.
In most sites logging practices have been selective for valuable
timber. Although large-scale clearcutting is not common in the
area, there are small tracts scattered throughout the project
area, which have been clearcut and are in varying stages of
post-cut succession. Soil compaction has occurred in these
areas, particularly in deep ruts caused by machinery used in the
logging procedures. As a result of this, much of the ground is
soggy or has standing water up to one foot deep.
In the more recently cut areas, living vegetation is sparse
and consists of wool grass (Scir us cyperinus), cane
(Arundinaria i antea) and blackberry. In the older cutover
areas various shrubby plants, including silverling (Baccharis
halimifolia), wax myrtle (M rica cerifera), sweet bay (Magnolia
virginiana) and bitter gallberry (Ilex labra) are the dominant
vegetative cover along with red maple (Acer rubrum) and tulip
poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera) saplings.
There is a substantial amount of cut down timber remaining
on the ground which eastern fence lizards (Sceloporus undulates)
commonly use for refuge. The canebrake rattlesnake (Crotalus
horridus atricaudatus) is another reptile attracted to cane
thickets and woodpile refuge. This species is becoming
increasingly rare because of public fear towards the highly
venomous snake, which is usually killed if encountered by man.
The pine woods treefrog (Hyla femoralis)*, a species
usually found high in trees and thus rarely seen, can also adapt
to existence on the ground after an area has been cutover. They
are often abundant in cutover habitats, which is most likely a
result of being more visible and concentrated around remaining
debris.
Species of birds which populate open cutovers include
blue-gray gnatcatcher (Polioptila caerulea)*, eastern bluebird
Sialia sialis)*, white throated sparrow, slate-colored junco
(Junco hyemalis)* and indigo bunting (Passerina cyanea). These
birds feed on a variety of seeds and insects and use the cover
of the thickets and fallen debris to avoid predation.
21
Red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis)*, loggerhead shrike
(Lanius excubitor) and red-shouldered hawk utilize the open
nature of this habitat to prey on small birds, rodents and
reptiles which are exposed.
Mixed Bottomland Forest
This community type...s most common In the northern section
of the project area and is generally a wetland community. The
canopy is dominated by red maple, sweet gum (Liquidambar
st raciflua), black gum (Nyssa sylvatica), overcup oak ( uercus
grata), swamp chesnut oak (L michauxii), loblolly pine (Pinus
tae a) and pond pine (P. serotina). The density of the
mid-story varies from site to site and is dominated by sweet
bay, red bay (Persea borbonia) American holly (I. opaca), sweet
gallberry (I. coriacea) and fetter bush (Lyonia lucida). A
thick vine 'dyer of grape (Vitis sp.) cat briar (Smilax sp.)
cross vine (Anisostichus capreolata) and trumpet vine (Cam sis
radicans) may occur as well. Due to the time of the year and the
heavy leaf litter, the herbaceous component of the community was
not well surveyed. Sensitive fern (Onoclea sensibilis) and
netted chain fern (Woodwardia areolata) were observed during
site visit.
The faunal component of this community is very diverse.
The forest floor is heavily covered with leaves and fallen
branches providing habitat for southern toad (Bufo terrestris),
eastern narrow-mouthed toad (Gastrophyryne carolinensis)*,
marbled salamander (Ambystoma o acum)* and cotton mouse
(Peromyscus gossypinus)*, all of which live under the litter
layer and in hollow logs, feeding on various species of beetles,
ants and other insects, as well as herbaceous plant material.
Brimley's chorus frog (Pseudacris brimle_yi)* deposits its eggs
on twigs and other debris in the wetter areas of the community.
These species, although often found in other habitats, can adapt
to a periodically semi-flooded environment. Other species which
are associated with the forest floor are the golden mouse
(Ochrotomys nuttalli), which builds its nests several feet off
the ground in vines or shrubs. The eastern box turtle
(Terrapene carolina), a common species feeding on plant
material, fungi, insects and small animals, and the swamp
sparrow (Melospiza melodia)*, which feeds on or near the ground
on seeds and small insects, are other common occupants of this
habitat.
Stumps, roots and tree cavities provide shelter for
numerous bird and mammal species including solitary vireo (Vireo
solitarius) *, downy woodpecker (Picoides pubescens) *, evening
bat (Nycticeius humeralis), a nocturnal forager feeding on
moths, beetles, and flying ants which often roosts in vacated
woodpecker holes, and the grey squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis)*,
the nests of which are a common sight in most forested habitats
in North Carolina.
22
Barred owls (Strix varia) are common predators of these
habitats feeding primarily on rodents. These large birds nest in
mid winter in abandoned hawks or crows nests.
Cypress/Gum Swamp
These communities border the,blackwater ,stream systems
located inthe' proec"t area and are permanently saturated tby
stagnant water.* Bald cypress (Taxodium distichum), black gum
and tupelo gum (Nyssa a uatica) are the dominant canopy species.
The understory is sparse to absent consisting of red bay, sweet
bay, water ash (Fraxinus caroliniana) and sweet pepperbush
(Clethra alnifolia . The herb layer is sparse to moderate and
consists of lizards tail (Saururus cernuus), netted chain fern,
knottweed (Polygonum punctatum), pennywort (Hydrocotyle sp.)
and, most likely, other seasonal species.
The Cypress-gum Swamp communities grade into Bottomland
Forest habitats, therefore the faunal assemblages of the two
communities are very similar. The Cypress-gum Swamp will also
contain organisms adapted to a more aquatic existence.
Hollowed cypress buttresses are preferred hiding places for
the poisonous eastern cottonmouth (Agkistrodon .piscivorus
piscivorus) a very aggressive snake which consumes a wide
variety of prey including fish, amphibians, birds and small
mammals.
Along the east side of US 13.,,-north of.-the Chowan kRiver,
the bordering Cypress-gum swamp canopy is also popu l atea° wifth.
Atlantic white cedar-(Chamaecyparis th oidesy. Atlantic white
cedar stands are 'mag,gwzed as special communities by the N'C
Natural Heritage Program and are becoming increasingly rare due
o / to logging. The wood was highly sought after for construction
/ of boats, fence posts, shingles and telephone poles. A group of
the gregarious cedar waxwing (Bombycilla cedrorum)* was seen
here perched in the treetops during the site v- isit.
Wet Pine Flatwoods
This community is characterized by an open mature loblolly
pine stand, which is semipermanently to permanently saturated.
A dense low shrub layer of cane, red bay, bitter gallberry and
white bay is present along with a sparse to nonexistent herb
layer dominated by bracken fern (Pteridium aquilinum) and three
awn grass (Aristida sp.).
The dense cane thickets serve as cover for white tailed
deer which were observed bedded down during the site visit.
Numerous woodcock (Scolopax minor)* were also stirred up. This
highly prized game bird nests in leaf-lined depressions in the
low wet woods.
23
The pileated woodpecker (Dryoucopus pileatus)*, the largest
woodpecker in the state, often tears away large slabs of bark in
search of wood-boring beetles and grubs. This species adapts
well to disturbed or logged habitats and is likely more abundant
today than ever before due to the extripation of the ivory
billed woodpecker (Campephilus principalis) from this area.
This bird, presumably once a competitor with the pileated
woodpecker was not able to adapt to the loss of large areas of
forested habitat and is near extinction.
Pine warblers (Dendrocia pinus)* are very abundant
(particularly in the wine months) in these habitat types of
the eastern part of the state. They often congregate in
multi-species flocks with eastern bluebirds, tufted titmice
(Parus bicolor)*, brown-headed nuthatches (Sitta usilla)*, and
Carolina chickadee.
Red-backed salamander (Plethodon cinereus)* and slimy
salamander (Plethodon glutinosus)* are very abundant under the
many logs found in this habitat. The red-backed salamander is a
cool weather species, which is very rarely seen in late spring
and early summer. Diet of these species consists of earthworms,
grubs and small insects.
The southeastern shrew (Sorex longirostris longirostris)*
inhabits the ground surface of the cane thickets under a cover
of leaves and vines. The shrew preys on insects, slugs and worms
and appears to search for food constantly. Because of high
metabolism rates, these shrews starve after only a few hours
without food. This shrew along with the woodland vole (Microtus
pi.netorum), a burrowing herbivorous mouse common to this
habitat, and other small mammals are preferred prey of screech
owls (Otus asio)* and grey foxes.
Mixed Pine U ZI nd Forest
This co ni ty type occurs throughout the project alignment
in small areas distinguished from the other habitats by higher
elevation. This community was likely pine dominated; however,
fire repression has resulted in the invasion of numerous
hardwood species.
Loblolly pine, short-leaf pine (Pinus echinata), red maple,
southern red oak ( uercus falcata), post oak ( uercus stellata),
flowering dogwood (Corpus floridia), American beech (Fa us
grandifolia), and sweetgum comprise the canopy. The dense
midstory is composed of black jack oak ( uercus marilandica),
American holly, red maple, red bay, cherry (Prunus serotina),
sweet bay, horse sugar (Symplocos tinctoria) and privet
(Lingustrum sinense). A thick vine layer is presently composed
of cross vine, trumpet vine, cat brier, grape and poison ivy.
This vine layer along with blackberry and hercules'-club
(Zanthoxylum clava-herculis) forms inpenetrable thickets in
areas of these communities.
24
Organisms which occur in these communities can be found in
the surrounding communities described earlier. There are some
species that are adapted to dry conditions which are likely to
be found only in this community type.
The ground skink (Scincella lateralis)*, the smallest
lizard in North Carolina, is commonly found under logs and
debris in dry upland habitats.
The brown creeper (Certhia familiaris)*, ruby-crowned
kinglet (Regulus calendula) and white-breasted nuthatch (Sitta
carolinensis)* are found in these habitats nesting in knotholes
and other natural cavities as well as abandoned woodpecker
cavities.
The great horned owl (Bubo virginianus)*, a fairly common
permanent resident of dry woodlands throughout the Carolinas,
feeds on rodents, small snakes, frogs, and large insects
(grasshoppers, bettles). Wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo) are
also found in this habitat. This species which feeds primarily
on acorns, insects and berries is hunted in some parts of the
state during a restricted season. Reward posters for capture of
this species have been solicited in the area by the Wildlife
Resources Commision.
Pine/Scrub Oak Sandridge
This community occurs in the southern section of the
unusual geomorphic feature, the Chowan Sand Banks, which runs
from Gates County northward into Virginia. It is postulated
that the sand banks were formed by eolian (wind blown) deposits,
caused by prevailing westerly winds blowing sand from the
floodplains onto the eastern banks of the river.
The NCNHP recognizes the Chowan Sand Banks as a "Special
Natural Area", because it is the northernmost area with
Sandhills type vegatation and it contains the most extensive
stand of mature old-growth loblolly pine. Longleaf pine (Pinus
alustr?is) occur.in this habitat although few longleaf remain n
the project area of impact due to selective logging and nearly a
century of fire suppression. There is presently no degree of
protection offered to this unique natural area.
The canopy of this community is dominated by loblolly pine
and numerous other invading hardwoods (mostly oaks) such as
southern red oak, turkey oak ( uercus laevis), post oak, scrubby
post oak ( uercus margaretta), red maple and black cherry. The
herbaceous component is sparse due to shading from the invading
species.
Faunal composition is similar to the Mixed Pine Upland
community. The black bear (Ursus americanus) reportedly occurs
in this area. This bear occupies large relatively undisturbed
forested areas. Clearcutting and development have threatened its
existence in unprotected lands.
25
One tract of this community has been selectively logged for
hardwoods, leaving an open mature loblolly pine stand, which is
populated by the federally protected red-cockaded woodpecker
(Picoides borealis). Other woodpecker species are abundant in
t iF's tract, including pileated woodpecker, red-headed woodpecker
(Melanerpes erythrocephalus)*, red-bellied woodpecker
(Melaner ems carolinus)*, downy woodpecker, common flicker
(Co al ptes auratus)* and yellow-bellied sapsucker (Sphyrapicus
varius) .
Young Regrowth Pine
These communities are uniformly planted with loblolly pine,
or long-leaf pine of the same age and size (10-15 feet high),
for silviculture management (needle raking/timber). Other
vegetation is rare to absent in these tracts; however, foresters
occasionally have problems with lespedeza invading and shading
out small newly planted trees.
Organisms found in a number of the other habitats
previously described may occur in these tracts. However,
because of the uniform nature of this tract animal numbers and
diversity are expected to be low compared to the other forested
communities.
Anticipated impacts to each terrestrial community is shown
in Table 4.
TABLE 4 ESTIMATED IMPACTS TO TERRESTRIAL COMMUNITIES
Community Acres
Roadside 25.3
Agricultural Field 28.5
Successional Field 11.2
Cutover 42.6
Mixed Bottomland Forest ;92.`1
Cypress/gum Swamp _7.8
Wet Pine Flatwoods 25.1
Mixed Pine Upland 47.4
Pine/Oak Sand Ridge 8.4
Young Regrowth Pine 54.9
TOTAL 343.9
Project construction will result in clearing and
degradation of portions of the ten plant community types
described. It should be noted that estimated impacts listed
above were derived using the entire proposed right of way.
Project construction often does not require the entire right of
way and therefore actual impacts may be considerably less.
26
The plant communities found along the project alignment
serve as shelter, nesting and foraging habitat for numerous
species of wildlife. Loss of habitat is likely to reduce the
number of faunal organisms and concentrate them into a smaller
area, which causes some species to become more susceptible to
disease, predation and starvation. Individual mortalities are
likely to occur to animals closely associated with the ground
(snakes, small mammals, etc.), because of construction machinery
used during clearing and grading activities.
Displacement of faunal organisms will occur during
construction activity. These animals may return to the area
following construction; however, the amount of forested habitat
will be reduced. The four-lane roadway will further dissect the
forested communities causing habitat fragmentation. This will
likely isolate species populations on one side of the roadway
from populations on the other side because many animals will be
deterred from or will be unable to cross the widened road.
b. Aquatic Communities
There are six bodies of water crossed in the project
alignment, five small streams, and the Chowan River. Two
aquatic community types will be described here, small stream and
the Chowan River.
Small Stream
Coastal swamp streams such as these have a high fish
diversity relative to stream channel size. This diversity is
related to an abundant food supply and physical variation within
the stream. Underwater roots of cypress and gum trees offer
cover to various fish. Research has shown fish to be highly
attracted to solid objects such as roots, rocks and floating
vegetation. This behavior is defined as thigmotropisim. The
fish species found in these streams are generally small in size
and. may be. the , smal lest members of the r ,respective :.fami 1y
groups;., They :are -:alsoadapted-to, sluggish waters'-with low
oxygen contents.
A large amount of area outside the actual stream channel is
inundated throughout most of the year. These areas have a
substantial amount of leaf and branch litter in the water, which
is utilized as cover by mudsunfish (Acantharchus omotis)*,
bluespotted sunfish (Enneacanthus gloriosus)*, black banded
sunfish ( E. chaetodon), pirate perch (Aphredoderus sa anus)*,
eastern mudminnow (Umbra pygmaea)*, a small minnow sized fish
which can utilize atmospheric oxygen by gulping air at the
surface, eastern mosquitofish, flier (Centrarchus macropterus)*,
swamp darter (Etheostoma fusiforme)* and lined topminnow
(Fundulus lineolatus)*. These fish feed primarily on insects
falling into the water and insect larvae, which are found in the
mud and leaf litter on the substarte. The lined topminnow and
eastern mosquitofish feed at the water surface, mainly on
27
aquatic insects and swimming insect larvae. The bowfin (Amia
calva), a large, primitive fish, stalks its prey of small fish,
frogs and dragonfly nymphs primarily using sense of smell. The
bowfin is also able to utilize atmospheric oxygen.
Various crayfish (Cambarus sp. and/or Procambarus sp.)
species, which scavenge on dead fish and other animal material
as well as consume live prey, were captured here during the site
visit.
Raccoon and mink (Mustela vison) are common in swamp
habitats feeding in the standing water areas on the fish species
mentioned, as well as on frogs, crusteaceans and freshwater
mollusks. The introduced Asian clam (Corbicula fluminea)* was
found in large numbers during site visits.
Another common fish species occurring in these streams, the
golden shiner (Notemigonus crysoleucas)*, feeds on aquatic
vegetation. Golden shiners are extensively raised in fish farms
and are the most common baitfish sold in the United States.
This fish usually stays near the shore, but may venture into the
stream channel to feed on floating vegetation. The warmouth
(Le omis ulosus) and the redfin pickeral (Esox americanus)*
the smallest member of the pike family, are predatory fish which
usually stay in the deepest part of the stream channel near the
bottom. Their diet includes small fish, frogs and insects.
A beaver (Castor canadensis)* dam is constructed in one of
the streams crossed in the alignment. The shallow impoundment
(beaver pond) formed by the dam is inhabited by wood ducks (Aix
s onsa)* which build nests in natural cavities of living or dead
trees in or near the water. Cypress cones and galls, duckweed
and acorns are preferred foods of the wood duck.
Chowan River
w sh peci4t use_ the Xihmww .Rivver
enr?ut? to spawn7`ng areas in the river .and .>inv..ua??ra??s...,
trig ?qt,l- of thO ri der. a Many of these species belong to the
genus Alosa, and are `referred to collectively as Alosids.
Alosids have been important components of recreational and
commercial fisheries in this area since pre-American Revolution
times. The primary species which occur in these waters are
blueback herring (Alosa aestivalis), alewife (A.
pseudoharengus), American shad (A. sapidissima) and hickory shad
(A. mediocris).
The fishing season for these species generally runs from
late January to early May, when the fish migrate upriver from
saltwater. These fisheries are regulated by the Division of
Marine Fisheries below the inland fishing waters line and the NC
Wildlife Resources Commission in waters above that line
28
(project area is in inland waters). The commercial harvest of
these species was greatest in the late 1800's and drastically
decreased in the 1960's. This decline can be attributed to
overfishing, diminishing water quality, and environmental
factors (weather events, etc.). Since the 1960's, management
practices have aided in a slight resurgence of the species
stocks; however current landings are only a fraction of landings
from the 1890's.
The striped bass (Morone saxatilis) is another anadromous
fish occurring in this 'river. This species is a very popular
gamefish in the mid-Atlantic states and was once a very
important commercial species in these states as well, but
landings have declined drastically in recent years. In 1991,
only 3,967 lbs of striped bass were commercially harvested in
the Chowan River.
Spawning times for these anadromous species generally occur
in late winter-early spring when water temperatures range from
54°to 67°F.
Numerous other popular game fish species occur in the
Chowan River as well. These include largemouth bass
(Micro terus sal_ mos ides), black crappie (Pomoxis nigromaculatus),
b uegi Le omis macrochirus)*, chain pickeral (Esox niger),
white catfish (Ictalurus catus) and channel catfish (I.
punctatus).
Non-game species found in the Chowan River include lake
chubsucker (Erm_yzon sucetta), golden shiner, spottail shiner
(Notropis hudsonius), tessalated darter (Ethostoma olmstedi) and
the carp (C rinus car io).
Piscivorous bird species such as the great blue heron
(Ardea herodias)*, belted kingfisher (Megaceryle alcyon)*,
ring-biMR- gu 1 (Larus del awarens i s) *, a coastal species,
becoming increasing y more frequent inland and the fish crow
(Corvus ossifragus)* were seen near the river banks during site
visits. In addition to consuming small fish, fish crows
habitually: raid heron :and gull -nests;: preying d the eggs and
hatchlings.
Ensuing impacts to the aquatic communities can be
attributed to construction related sedimentation and erosion.
Although sedimentation and erosion may be temporary processes
during the construction phase of this project, environmental
impacts from these processes could--be Tong-lived or irreversible
if, nnot controlled....
The aquatic environment serves as a major food source for
many terrestrial organisms such as raccoons, various species of
snakes, birds, turtles and amphibians. It also serves as a
means of predator avoidance for amphibians (frogs and
salamanders), reptiles (snakes and turtles), and mammals
(muskrats, mink and beavers).
29
Potential impacts to aquatic systems from project
construction include disturbance of benthic habitat and increase
of sediment load. Impacts to these systems will be minimized
through the use of sedimentation control measures.
Benthic non-mobile organisms, such as filter and deposit
feeders, and macro and micro alga, are particularly sensitive to
construction activities such as dredging, filling, pile driving
operations and slope stabilization. These construction
activities physically disturb the attachment substrate,
resulting in loss of sessile benthic organisms. Many of these
aquatic organisms are slow to recover, or repopulate an area,
because they require a stabilized substrate which may take very
long to develop. Therefore changes in community composition are
likely as a result of substrate disturbance.
Light penetration is essential for photosynthetic species,
the primary producers in the food chain. Siltation greatly
reduces the amount of available light in the water column.
Clogging of feeding apparati of suspension feeders and burial of
newly settled larvae of these organisms are other effects of
siltation. These species, often the primary consumers in the
food chain, are a major step in the aquatic food web. Impacts to
these organisms may directly effect organisms higher in the food
chain, such as game fish, raccoons and mink.
Mobile aquatic organisms are generally not directly as
sensitive to siltation; however, gills of fish, crustacean and
larval amphibian and insect forms can become clogged and
dysfunctional as a result of sedimentation.
An increase of toxic compound (gasoline, oil, etc.)
concentrations in the stream is also likely, coming from
construction related machinery and road paving activities as
well as probable increased traffic loads. Measures will be
taken to reduce the amount of these compounds entering the
stream so as not to cause mortalities to numerous types of
aquatic organisms.
eAll-aPAW, t. f t ? LJAg :br4-Ag.e_,,_aver ,,the Chowan-,Ri-ver is
l i=kel:y - to ;impact the anadromous fish :population, in _ the river.
Construction related practices may deter fish from migrating
upstream because of physical disturbances, reduction of water
clarity, and changes in water flow. The eggs and newly
developing larvae are very sensitive to changes in water
quality, which are consequences of construction. .A....con ,tructioon
moratorium on the Chowan River bridge will be observe from
-_?
Feb..ruarY 1 to May 15 to avoid. hindering spawning, efforts .:and,
-
,,4ar,Val survival
30
C. Protected Species
1. Federally Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classifications of
Endangered (E), Threatened (T), Proposed Endangered (PE)
and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under provisions
of Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended. As of May 13, 1993, the U. S. Fish and
Wildlife Service lists the red-cockaded woodpecker
(Picoides borealis) and the Dismal Swamp southeastern shrew
(Sorex longirostris fisheri) as protected species for Gates
County. Scientific surveys were conducted for each of
these species to determine if these animals occur in the
project area. Brief descriptions of these organism's
physical characteristics, habitat requirements and survey
methods employed are provided.below.
Picoides borealis (red-cockaded woodpecker)
Status: E
Family: Picidae
Listed: 10/13/70
The adult RCW's plumage is entirely black and white
except for small red streaks on the sides of the nape in
the male. The back is black and white with horizontal
stripes and the breast and underside are white with
streaked flanks. There is a large white cheek patch
surrounded by the black cap, nape, and throat.
RCW's use open old growth stands of southern pines,
particularly longleaf pine (Pinus palustris), for foraging
and nesting habitat. A forested stand must contain at
least 50% pine. These birds nest exclusively in trees that
are >60 years old and are contiguous with pine stands at
least 30 years of age. The foraging range of the RCW is
from up to 500 acres, and this acreage must be contiguous
with suitable nesting sites.
These woodpeckers nest exclusively in living pine
trees and usually in trees that are infected with the
fungus that causes red-heart disease. Cavities are located
in colonies from 12-100 feet above the ground and average
30-50 feet high. They can be identified by a large
incrustation of running sap that surrounds the tree, which
is referred to as "candel-sticking" This is arguably used
as a defense against possible predators. A clan of
woodpeckers usually consists of one breeding pair and the
offspring from previous years. The eggs are laid in April,
May, and June and hatch 38 days later. Clutch size is from
3-5 eggs. All members of the clan share in raising the
young. RCW's feed mainly on insects but may feed on
seasonal wild fruits.
31
Suitable foraging and nesting habitat exists in
various areas along US 13 within the project boundaries.
These areas were surveyed using methods described by Henry
(1989). The survey was accomplished by walking north-south
line transects (cavities usually face east/west) and
visually searching for cavity trees, which are easily
identifiable by the "candel-sticking" effect.
The NCNHP database revealed one reportedly abandoned
cavity tree, along the roadside of US 13, just south of the
US 13/SR 1200/NC 137 intersection. Eight cavity trees were
reported in the northwest quadrant of this intersection,
approximately 0.7 to 1.0 miles from the roadside tree, in
habitat which is contiguous with the habitat along US 13.
Thirteen cavity trees (three active) and four "cavity
starts", which were not on the NCNHP database were
identified just north of the US 158/US 13 intersection.
Several adult birds were also observed in the area of the
cavity trees.
The red-cockaded woodpecker occurs within the project
boundaries. Project construction (clearing and grubbing)
may impact these colonies' existence. Further foraging
habitat analysis surveys must be conducted to determine if
removal of trees along this section of US 13 will have a
detrimental effect on this species. The results of these
surveys will be reported in subsequent environmental
documentation.
Sorex longirostris fisheri (Dismal Swamp shrew)
Status T
Family: Soricidae
Listed: 9/27/86
This subspecies of the southeastern shrew is found
only in the Dismal Swamp in southeastern Virginia and
northeastern North Carolina.
This shrew measures 72-116 mm in total length and has
a tail that is roughly half of the body length. It has a
long pointed nose, tiny eyes, and small pinnae. The pelage
is brown on the dorsal side and is lighter on the
underside. In appearance the fisheri subspecies is similar
to the longirostris subspecies except it is larger and
duller in color.
The Dismal Swamp southeastern shrew is found in a
variety of habitats, from mesic mid-successional forested
areas with grassy or shrubbery understories, recent
clearcuts, stands of cane, to stands of softstem rush. It
is uncommon in mature pine and hardwood forests.
32
The Dismal swamp shrew is found in the highest
densities in early successional stage wetlands. They
prefer areas with thick ground cover and a deep organic
layer. They need the habitat diversity provided by
forested areas but there is a distinct preference for
wetlands. Shrews have been found at the edge of cane
breaks and around rotting logs on drier ground in thickets
of myrtle, blackberry, poison ivy, and holly.
They are active both day and night and feed in
underground tunnels or under the leaf litter. Food for
this shrew consists of terrestrial and subterranean
arthropods, snails, slugs, worms, caterpillars, and
occasionally plant material. Nests of dry leaves are built
on high ground in fallen logs and rotting stumps or under
rocks, in early spring.
Little was known of this species distribution range in
North Carolina, prior to the 1992 investigation by
Dr. William David Webster of the University of North
Carolina at Wilmington. Dr. Webster was contracted by
NCDOT to determine the proposed improvement's impact on the
Dismal Swamp shrew. Dr Webster is an expert on the shrew
and has been involved in extensive research on the species.
During this investigation, surveys were conducted for this
species at various locations along US 13 within the project
boundaries, using 5 x 5 grids of 25 # 10 cans (coffee cans)
sunk into the ground so the open end is level with the
ground surface. These pitfall traps are designed to
capture animals travelling near the ground surface. Traps
were checked twice daily for a period of 4 days, resulting
in 100 trap-nights at each site per collecting trip; four
collecting trips were made during the course of the
investigation, resulting in a total of 1600 trap-nights.
Shrews often enter open discarded drink bottles along
roadsides and become trapped. Bottles along the roadway
were also sampled during the investigation.
Dr. Webster's study concluded that in Gates County,
the Dismal Swamp southeastern shrew is found only east of
the Suffolk Scarp. Also, the closely related southeastern
shrew was captured in the project area. These two species
are not sympatric (inhabit the same areas). As a result,
the project construction will not impact the Dismal Swamp
southeastern shrew.
33
2. Federal Candidate Species
There are a total of five federal candidate (C2)
species listed for Gates and one for Hertford County (Table
5). Candidate 2 (C2) species are defined as taxa for which
there is some evidence of vulnerability, but for which
there are not enough data to warrant a listing of
Endangered, Threatened, Proposed Endangered, or Proposed
Threatened at this time. The North Carolina statuses of
these species are listed here also. These species are
mentioned here for information purposes, should they become
protected in the future.
TABLE 5 Federal Candidate Species Gates/Hertford County
Scientific Name Common Name Habitat NC
Ammodramus henslowii Hennslow's sparrow Yes SR
PP ecotus rrafenesquii Rafinsque's big- Yes Sc
eared bat
Litsea aestivalis Pondspice Yes C
Orconectes virginiensis* Chowan River crayfish Yes SR
Potamogeton confervoides Conferva pondweed Yes C
Trillium usillum var. Virginia least No E
virginianum trillium
NC Status: SC, C, E, denote Special Concern, Candidate,
Endangered, respectively. SR denotes Significantly Rare which is
not offered State Protection.
* Listed for Hertford County
3. State Protected Species
Plants or animals with state designations of
Endangered (E), Threatened (T), or Special Concern (SC) are
given protection by the State Endangered Species Act and
the N.C. Plant Protection and Conservation Act of 1979,
administered and enforced by the North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission and the North Carolina Department of
Agriculture.
A search of the NC-NHP data base of rare plants and
animals found records of the coopers hawk (Accipiter
coo erii), (NC Status SC) from Gates county. This species
was observed throughout the alignment on several occasions
during site visits. However, no impacts on the species are
expected to occur due to the proposed improvements.
34
2. Water Resources
The proposed alignment crosses six streams. The following is a
description of each stream.
Unnamed Tributary of Mill Branch
This stream flows into Mill Branch, which is a tributary of
Potecasi Creek, which in turn is a tributary to the Chowan River.
Stream width is narrow (<10 ft.), and up to five feet deep just
before the roadway crossing. A beaver dam constructed in the stream
channel at this point creates the depth. The stream is diverted into
a roadside ditch along US 13 for approximately 500 feet before
crossing that road through a single 54" reinforced corrugated pipe
(RCP). The depth and width of the channel at the crossing is
approximately one foot and two feet respectively. The flow rate is
not available. The substrate is mostly an unconsolidated muddy
bottom, with little variability.
Chowan River
This river, which headwaters arise in Virginia, flows into the
north shore of the Albemarle Sound at Reedy Point in Chowan County
near the town of Edenton. The channel width is approximately 800 feet
at the crossing. Depth information was not available, but the
channel has presumably been dredged to accommodate logging barge
travel. Average daily flow is 4600 cubic feet per second (cfs).
Substrate is mostly coarse sand with a fine silt layer. The-7'sting
st,ruc ua^e , i s. a ;1121' bridge.
Buckhorn Creek
The headwaters of this stream arise approximately 2 miles
upstream of US 13 crossing where it begins to flow southeastward into
the Chowan River, approximately 2.5 miles downstream of the crossing.
An extensive cypress-gum swamp is associated with the stream, which
is 20-25 feet wide and up to 7 feet deep, with a fine grained sandy
sediment. Average daily flow is 14 cfs. The'-existing structure is
:bri dge.
Unnamed tributary of Flat Branch
This small stream begins approximately 0.'3'milesUpstream of the
crossing and flows eastward into Flat Branch, 0.3 miles downstream
from the crossing Flat Branch flows into Cole Creek and then to
Sarem Creek before flowing into the Chowan River 4 miles south of
Gatesville, approximately 12 miles downstream of the crossing. The
stream width is less than 10 feet and the depth varies from 2-4 feet.
The s;obstrate is a soft fine silt. T_wo 42" "'RCRdsF,-xtist at this
35
Flat Branch
Flat Branch begins 1.4 miles upstream of its crossing of US 13.
The channel width is 12 feet, widening to 20 feet at the existing
culvert. The substrate is fine sand with a silt top layer. Three
42" RCP's exist at this crossing. Average daily flow is 2 cfs.
Mill Swamp Creek & Riddick Swamp
Mill Swamp Creek begins in Northwest Gates County at Riddick
Swamp and flows northwest into Somerton Creek in Virginia. Somerton
Creek flows westward into the Chowan River in northwest Gates County.
This stream is c,ated with an extensive bottomland swamp, which
surrounds the stream near the existing structure.`The channel width
is 20 feet.,*,. widening to' 30 feet at the existing culvert`. The depth
varies from 3-8 feet. The substrate is a very soft fine sand-silt.
Three 120" corrugated metal pipes exist at the crossing. The
average daily flow is 7 cfs.
.
Bu:x M: Creek" and their respectsve°°tr° u cries, areSWas
assigned by the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and
Natural Resources (DEHNR), Classifications and Water Quality
Standards Assigned to The Waters of the Chowan River Basin, 1993.
Class C designates waters suitable for aquatic life propagation and
survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation and agriculture.
NSW designates Nutrient Sensitive Waters, which require limitations
on nutrient inputs.
,_aears of the Chowan River are given a classification of B,
'W"W' Class B designates waters suitable for primary recreation
(swimming) and any other usage specified by the class "C"
classification. This river is very sensitive to nutrient inputs, and
experienced major algal blooms in the late 1970's, caused by high
nutrient levels. Fish larvae are extremely sensitive to
eutrophication because dissolved oxygen is severely depleted and
toxins are often produced by the algae.
The Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN), assesses
water quality by sampling for selected benthic Macroinvertebrate
organisms. The species richness and overall biomass are reflections
of water quality. The Chowan River has been sampled regularly by
BMAN in Hertford County at SR-1319, approximately 5 miles upstream pf
the project crossing.. Ratings since_1984'have fluctuated from "Good'';
to "Excellent. The most recent bioclassification was "Excellent" in
July 1991: ;.
The DEM National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
report lists no point source dischargers to any of the water bodies
near the project impact area.
No waters classified as High Quality Waters, Outstanding
Resource Waters, WS-I, or WS-II occur within one mile of the project
area.
36
Potential impacts to the waters affected by the proposed
project, caused by construction-related sedimentation and turbidity,
include decreases of dissolved oxygen, and changes in temperature.
This is due to vegetation loss (covered with sediment) and reduction
of water clarity. Impacts as a result of construction-related
sediment will be minimized through the use of sedimentation control
measures. Alterations of water level, due to interruptions or
restrictions to surface water flow are likely, especially if the
replacement structure has a different surface area for the stream to
flow through (i.e. change in pipe culvert diameter).
If rechannelization of any stream crossed in the project becomes
necessary, consultation with the USFWS will be initiated, per the
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, as amended (16 USC 661-667d).
3. Jurisdictional Wetlands
Wetlands and surface waters fall under the broad category of
"Waters of the United States" as defined in 33 CFR 328.3, in
accordance with provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33
U.S. C. 1344).
Wetland communities were identified using the criteria specified
in the 1987 "US Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual".
For an area to be considered a "wetland", the following three
specifications must be met; 1) presence of hydric soils (low soil
chroma values), 2) presence of hydrophytic vegetation, and 3)
evidence of hydrology, or hydrological indicators, including;
saturated soils, stained,' matted vegetation, high water marks on
trees, buttressed tree bases and surface roots.
Surface waters and wetlands will be impacted by project
construction. Appr-ox mately''149.2- acres of-`Palustrine forested
decidous and evergreen forested wetlands will be impacted (fi1'hed}.
The majority of the wetlands occur to the north of the Chowan'R'wer
bffdge. Approximate impacts to wetlands due to the proposed
improvements are listed in Table 6 on page 37 and shown in Figure 5.
37
TABLE 6 APPROXIMATE IMPACTS TO WETLANDS
Site # Location Acres
1 Just south of US 158 2.0
2 Just south of Chowan River 3.4
3 Just north of Chowan River 54.8
4 Just south of SR 1200 12.7
5 Just north of SR 1122 1.8
6 Just north of US 158 at Tarheel 11.7
7 At SR 1121 54.0
8 At SR 1211 0.7
9 Just south of VA State Line 8.1
TOTAL
149.2
a. Permits
The North Carolina Coastal Area Management 'Act ' (CAMA)
has primary authority in issuance of wetland development
permits in the 20 coastal counties of North Carolina, which
includes Gates County. CAMA requires a permit if the
project is in or affects an area of environmental concern
(AEC), which include an estuarine AEC, an ocean hazard AEC,
public trust waters AEC, or a natural or cultural resource
AEC.
The Chowan River, Buckhorn Creek, and Mill Swamp Creek
are recognized as public trust AEC's. This project will
require a major development permit. This project will also
impact non AEC wetlands and surface waters, which will also
be under the authority of CAMA, because impacts from the
entire project will be considered cumulatively for
permitting purposes. Although CAMA is the primary
permitting agency involved in this process, it is
anticipated the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) will
require Individual 404 permits for the non-AEC wetlands and
surface waters. Final permit decisions lie with the CAMA
and the COE.
38
Section 401 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1341)
requires each state to certify that state water quality
standards will not be violated for activities which require
discharges into "waters of the United States", or involve
issuance of a federal permit or license. A North Carolina
Division of Environmental Management (DEM) Sg trincl
(1665) Water Quality General Certification will be
min 'issuance of a CAMA Major Development
permit and/or an Individual 404 permit. Projects that
require individual permits are those which may have a
significant impact on surface waters and/or wetlands, due
to the size or location of the proposed activity.
A U. S. Coast Guard 'bridge construction permit 33 CFR
114 and 115 will be required for the construction of the
Chowan River bridge, under authority of the General Bridge
Act of 1946 as amended, and the Rivers and Harbors Act of
1899, as amended. The U. S. Coast Guard was contacted and
concurred with this recommendation. Permit application
will be submitted at the same time of the CAMA major
development and 401 water quality permits.
b. Mitigation
North Carolina state policy requires for projects
impacting coastal lands and waters, that if no prudent
alternate design, or location of project is reasonable,
project design must minimize adverse environmental effects,
and a satisfactory mitigation plan must be proposed and
submitted to the Coastal Resources Commission (CRC) for
approval. i?cr preeodgres_.
q?ual 404-permit
i
spa wi 11 else tie appl a cab I e; ` for ° non
-G A final determination regarding mitigation
requirements will be made in coordination with various
r environmental review agencies during the final design phase
of the project. The project will impact approximately
149.2 acres of wetlands. ??Impacts on wetlands will be
mini
i
d b
h
..o m
ze
y t
e use of best management practices"
X", throughout the project during construction. An effective
i
eros
on and sedimentation control program will be required
.; of the contractor. Mitigation of potential impacts on
°.•ti wetlands may include the following:
1. The implementation of best management practices (33
:. CFR 330.6)
2. Establishment of an Erosion and Sedimentation Control
., Plan in cooperation with appropriate review agencies.
39
3. Degraded wetland systems that occur within the project
limits could be enhanced. If such systems do not
exist within the project limits, a search will be
conducted adjacent to the project area to find
degraded wetland systems that can be restored. Also,
areas of hydric soils presently under cultivation will
be prime candidates for restoration. As with any
restoration efforts off NCDOT right of way, specific
plans will depend on negotiations with property
owners.
4. In the event mitigation measures mentioned above do
not completely offset the loss of wetlands due to this
project, acreage of bottomland hardwood losses will be
debited from the NCDOT Company Swamp Bank.
4. Soils
The soils of the area are generally poorly drained loams and
sands. The fine sandy loams, Noboco and Goldsboro, are the prominent
soil units in the northern section of the project along with the
hydric soil unit Rains loam. The soils of the mid-section of the
project are predominately hydric Bladen loam series with scattered
small pockets of non-hydric Craven loam series. In the southern end
of the project, Alaga sand and Pactolus sand units along with hydric
Ballahack loam unit are the predominant soils. Numerous other soil
mapping units occur less frequently throughout the project area.
5. Flood Hazard Evaluation
Gates County is a participant in the National Flood Insurance
Hazard Program, while Hertford County is not. The:approximate limits
of the 100-year flood boundaries for streams in the vicinity of the
project are shown in Figure 6. The proposed improvements to US 13
will not have a significant effect on these floodplains.
6. Farmland
The Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA) requires all federal
agencies or their representatives to consider the impact of land
acquisition and construction projects on prime and important
farmland. Such farmland soils are defined by the US Soil
Conservation Service (SCS). The number of acres of additional
right-of-way required for the proposed improvement was estimated and
reported to the SCS, which determine the number acres of prime and
important farmland that will be affected, as well as their relative
value. The Form AD 1006, Farmland Conversion Impact Rating, was
completed.
According to the SCS, approximately 116 acres of prime farmland
and 14 acres of statewide or local important farmland soils will be
impacted by the proposed improvements. Nearly two-thirds of the
farmland in Gates and Hertford Counties is of the same or higher
relative value of the impacted farmland soils.
40
The Form AD 1006 is used to determine the relative value of the
farmland, and provides a site assessment using a point score
methodology. The FPPA regulations established a threshold of 160
points for considering alternative actions which may reduce the
project's impact on the farmland soils. The completed AD 1006
assessment resulted in a total score of 149 points. Therefore,
further consideration alternatives is not required. However, it
should be noted that the proposed improvements will be configured to
avoid many existing structures, including those associated with
farms, so that the impact to many existing farms will be minimized.
7. Traffic Noise
An analysis was performed to determine the effect of the
proposed project on noise levels in the immediate project area. This
investigation includes an inventory of existing noise sensitive land
uses and a field survey of ambient (existing) noise levels in the
study area. It also includes a comparison of the predicted noise
levels and the ambient noise levels to determine if traffic noise
impacts can be expected resulting from the proposed project. Traffic
noise impacts are determined from the current procedures for the
abatement of highway traffic noise and construction noise, appearing
as Part 772 of Title 23 of the Code of Federal Regulations. If
traffic noise impacts are predicted, examination and evaluation of
alternative noise abatement measures for reducing or eliminating the
noise impacts must be considered.
Noise is basically defined as unwanted sound. It is emitted
from many sources including airplanes, factories, railroads, power
generation plants, and highway vehicles. Highway noise, or traffic
noise, is usually a composite of noises from engine exhaust, drive
train, and tire-roadway interaction.
The magnitude of noise is usually described by its sound
pressure. Since the range of sound pressure varies greatly, a
logarithmic scale is used to relate sound pressures to some common
reference level, usually the decibel (dB). Sound pressures described
in decibels are called sound pressure levels and are often defined in
terms of frequency weighted scales (A, B, C, or D).
The weighted-A scale is used almost exclusively in vehicle noise
measurements because it places most emphasis on the frequency range
to which the human ear is most sensitive (1,000-6,000 Hertz). Sound
levels measured using A-weighting are often expressed as dBA.
Throughout this report, references will be made to dBA, which means
an A-weighted decibel level. Several examples of noise pressure
levels in dBA are listed in Table 7 on Page 41.
Review of Table 7 indicates that most individuals in urbanized
areas are exposed to fairly high noise levels from many sources as
they go about their daily activities. The degree of disturbance or
annoyance of unwanted sound depends essentially on three things:
41
TABLE 7
e
r
HEARING: SOUNDS BOMBARDING US DAILY
140 Shotgun blast, jet 100 ft away at takeoff PAIN
Motor test chamber HUMAN EAR PAIN THRESHOLD
130

Firecrackers
120 Severe thunder, pneumatic jackhammer
Hockey crowd
Amplified rock music UNCOMFORTABLY LOUD
110

Textile loom
100 Subway train, elevated train, farm tractor
Power lawn mower, newspaper press
Heavy city traffic, noisy factory LOUD
90

D Diesel truck 40 mph 50 ft. away
E 80 Crowded restaurant, garbage disposal
C Average factory, vacuum cleaner
I Passenger car 50 mph 50 ft. away MODERATELY LOUD
B 70

E Quiet typewriter
L 60 Singing birds, window air-conditioner
S Quiet automobile
Normal conversation, average office QUIET
50

Household refrigerator
Quiet office VERY QUIET
40

Average home
30 Dripping faucet
Whisper 5 feet away
20 Light rainfall, rustle of leaves
AVERAGE PERSON'S THRESHOLD OF HEARING
Whisper JUST AUDIBLE
10

0 THRESHOLD FOR ACUTE HEARING
Sources: World Book, Rand McNally Atlas of the Human Body,
Encyclopedia Americana, "Industrial Noise and Hearing
Conversation" by J. B. Olishifski and E. R. Harford
(Researched by N. Jane Hunt and published in the Chicago
Tribune in an illustrated graphic by Tom Heinz.)
42
1) the amount and nature of the intruding noise, 2) the relationship
between the background noise and the intruding noise, and 3) the type
of activity occurring where the noise is heard.
Over a period of time, individuals tend to accept the noises
which intrude into their lives. Particularly if noises occur at
predicted intervals and are expected. Attempts have been made to
regulate many of these types of noises including airplane noises,
factory noise, railroad noise, and highway traffic noise. In
relation to highway traffic noise, methods of analysis and control
have developed rapidly over the past few years.
In order to determine that highway noise levels are or are not
compatible with various land uses, the Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA) has developed noise abatement criteria and procedures to be
used in the planning and design of highways. These abatement
criteria and procedures are set forth in the aforementioned Federal
reference (Title 23 CFR, Part 772). A summary of the noise abatement
criteria for various land uses is presented in Table 8 on page 43.
The Leq, or equivalent sound level, is the level of constant sound
which in a given situation and time period has the same energy as
does time varying sound. In other words, the fluctuating sound
levels of traffic noise are represented in terms of a steady noise
level with the same energy content.
Ambient noise measurements were taken in the vicinity of the
project to determine existing noise levels. The purpose of this
noise level information was to quantify the existing acoustic
environment and to provide a base for assessing the impact of noise
level increases. The field data was also used to establish ambient
noise levels for residences, businesses, and other noise sensitive
receivers in the vicinity of the project.
Existing roadway and traffic conditions along US 13 were
incorporated in the most current traffic noise prediction model to
compute existing Leq noise levels. These computed values were
compared with existing Leq noise levels which were measured at seven
locations along the proposed project. The computed existing Leq
noise levels deviated 0.6 to 5.3 dBA from the measured noise levels.
Differences in dBA levels can be attributed to "bunching" of
vehicles, low traffic volumes, and actual vehicle speeds versus the
computer's "evenly-speed" vehicles and single vehicular speed. The
ambient noise measurement sites and the corresponding existing Leq
noise levels are presented in Table 9 on page 44.
The prediction of highway traffic noise is a complicated
procedure. In general, the traffic situation is composed of a large
number of variables which describe different cars driving at
different speeds through a continually changing highway configuration
and surrounding terrain. Obviously, to assess the problem certain
assumptions and simplifications must be made.
43
TABLE 8
NOISE ASATEIENT CRITERIA
Hourly A-Weighted Sound Level - decibels (dBA)
Activity
Category Leq(h) Description of-Activity Category
A 57 Lands on wh1th serenity and quiet are of extraordinary significance and serve an important public
(Exterior) need and where the preservation of those qualities is essential if the area is to continue to
serve its intended purpose.
B 67 Picnic areas, recreation areas, playgrounds, active sports areas, parks, residences, Mtels,
(Exterior) hotels, schools, churches, libraries, and hospitals.
C 72 Developed lands, properties, or activities not included in Categories A or B above.
(Exteriorl
D -- Undeveloped lands
r
E 52 Residences, motels, hotels, public meeting rooms, schools, churches, libraries, hospitals,. and
(Interior) auditoriums.
Source: Title 23 Code of Federal Regulations (CRF) Part 772, U. S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway
Administration
DEFINITION OF SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE
Hourly A-Weighted Sound Level- decibels (dBA)
Existing Noise Level Increase in dBA from Existing Noise
in Leq(h) Levels to Future Noise Levels
< 50 > 15
> 50 > 10
Source: North Carolina Department of Transportation Noise Abatement Guidelines.
44
TABLE 9
AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS
(Leq)
US 13, from SR 1457 in Hertford County to the Virginia State Line
in Gates County, State Project # 6.079002T, TIP # R-2507
OIE
SITE LOCATION
DESCRIPTION N
EVEL
(dBA)
1• 'US 13; 2150 Feet South of US 158
Grassy
Area
72
2• US 13; 2900 Feet South of SR 1230
Grassy
Area
70
3. US 13, 800 Feet South of US 158
Grassy
Area
68
4.
• US 13, 3250 Feet South of SR 1221
Grassy
Area
68
5. US 13, 90 Feet North of SR 1217
Grassy
Area
68
6. US 13, 225 Feet North of SR 1215 Grassy Area 69
7. US- 13, 300 Feet North of SR 1300
Grassy
Area
65
Note:
The ambient noise level sites were measured at 50 feet from the cen
of the nearest lane of traffic. ter
45
The procedure used to predict future noise levels in this study
was the Noise Barrier Cost Reduction Procedure, STAMINA 2.0 and
OPTIMA (revised March, 1983). The BCR (Barrier Cost Reduction)
procedure is based upon the FHWA Highway Traffic Noise Prediction
Model (FHWA-RD-77-108). The BCR traffic noise prediction model uses
the number and type of vehicles on the planned roadway, their speeds,
the physical characteristics of the road (curves, hills, depressed,
elevated, etc.), receptor location and height, and, if applicable,
barrier type, barrier ground elevation, and barrier top elevation.
Only preliminary alignment was available for use in this noise
analysis. The proposed roadway improvement will consist of widening
US 13 from SR 1457 in Hertford County to the Virginia State Line in
Gates County to a 4-lane divided facility with a 46 foot median. The
proposed project was modeled assuming no special noise abatement
measures would be incorporated. Only those existing natural or
man-made barriers which could be modeled were included. The roadway
sections and proposed intersections were assumed to be flat and at-
grade. Thus, this analysis represents "worst-case" topographic
conditions. The noise predictions made in this report are
highway-related noise predictions for the traffic conditions during
the year being analyzed.
Peak hour design and Level-of-Service (LOS) C volumes were
compared, and the volumes resulting in the noisiest conditions were
used with proposed posted speed limits. Thus, during all other time
periods, the noise levels will be no greater than those indicated in
this report.
The STAMINA 2.0 computer model was utilized to determine the
number of land uses (by type) which, during the peak hour in the
design year 2016, would be exposed to noise levels approaching or
exceeding the FHWA noise abatement criteria and those land uses
predicted to experience a substantial noise increase. The basic
approach was to select receptor locations such as 25, 50, 100, 200,
400, 800, and 1600 feet from the center of the near traffic lane
(adaptable to both sides of the roadway). The location of these
receptors were determined by the change in projected traffic volumes
along the proposed project. The result of this procedure was a grid
of receptor points along the project. Using this grid, noise levels
were calculated for each identified receptor.
The total number of impacted receptors, whether by approaching
or exceeding the FHWA Noise Abatement Criteria (NAC) or by a
substantial increase in exterior noise levels are given in Table 10
on page 46. Thirty-seven receptors will be impacted. Other
information included in Table 10 is the maximum extent of the 72 and
67 dBA noise level contours. This information should assist local
authorities in exercising land use control over the remaining
undeveloped lands adjacent to the roadway in local jurisdiction and
to prevent further development of incompatible activities and land
uses.
46
TABLE 10
FHWA NOISE ABATEMENT CRITERIA SUMMARY
US 13, from SR 1457 in Hertford County to the Virginia State Line
in Cates County, State Project M 6.079002T, TIP M R-2507
MAXIMUM PREDICTED CONTOUR APPROXIMATE NUMBER OF IMPACTED
Leq NOISE LEVELS DISTANCES RECEPTORS ACCORDING TO
(dBA)> (MAXIMUM)' TITLE 23 CFR PART 772
DESCRIPTION 50' 100' 200' 72 dBA 67 dBA A B C D
E
1. Aberdeen Chapel Road (SR 1457)

to us 158/NC 45 72 68 63 108' 174' 0 0
0
0
0
2. US 158/NC 45 to NC 137/SR 1200
(Sand Banks Road)
r 70 66 61 86' 142' 0 3 0 0
0
3. NC 137/SR 1200 (Sand Banks Road)
to US 158 70 66 60 82' 136' 0 11 0 0
0
4. US 158 to SR 1202 (Sure Road) 69 65 60 <78' 127'
0
0
1
0
0
5. SR 1202 (Eure Road) to SR 1216

(Eure Road)/SR 1212 70 66 60 el' 133' p
4
0
0
0
6. SR 1216 (Eure Road)/SR 1212

to NC 37 70 66 61 86' 142'
0
13
0
0
0
7. NC 37 to Virginia State Line 71 67 62
93'
154'
0
t
1
0
0
TOTAL 0 35 2 0 0
50', 100', and 200' distances are measured from center of nearest travel lane.
'72 dBA and 67 dBA contour distances are measured from center of proposed roadway.
47
The exterior noise level increases are predicted to range from 0
to +15 dBA, these are indicated in Table 11 on page 48. The majority
(68 of 73) of the identified receptors along the project will
experience an increase in exterior noise levels of 8 dBA or less.
Increases of this magnitude are common on symmetrical widening
projects since the widening occurs equally on both sides of the
existing roadway and the majority of these areas already have highway
traffic noise in their acoustic environment. However, the widening
along this project is asymmetrical, that is all widening will occur
on one side of the existing roadway. This type of widening moves the
proposed roadway dramatically closer to the receptors that are
located on the side of the widening. Hence, 5 of the 73 identified
receptors will experience an increase of 9 dBA or greater in their
exterior noise levels, and three of these are predicted to experience
a substantial increase.
When real-life noises are heard, level changes of 2-3 dBA are
barely perceptible. A 5 dBA change is more readily noticeable, and a
10 dBA change is judged by most people as a doubling or a halving of
the loudness of the sound.
Traffic noise impacts occur when the predicted traffic noise
levels either (a) approach or exceed the FHWA Noise Abatement
Criteria (NAC), with approach meaning within 1 dBA, or (b)
substantially exceed existing noise levels, as defined in the lower
portion of Table 8. Noise abatement measures must be considered when
either of the two preceding conditions exist.
Physical measures to abate anticipated traffic noise levels can
often be applied with a measurable degree of success by the
application of solid mass, attainable measures to effectively
diffract, absorb, and reflect highway traffic noise emissions. Solid
mass, attenuable measures may include earthen berms or artificial
abatement walls.
The project will maintain no control of access, meaning most
commercial establishments and residences will have direct driveway
connections to the proposed roadway, and all intersections will
adjoin the project at grade.
For a noise barrier to provide sufficient noise reduction it
must be of substantial height and length as to shield the receptor
from significant sections of the highway. Access openings in the
barrier severely reduce the noise reduction provided by the barrier.
It then becomes economically unreasonable to construct a barrier for
a small noise reduction. Safety at access openings (driveways,
crossing streets, etc.) due to restricted sight distance is also a
concern. Furthermore, to provide a sufficient reduction, a barrier's
length would normally be eight times the distance from the barrier to
the receptor. For example, a receptor located 50 feet from the
barrier would normally require a barrier 400 feet long. An access
opening of 40 feet (10 percent of the area) would limit its noise
reduction to approximately 4 dBA (FUNDAMENTAL AND ABATEMENT OF
HIGHWAY TRAFFIC NOISE, Report No. FHWA-HHI-HEV-73-7976-1, USDOT,
chapter 5, section 3.2, page 5-27).
48
TABLE II
TRAFFIC NOISE LEVEL INCREASE SUMMARY
US 13, from SR 1457 in Hertford County to the Virginia State Line
in Gates County, State Project A 6.079002T, TIP x R-2507
t
RECEPTOR EXTERIOR NOISE LEVEL INCREASES SUBSTANTIAL
SECTION NOISE LEVEL
<=0 1-2 3-4 5-6 7-8 9-10 11-12 13-14 15-16 17-18 19-20 21-22 23-24 >- 25 INCREASES'
Aberdeen Chapel Road 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
(SR 1457) to US 158/NC 45
US 158/NC 45 to NC 137/SR 4 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C
1200 (Sand Banks Road)
NC 137/SR 120P (Sand Banks 0 16 0
2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Road) to US 158
US 158 to SR 1202 (Eure Road) 0 4 1 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p
SR 1202 (Eure Road) to SR 0 2 2 2 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C
1216 (Eure Road)/SR 1212
SR 1216 (Eure Road)/SR 1212 0 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p
to NC 37
NC 37 to Virginia State Line 0 0 0 1 4 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL
4 47 3 7 7 3 0 1 1 0 0 0 p p
0
0
1
0
0
2
3
'As defined in Table N2.
49
Based on past project experience, these factors effectively
negate the effectiveness of any physical abatement measures and none
are recommended for this project.
The traffic noise impact for the "Do Nothing", or "No Build",
alternative was also considered. Fifty seven residences, two
businesses and one church will be impacted whether by approaching or
exceeding FHWA Noise Abatement Criteria (NAC). No receptors will be
impacted by substantial increases in exterior noise levels, since
these increases ranged from +1 to +8 dBA. When real-life noises are
heard, level changes of 2-3 dBA are barely perceptible and a 5 dBA
change is more readily noticeable.
The major construction elements of this project are expected to
be earth removal, hauling, grading, and paving. General construction
noise impacts, such as temporary speech interference for passersby
and those individuals living or working near the project, can be
expected particularly from paving operations and from the earth
moving equipment during grading operations. Overall, construction
noise impacts are expected to be minimal, since the construction
noise is relatively short in duration and is generally restricted to
daytime hours. Furthermore, the transmission loss characteristics of
surrounding man-made structures and natural features are believed to
be sufficient to moderate the effects of intrusive construction
noise.
The projected increase in noise levels and associated noise
impacts for a proposed widening project of this nature are expected.
Based on these preliminary studies, no traffic noise abatement is
reasonable or feasible along this project, due to the uncontrolled
access feature of the facility and the isolated condition of the
impacted receptors, and none is proposed. This evaluation.completes
the highway traffic noise requirements, and unless a major project
change develops, no additional reports are required for this project.
8. Air Quality Analysis
Air pollution is produced many different ways. Emissions from
industrial and internal combustion engines are the most prevalent
sources. Other sources of common outdoor air pollution are solid
waste disposal, forest fires and burning in general. The impact
resulting from the construction of a new highway or the improvement
of an existing highway can range from aggravating existing air
pollution problems to improving the ambient air conditions. Motor
vehicles are known to emit carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxide (NO),
hydrocarbons (HC), particulate matter, sulfur dioxide (S02), and lead
(Pb) (listed in order of decreasing emission rate).
The primary pollutant emitted from automobiles is carbon
monoxide. Automobiles are considered to be the major source of CO in
the project area. For these reasons, most of the analysis presented
are concerned with determining expected carbon monoxide levels in the
vicinity of the project.
50
In order to determine the ambient CO concentration at a receptor
near a highway, two concentration components must be used: local and
background. The local component is due to CO emissions from cars
operating on highways in the near vicinity (i.e., distances within
100 meters) of the receptor location. The background component is due
to CO emissions from cars operating on streets further from the
receptor location.
In this study, the local component was determined using line
source computer modeling and the background component was determined
by the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural
Resources (NCDEHNR). These two concentration components were
determined separately, then added together to determine the ambient
CO concentration for comparison to the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS).
Automobiles are generally regarded as sources of hydrocarbons
and nitrogen oxides. Hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides emitted from
cars are carried into the atmosphere where they react with sunlight
to form ozone and nitrogen dioxide. Area-wide automotive emissions
of HC and NO are expected to decrease in the future due to the
continued installation and maintenance of pollution control devices
on new cars, and thus help lower ambient ozone and nitrogen dioxide
levels.
The photochemical reactions that form ozone and nitrogen dioxide
require several hours to occur. For this reason, the peak levels of
ozone generally occur 10 to 20 kilometers downwind of the source of
hydrocarbon emissions. Urban areas as a whole are regarded as
sources of hydrocarbons, not individual streets and highways. The
emissions of all sources in an urban area mix together in the
atmosphere, and in the presence of sunlight, the mixture reacts to
form ozone, nitrogen dioxide, and other photochemical oxidants. The
best example of this type of air pollution is the smog which forms in
Los Angeles, California.
Automobiles are not generally regarded as significant sources of
particulate matter and sulfur dioxide. Nationwide, highway sources
account for less than seven percent of particulate matter emissions
and less than two percent of sulfur dioxide emissions. Particulate
matter and sulfur dioxide emissions are predominantly the result of
non-highway sources (e.g., industrial, commercial, and agricultural).
Because emissions of particulate matter and sulfur dioxide from cars
are very low, there is no reason to suspect that traffic on the
project will cause air quality standards for particulate matter and
sulfur dioxide to be exceeded.
Automobiles emit lead as a result of burning gasoline containing
tetraethyl lead which is added by refineries to increase the octane
rating of the fuel. Newer cars with catalytic converters burn
unleaded gasoline eliminating lead emissions. Also, the United
States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has required the
reduction in the lead content of leaded gasolines. The overall
average lead content of gasoline in 1974 was 2 grams per gallon. By
1989, this composite average had dropped to 0.01 grams per gallon.
51
In the future, lead emissions are expected to decrease as more
cars use unleaded fuels and as the lead content of leaded gasoline is
reduced. "The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 makes the sale,
supply, or transport of leaded gasoline or lead additives unlawful
after December 31, 1995." Because of these reasons, it is not
expected that traffic on the proposed project will cause the NAAQS
for lead to be exceeded.
A microscale air quality analysis was performed to determine
future CO concentrations resulting from the proposed highway
improvements. "CAL3QHC - A Modeling Methodology For Predicting
Pollutant Concentrations Near Roadway Intersections" was used to
predict the CO concentration at the nearest sensitive receptor to the
project.
Inputs into the mathematical model to estimate hourly CO
concentrations consisted of a level roadway under normal conditions
with predicted traffic volumes, vehicle emission factors, and "worst
case" meteorological parameters. The traffic volumes are based on
the annual average daily traffic projections. Carbon monoxide vehicle
emission factors were calculated for the design year 2016 and for ten
years prior (2006) using the EPA publication "Mobile Source Emission
Factors" and the MOBILE4 mobile source emissions computer model.
The background CO concentration for the project area was
estimated to be 1.9 parts per million (ppm). Consultation with the
Air Quality Section, Division of Environmental Management, North
Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
indicated that an ambient CO concentration of 1.9 ppm is suitable for
most rural areas.
The "worst case" air quality receptor resulting from the
widening project was determined to be a residence (receptor #98).
The receptor is located 93 feet east of US 13 and approximately 300
feet north of SR 1214. The "build" and "no build" one hour CO
concentrations for years 2006 and 2016 are summarized in Table 12.
TABLE 12 ONE HOUR CO CONCENTRATIONS (PPM)
"Build" "No Build"
Receptor 2006 2016 2006 2016
R-98 2.5 2.5 2.3 2.3
Comparison of the predicted CO concentrations with the NAAQS
(maximum permitted for 1-hour averaging period = 35 ppm; 8-hour
averaging period = 9 ppm) indicates no violation of these standards.
Since the results of the "worst case" 1-hour CO analysis is less than
52
9 ppm, it can be concluded that the 8-hour CO level does not exceed
the standard. The results also show that the building of the project
will not adversely effect air quality conditions in the area. Input
data tables are located in the Appendix of this report.
The project is located in the Northern Coastal Plain Air Quality
Control Region. The ambient air quality for Hertford and Gates
Counties has been determined to be in compliance with the National
Ambient Air Quality Standards. Since this project is located in an
area where the State Implementation Plan (SIP) does not contain any
transportation control measures, the conformity procedures of 23 CFR
770 do not apply to this project.
During construction of the proposed project, all materials
resulting from clearing and grubbing, demolition or other operations
will be removed from the project, burned or otherwise disposed of by
the Contractor. Any burning will be done in accordance with
applicable local laws and ordinances and regulations of the North
Carolina SIP for air quality in compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520.
Care will be taken to insure that burning will be done at the
greatest practical distance from dwellings and not when atmospheric
conditions are such as to create a hazard to the public. Burning
will be performed under constant surveillance.
53
Site No. 2 Mrs. H. J. Perry Grocery (Perry's Superette) is an
operational gasoline outlet located on the northwest side of
US 13, approximately 500 feet south of the intersection of
SR 1128 and US 13. According to the records of the
DEM/Groundwater Section, this facility (ID #0- 015118) has 3
UST's that were installed on 5/10/71. The UST's are constructed
of steel and have a capacity of 2000 gallons each. The tanks at
this site are located approximately 70 feet from the existing
centerline of US 13. Proposed improvements call for widening
mostly to the opposite side of US 13 from this property.
Site No. 3 - Malones Used Cars is a non-operational gasoline
outlet located on the southeast side of US 13, near the
intersection of SR 1126 and US 13. Although a pump island was
observed on the premises, there was no other evidence for any
existing UST's. Proposed improvements call for widening US 13
to the side of this business.
Site No. 4 - Corner High Grocery is an operational outlet
located on the northwest side of US 13, approximately 450 feet
north of the intersection of SR 1126 and US 13. According to
the records of the DEM/Groundwater Section, this facility (ID
#0-015567) has three 550 gallon UST's constructed of steel. The
tanks at this site are located in an area 45 to 69 feet from the
existing centerline of US 13. Proposed improvements call for
widening mostly to the opposite side of US 13 from this
facility.
Site No. 5 - Tarheel Bar-B-Q is an operational outlet located on
the northwest side of US 13, near the intersection of US 158 and
US 13. According to the records of the DEM/Groundwater Section,
this facility (ID #0-030845) has 6 steel UST's on the premises.
At least 2 USTs were observed approximately 90 feet from the
existing centerline of US 13. In addition, fillers for 5 other
USTs were observed in an area 141 to 165 feet from the existing
centerline of US 13. Proposed improvements call for widening to
the opposite side of US 13 from this property. However, this
business is located in close proximity to existing US 13 and may
be impacted.
Site No. 6 - Doris-N-Roger Kitchen is a non-operational gasoline
outlet located on the northwest side of US 13. According to the
records of the DEM/Groundwater Section, the USTs at this
facility (ID #1-029444) were permanently closed by removal on
12/31/89. Proposed improvements call for widening US 13 mostly
to the side of this property.
Site No. 7 - An abandoned building is located on the northwest
side of US 13, near the Virginia State line. One UST filler was
observed under the building canopy, approximately 51 feet from
the existing US 13 centerline. Due to the National Register
property (Freeman House), located directly across US 13 from
this building, widening will be accomplished entirely to the
side of the property containing this site.
54
If any of the UST areas described above are to be impacted by
the proposed improvements, those sites will be further investigated
for possible fuel leakage during the right-of-way acquisition phase
of the project.
Significant adverse effects are not anticipated to the
geological regime as a result of this project. Based on a review of
the North Carolina Directory of Mineral Producers (1970), no
significant mineral resources are known to occur aside from some
local sand and gravel pits. Potential sources of borrow material are
anticipated near existing US 13 between SR 1131 and SR 1200.
11. Geodetic Survey Markers
Thirty-eight geodetic survey markers will be impacted. The N.C.
Geodetic Survey will be contacted prior to construction.
12. Construction Impacts
To minimize potential
activities, the following
mentioned, will be enforced
adverse effects caused by construction
measures, along with those already
during the construction phase:
55
the plans and specifications which pertain to erosion and
siltation. These contract provisions are in accordance
with the strict erosion control measures as outlined in the
Department of Transportation's FHPM 6-7-3-1. Temporary
erosion control measures such as the use of berms, dikes,
dams, silt basins, etc. will be used as needed.
e. Borrow pits and all ditches will be drained insofar as
possible to alleviate breeding areas for mosquitoes.
f. An extensive rodent control program will be established if
structures are to be removed or demolished.
g. Care will be taken not to block existing drainage ditches.
h. The construction of the project is not expected to cause
any serious disruptions in service to any of the utilities
serving the area. Before construction is started, a
preconstruction conference involving the contractor,
pertinent local officials, and the Division of Highways
will be held to discuss various construction procedures,
including a discussion of precautionary steps to be taken
during the time of construction that will minimize
interruption of water service.
i. Prior to construction, a determination will be made
regarding the need to relocate or adjust any existing
utilities in the project area. A determination of whether
the NCDOT or the utility owner will be responsible for this
work will be made at the time.
j. Prior to the approval of any borrow source developed for
use on this project, the contractor shall obtain a
certification from the State Department of Cultural
Resources certifying that the removal of material from the
borrow source will have no effect on any known district,
site, building, structure, or object that is included or
eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic
Places. A copy of this certification shall be furnished to
the Engineer prior to performing any work on the proposed
borrow source.
k. Traffic service in the immediate project area may be
subjected to brief disruption during construction of the
project. Every effort will be made to insure that the
transportation needs of the public will be met both during
and after construction.
56
V. COMMENTS AND COORDINATION
A. Comments Received
The project has been coordinated with appropriate federal, state and
local agencies. Comments were received from the following agencies:
U. S. Dept. of Interior - Fish and Wildlife Service
U. S. Dept. of Commerce - National Marine Fisheries
N. C. Dept. of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
N. C. Dept. of Cultural Resources
N. C. Dept. of Crime Control and Public Safety
N. C. Wildlife Resources.Commission
Mid-East Commission
Copies of the comments received are included in the Appendix.
B. Informational Workshops
Two informational workshops were held on February 12, 1992 and
November 5, 1992 at the County Office Building in Winton. Approximately
25 people attended those two meetings. Press releases advertising the
meetings are included in the appendix.
Each attendee was given the opportunity to review maps showing the
proposed improvements to US 13 and to ask questions and make comments. In
addition, handouts were available to all meeting attendees. Each handout
contained a comment sheet which could be completed and submitted to the
Division of Highways.
All those attending the workshop were in favor of the project. A few
attendees were concerned about the impacts the proposed improvements would
have on their properties and requested that widening be accomplished to
the opposite side of US 13 from their homes. One attendee requested a
median crossover near a development just south of SR 1230.
C. Coordination with the State of Virginia
The proposed improvements will require an approximate 1500-foot
transition (from the proposed four-lane divided roadway to the existing
two-lane facility) for approximately 1500 feet into the State of Virginia.
NCDOT will coordinate any project work to be accomplished in the State of
Virginia with the Virginia Department of Transportation.
D. Public Hearing
A public hearing will be held following the completion of.this report
to provide more detailed information on the proposed project to local
citizens and to receive additional comments on the project.
EM/plr
GATES-HERTFORD
.COUNTIES -
C O U N T Y
'
l
N.\Y
7 Reynolds 2 Gates Drum Hill / Corsip,
?,N. CAAUIINA
camo s G a A T E S 3I
258 od 6uckland 7
7 'P 13 1 3 3 3 158 15
2 O urfreesb ure l t ?t ury
MaDiet 1 158 3 Srat• 1•A
? atesville { 7
{ Winton 1 37 TrotvilleSandw-
9 Tunis _
Menol K 6 fie d 7 1 ?%°t .
Unio ?r
'H 5 E 3 7? F 0 4 HarrellSvil
a' Soh s *Ahoskie 1
6 1 2 10 8 ??
mare 2 1_ -
-'iVIR_G.INIA STATE LIN
\, , uu
? uu
w 1P!
?
i It
1tf4 ? 1
IA 1?
] m fM
y 7•nr : t,t , ua,w.a lilt !1!1
111: urt ?.
im
1W
nu/ O
WHIMAA' PocaslN r
11M J
1111
b
J92t ?•?<?
1111 1 t?
1
L191 I .. rN J ew•m 11i!

' a
ty
0
eol. a
!at 1°:
J Lit
BEGIN
• PROJECT
rt.:•
tlfi 1111 WAM
r
r
1111
v ' t.3
1111 t? p
S 1111 1111
Slll
a- u ay
.s
L
`r 1111
1LLl • 3
$°o
un
-1
END
PROJECT ;:'
a - ,'
11liy l
1111 /•
U r•
01-b n t`.
GATES COUNTY ,> 8L
? i 13 > wa.tte. ui'
1 1191
aw?1w
1111
Mw?•n
ia?i ,7 --- ? t 1sd
M GATESVILLE ^ 1111 ? n
?v U J
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
US 13
FROM SR 1457 NEAR WINTON
TO VIRGINIA STATE LINE
GATES-HEARTFORD COUNTIES
T. I. P. NO. R-2507
FIG. 1

gi-
g ni
Hi-
ni.

s
s
s
s ?
a ?
a ?
a ?
a ?
a ?
s
s
a ?
a ?
a
a ?
a ?
s
s
a ?
a ?
a
a ?
a ?
s
s
a ?
a ?
a
a ?
a ?
s
s
a ?
a ?
a
a ?
a ?
s
s
a ?
a ?
a
a ?
a ?
s
s
a ?
a ?
a
a ?
a ?
s
s
a ?
a ?
a
a ?
a ?
s
s
a ?
a

PROJECTED TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(ADT IN HUNDREDS) 1996/2016
US 13, GATES-HERTFORD COUNTIES
T.I.P. PROJECT NO. R-2507
US 13 US 13 A
1fi
? 137
TO AHOSKIE 56
ABERDEEN 18 1
CHAPEL ROAD 2
SR 1457 J{ SURE R0. SR 7227
50 1D? 4 2
18 ??
123
46
34
NC 45 x
42
10

59
18 13
TTST 15%
DUAL 4%
DHV 10%
3D
74
2
SR 1131
2 1
1
1
Al
72

BARFIELD RD. 2
2 }
r
SR 1128 •
2
4 _;.'?
2
m
72
6 1 ?Z SAND BANKS RD.
SR 1200

6
10

2

66
PUTT LANDING RD. 4 J ?2
SR 1126 J
6
2
2
;4.
64
HILLS LANE RD. 2 I
SR 1126 4
^?
8
6 2
4 1
14
64
US 158 24
40
2
4
TINKHAM RD.
SR 1201
-B-"N
16
25
56
A . A
US 158
4
4
2
10 N
56
4 2
1 14
EURE RD. SR 1202 6 EURE RD. SR 1202
10 16 0? 12
8
34
64

URE R0. SR 1276 ?.
2
j1 r. 4

REYNOD CHURCH RD.
SR 1212
A
8 5 1C
Al -I 16
2

TYLER RD. SR 1275

8 G
? J
°
f
NC 37 ?
-8- 6
20 _
14
Ct_
82

TAYLOR RD. SR 1214
2 2
a 6
,1F
er
2
'
RIODICK RI). SR 1300
S
8
7
E.F;
NORTH CAROLINA STATE LINF.
VIRGINIA STATE UNF FIGURE 3
Z
O
U
W
U)
U)
U)
O
aC
U
0
W
U)
O
(L
a:
CL
? N
O I Cj
sm:) bOd 1NIOd 3ONIH
.o
L
m al
r
?r
Z
? 0
W N

?? NI
.Oi 1 y
z
0
w- : -------------- --- -
W
Z
to
N
O
of
V3

W r
N I ? O
L

r f

TUd vcm
W
. d
K
? N
u
a
m
d'
W
I
1// •R?
V
F
I
i
%
%
Ant
lid
T Ch-- 1.
`''x 7fy? i' •?`+` '?.Q \ :+ NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
), j .. > ;, ?, • ?' :? TRANSPORTATION
1-w:?j/1' : 's' - S \• DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
- / •p; ?ct+';! PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL ?
I - t ( [? n r, =?tr••' Tu.e6rDri $ t BRANCH j
t s)1' "f ri1Gj '? °,; R - 2507 -
S - wmtol, WETLAND SITES
.. I r• `~• ?' r- 1 ?` SHEET 1 OF 3 _
BEGIN PROJECT 1' j FIG. 5
re .q j r ? ('
'"??' `•` •?:•iu ` •+, ........... \. \ S+rem n
47
Whiteoak \Pocosin
e
Jon
Swag. _ U
-- ?: `
• . Roduco Itt!
- iarhasl 1_ -' _ •
6lddkk
\j Crourw? e ` -- _ .White
oel
N?..
HIS C
Ind
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION -
'11 I ^ a DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL -
BRANCH -
. ?b6. ...e R - 2507
Iro l o = o '? WETLAND SITES
?? .
`c- J \SHEET 2 OF 3
1 acovnC y `, C? I \ \ , I ( ?
FIG. 5
z+1
F t
Y : _.. -
76. tl
_?
Some
Pittmantown O n IQ Sf aV l/ -i ?rQY /\?1? d o. kr.?. .(:
a .t
Yd? ? 13 J i ? \ IJ - _
END PROJECT
Cem
?acf I ?,,, _ NORTH GATE>
f?xc\\__-mil .
fA
Ilr" eN - ^\?,,
t! , , - eoJ -
%
noldwn
Crot
Suwal
7- 2- _ -Z=Z3, -
1.
c.
t
r
•?' ._--'+ ?/ O .4. ?, ?-- ?1• `\ I- f ?•'• ,•,Xli?11 ' /"1 Cam! ,?...j
r:-
Department of 1?nvState of N
ironmentorth Carolina
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Highway 17 South • Elizabeth City, North Carolina 27909
James G. Martin, Governor ?rnl 8 9 /n??
William W. Cobey, Jr,, Secretary
f>
Roger N. Sche
eter
Director
MEMORANDUM
K
TO: Steve Benton
?r r,/
FROM: M. Todd Ball
SGBjECT: Comments on Project Number SCH91-0742 Submitted by the
NC Division of Highways.
DATE: May 2, 1991
The project as proposed would require a CAMA Major Permit
for that portion of the project which includes the construction
of a new bridge across the Chowan River. • This construction will
be located within the Public Trust Waters Area of Environmental
Concern.
Also, any future plans to use designated 11404" wetlands for
the purpose of road construction :could require review for
consistency with the Gates County Land Use Plan.
A-11
Route 6, 60>; 29:. Ihreti-:h ,Mort}, Carohna 779;N Tcrhnn:• 919 1Ga-;or,
l? I
An
!_q?.wl l ?t DGrlunit)' A.Ifirrna:rv^ C:1.•- Ern^In?.?.
-it uranc iay, l,ansrnittal m?
' T
rno i 67S + o: pageE .
o o
C 1.
From
Co.
' Gl^? te
Co.
1:emorandum Dept. {
?
C N CZ
Z?-
Fax •
fa Phone a -,
,
- (
?-? I
10, 1 J. UY q C,
"1 ?
Fax R ^ l?
To: Steve Benton _
From: Terry Moore
Sub:i: Project Number SCH91-0742, Dated 4-9-91
Scopi.ng-US 13 from S.°, 1454 (Hertford County)
to the Virginia Line (Gates County)
Date: 3 May 1991
Any proposed construction (=c. eXCJ.vation fill-ins, 0,
driv_n?x of pi?i..c; within
any area of environmental concern (AFC) will regui;e a pc,:nit fro;,: *Ihc s,
Of Coastal Management. The Chowan river is Estuarine ?aat erex-re
has a 75' Estuarine AEC Shoreline AFC. Any approac): fills/temporary or construction
related `ills includirng any eXcava*_ion, driving of riles or construction
activities in the river or Estuarine Shorcl.i;;
Development Permirt. e trj,l'_ require F ; , CA!:a !?jor
Other stream crossirgC in votes County and=r ;urisciction of
'L 7^v, c; on c°
Coa :tal 1S ±,tagcnc: -
t ct1:G cOVr-rc6 !,_ tlae i7^..I1
City Feld Qf ,
?ic_
fi?Aylq
is
?Z.

A-12
? VArj o l
d' I
James G. Marvin, Governor
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary
May 2, 1991
MEMORANDUM
y7 ?y
991 s
John N. Moms
Director
TO: Melba McGee
FROM: John Sutherland
SUBJECT: 91-0742, Improvements to US 13, Hertford and Gates
4 Counties
We have the following comments on the above project:
1. At stream and wetland crossings, utilize bridges whenever
possible to minimize habitat losses and floodplain
encroachment.
2. Minimize the loss of timber and prime farmland.
3. Provide vegetation buffers when highway passes close to
residential areas.
4. Mitigate the loss of wetlands and forests.
5. Minimize the use of curb and gutter; maximize the use of
porous pavement and grass swales.
6. Involve local landowners in gathering data on impacts; be
flexible on location of alternatives - adjust them to meet
local concerns.
7. In rural areas, use a four-lane divided highway with
left-hand turn lanes at major intersections; in urban areas,
use 5-lane highway.
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Water Resources
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
A-13
I'U Ilru 27687
. IUngh. North Oruhru rml 76M7 lilr?ih?ux gl,p 1.UP,r
DIVISION OF PARKS AND RECREATION
May 3, 1991
MEMORANDUM
TO:
THROUGH:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
REFERENCE:
Melba McGee
Carol Tingley C'I
N'
Uf. v ?
Harry LeGrand, Natural Heritage Program
Scoping -- widen US 13 in Hertford
and Gates Counties
91-0742
The Division of Parks and Recreation has reviewed the proposal to
widen U.S. 13 in Hertford and Gates Counties. We have several
concerns about the project.
First, our Natural Heritage Program is aware of the location of a
colony of red-cockaded woodpeckers in the vicinity of US 13 and
SR 1200 (Storys). We believe that the colony is now abandoned,
but the habitat is still suitable for the species. In addition,
there is an active colony along SR 1200 less than a mile to the
northwest of the intersection. Thus, the habitat could be
colonized by birds from the colony, as well as be utilized
occasionally for foraging by members of the active colony.
Consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is highly
recommended to determine necessary actions before a widening of
US 13 can take place in the. Storys area. In addition, we
recommend that a survey of the colony site be made to determine
if any woodpeckers are present.
Second, the Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine Study identified several
significant natural areas lying alongside the proposed corridor
(Regional Inventory for Critical Natural Areas, Wetland
Escosystems, and Endangered Species Habitats of the
Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine Region: Phase I). These areas are
indicated in green on the enclosed maps. None of these areas is
afforded any protection, at the present time (except for perhaps
the State-owned land north of the Chowan River). However, we
hope that the widening of US 13 can avoid impacting any of these
sites. We recommend that DOT staff refer to the Regional
Inventory for further information about the natural areas
indicated on the enclosed maps.
Thank you for the opportunity to review this project.
CT/mb
3139
A-14
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA
37 IGATES) 339 47'30" I 140

16

16.

• ?4
ooh/ r•.

' - - f t9 tom- ,
•'
?
?
0 •\ 17.0
Ll
+

w / •s
? 1111 C
S rem I r \Z
?
Aicl
M le
,. y
4 ? Cem
N
P
10 + ;

-r I
_ i

?
"217) 1 f
11 1 ?

f
a
M
••Cem -•
J-1P ?- ,•
_
•

_ .. -
?•
Jon
I f?
/
_'/ X10
• S1ua

'A " e

j?l
Roduco
•
t? L
•

115 C
, M
h
/ N Ce /•

SlArl
Ir W,
Lrl
State of North Carolina ?.
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Highway 17 South • Elizabeth City, North Carolina 27909
James G. Martin, Governor Roger N. Schecter
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary Director
MEMORANDUM
Y
TO: Melba McGee, Division of Planning and Assessment
THROUGH: Mike Street
FROM: Sara E. Winslow, Biologist Supervisor C;?V
SUBJECT: US 13, from SR 1457 in Hertford County to the Virginia
State Line in Gates County; Hertford/Gates Counties;
State Project No. 6.079002T; TIP No. R-2507
DATE:. 24 April 1991
The N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries appreciates the
opportunity to comment and express concerns with the proposed
highway project.
The Division has conducted anadromous surveys in the Chowan
River system. The river and its tributaries have been documented
to function as river herring (blueback herring and alewife)
spawning and nursery areas. Blueback herring and alewife are
included in the "Threatened and Endangered Species Profiles of
North Carolina" under Category 3 (vulnerable). This report was
prepared by the North Carolina State Museum. Numerous federal
aid reports (AFCS-II, AFCS-9, AFCS-16) prepared by the Division
and other scientific papers stress the preservation of the
upstream and downstream environmental integrity associated with
spawning and nursery areas. American shad, hickory shad, white
perch, yellow perch, catfish and other commercially and
recreationally important species also utilize the area as a
nursery.
A-16
Route 6 Box 203, Elizabeth City, North Carolina 27909 Telephone [phone]
% f7, An .. ...... .. AV. r

Melba McGee, Division of Planning and Assessment
24 April 1991
Page Two
Based on the proposed alignment map the project will result
in the loss and/or alteration of swamps/wetlands and occasionally
flooded wetlands which have been determined to be critical to the
• survival of these and other species. Wetlands function as a
water run-off and nutrient buffer zone between upland areas and
the receiving waters. The cumulative impacts of the.. destruction
of wetlands is well documented.
i. The importance of the Chowan River and its tributaries and
the adjacent wetlands to fisheries resources has been pointed
out. This agency would request a moratorium in relation to any
excavation of new bridges being constructed over the Chowan River
or its tributaries. The moratorium would be 15 February through
30 September, ensuring that the environmental integrity of the
area would be protected during critical times of usage by the
above mentioned species.
The Division recommends bridging of wetlands rather than
solid fill. Numerous negative impacts may occur from the filling
of these important wetlands.
If you have any questions please feel free to contact me
(919-264-3911).
o?
A-17
?P ?.
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G. Martin, Governor
William NYZ Cobey, Jr., Secretary
may 1, 1991
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee
FROM: Larry T. Sinky)
urces
David W. Sides
Director
SUBJECT: Proposed Improvements to US 13 in Gates and Hertford
Counties. Project No. 91-0742
The concern for prime, unique and statewide important farmland
soils should be addressed as an important factor in the proposed
project. Although this would be mainly a widening of an existing
roadway, it still may take in a considerable amount of land due
to its length. The issues of prime, unique and statewide
important farmlands and wetlands should be a major factor in
right-of-way land. The impact on them should be kept to a
minimum. Soil survey information is available for both Hertford
and Gates Counties. An evaluation of prime, unique and statewide
important farmlands should be done. The same should also be done
for wetland areas. The potential to impact on wetland areas may
be moderate to high due to the river floodplain area and the
whiteoak pocosin.
LTS/tl
A-18
P.U N.x 7740i;. lUcigh. Nomh (.aruhna 2701 7687 ldt'1+hunc 'A') 733 2302
J gf
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resource'
Division of Forest Resources
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G. Martin, Governor
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary
Griffiths Forestry Center
2411 Garner. Road
Clayton, North Carolina
April 29, 1991
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee
Environmental Assessment Unit
!T77-- 3_1
4r /!?
iry
Harry F. Layman
Director
0 ?i
v, ,y
%
'x%57
L!1
FROM: Don H. Robbins ???
Staff Forester
SUBJECT: State EA Scoping for Proposed DOT Improvements to US 13 From SR 1457
in Hertford County to the Virginia State Line in Gates County
PROJECT #91-0742
DUE DATE 5-2-91
We have reviewed the above proposed highway improvements and have the
following comments:
1. The proposed widening will impact some woodland in Gates County.
2. The improvements may slightly improve response time for our
tractor-plow unit stationed at Winton.
3. The Environmental Assessment should contain the following
information concerning the widening and for possible right-of-way
purchases for the project:
a. The number of total woodland acres that would be taken out of
timber production as a result of new right-of-way purchases.
b. The acres breakdown of this woodland concerning present
conditions and/or timber types such as clear-cut areas, young
growing timber, and fully stocked stands of very productive
timber within the new right-of-way purchases for disturbed and
undisturbed portions.
C. The site indexes of the forest soils that would be involved
within the proposed right-of-way, so as to be able to determine
the productivity of these forest soils in the area.
d. The number of woodland acres that would affect any watersheds
in the area, if the woodland was removed.
A-19
P.0. &ta 27657, R.ileiph, North Caruhna 27611.7657 Telephone 919.733"2162
I . I r .... . .., r
Melba McGee
PROJECT X191-0742
Page 2
t
e. The impact both present and future to any greenways within the
area of the proposed project.
f. With woodland involved, it is hoped that the timber could be
merchandised and sold to lessen the need for piling and burning
of debris during right-of-way construction. *If and when any
debris burning is needed, the contractor should be extremely
careful to ensure that the burning is confined to the
right-of-way and not allowed to get into the woods.
Provisions should be indicated in the EA that the contractor
will make all efforts to salvage any merchantable timber to
permit construction, once the contractor takes charge of the
right-of-way.
g. The provisions that the contractor will take during the
construction phase to prevent erosion, sedimentation and
construction damage to the remaining standing trees outside of
the right-of-way boundary and construction limits. Trees
outside of construction limits need to be protected from
construction activities such as--
1. Skinning of tree trunks from heavy equipment operations.
2. 'Exposure and injury to feeder roots from heavy equipment
operations.
3. Placing of fill dirt around the base of trees which would
have a smothering affect which could eventually cause tree
mortality.
4. Accidentally spilling of petroleum products near the base
of trees which could cause mortality.
We would hope that the widening would have the least impact to forest and
related resources in that area.
DHR:la
pc: Warren Boyette - CO
DF Mike Hendricks, D-7
File
P.S. Mike Hendricks - Thank you for your prompt input on this proposed DOT ,
project.
lk
:,,l
s,
A-20
I'IH I -Uo-1>'. 1 itJ' ?.I- rr._u t Lru.r' i - LIrr 1k._L I LI 1 !1 _ _ _t?u: I- . La-

DIVISION OF LAND RESOURCES
LAND QUALITY SECTION
April 22, 1991
MEMORANDUM
TO: Lorraine Shinn 'e
'? ;
Regional Manager
Washington Regional Office _
FROM: Floyd Williams t;qC
Regional Engineer
Land Quality Section
Washington Regional Ofi c
SUBJECT: Review Comments
Dept. of EHNR Intergovernmental Review
Project Number 91-0742
NC Dept. of Transportation's Proposed Improvements to
US 13 from SR 1457 in Hertford County to the Virginia
State Line in Gates County
State Project No. 6.079002T
The proposed project must be consistent with the NC
Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973. Temporary and
permanent erosion and sedimentation control measures must be
utilized throughout the project to prevent of,fsite sedimentation
of adjacent natural watercourses and properties.
Periodic inspections will be made by personnel of the Land
Quality Section to ensure compliance with the sedimentation
Pollution Control Act of 1973.

A-21
x
11AY-08-1991 16:01 FROM EHVIP l4 i=.H REG IFF I'__;E TO 1 919 7--r.Y P.02-
State of North Carolina
Department of Environmont, Health, and Natural Resources Reviewing Office:
wachin ton Re Offzc
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW - PROJECT COMMENTS Project Number. Oue Date:
9/_ 07 2 6-2-'/ -
After review of this project it has been determined that the EHNR permit(s) indicated must be obtained in order for this project to
Comply With North Carolina Law.
Ouestions regarding these permits should be addressed to the Regional Office indicated on the reverse of the form.
All applications, information and guidelines relative to these plans and .permits are available from the same
Regional Office. Normal Process
Time
PERMITS SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REOUIREMENTS (statutory time
Ilmlt)

? Permit to construct & operate wastewater treatment

f
ili Application 90 days before begin construction or award of 30 days
ac
ties, sower system extensions, & sewer construction contracts On•slte Inspection. Post-application
systems not discharging Into stale surface waters. technical conference usual (90 days)
NPOES • permit to discharge into surface water and/or Application 180 days before begin activity. On-slie Inspection. 90.120 days
? permit to operate and construct wastewater facilities Pro•applicalton conference usual. Additionally, obtain permit to
diaehargfng into state surface waters. construct wastewater treatment facility-pranced after NPOES Reply (NIA
time, 30 days after receipt of plans or issue of NPDES
pernit•whichever Is later.*

? Water Use Permit
Pre-applicationtechnioal conference usually necessary
30 days
(NIA)
Wall Construction Permit NIA 7 days
(15 days)

r-1
LJ
Dredge and Fill Permit Application copy must be served on each riparian property owner.
On-elle Inspection. Pre-applicatlon conference usual. Filling 55 days
may require Easement to FIII from N.C. Department of (90 (says)
Administration and Federal Dredge and FIII Permit.
? Permit to construct & operate Air Pollution Abatement 60 days
facilities and/or Emission Sources NIA (90 days)
Any open burning associated with subject proposal ( 1. 1 14 vR 1C O?
Nr.0C T. DA
l "
must be In compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520. ,
GJ17'?'{ (sue
UC ST?DN?
Demolition or renovations of Structures containing
asbestos material must be in compliance with ,
n?1
igSBCsTUS ?r
• P
•r P
60 days
NCAC 2D.0525 which requires notification and removal .
,7
NIA
prior to demolition. 3,3 0

(90 days)
Complex Source Permit required under 15 NCAC ?D.0800.
? The Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 must be property addressed for any land disturbing activity. An erosion & sedimentation control plan
i
w
ll be required if one or more acres to be disturbed. Plan filed with proper Regional Office (Land Ouality Sect.) at least 30 days before begin activity.
The Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 must be addressed with respect to the referrenced Local Ordi
ance
n
:
' On•slle Inspection usual. Surety bond filed with EHNR as shown:
Any area mined greater than one acre must be permited.
?
Mining Permit AFFECTED
AREA AMOUNT OF BONG
a
e 37 days
s
Leb
than 5
cr
5 but less than 10 acres 5,000
„ 10 but less then 25 acres 12.500 (60 days)
25 or more acres 5.000
? North Carolina Burning permit On-site Inspection by N.C. Division Forest Resources if permit 1 day
exceeds 4 days (NIA)
Special Ground Clearance Burning Permit • 22
counties in coastal N
C
with or
anic 30113 On-mia inspection by N.D. Division Forest Resources required "If more
li
h 1 day '
.
.
g t
an
ve acres of ground clearing activities are involved. Inspections (NIA)
should be requested at least Ion days before actual burn is planned."

?
On Refining Facilities
NIA 90.120 dAys
(Id/A)
If permit required. application 60 days before begin construction.

C
Dam Safety Permit Applicant must hire N.C. qualified engineer lo: prepare plans,
Inspect construction, certify construction is aceordinc to EHNR approv- 30 days
ed plant. May also require permit under mo.0uito control program. An a (NIA)
404 permit from Corp: of Engineer
vs•rue
COAMSuee an n•v(.tge
A-22

DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
May 8, 1991
MEMORANDUM
TO: Lorraine Shinn
Regional Office Manager
FROM: Deborah Sawyer, Environmental Technician`
Water Qualify Section, WaRO'
SUBJECT: A-95 Review
Frojecr. 1/91 --0742
NC DOT: US 13, from SR 1457 to Virginia Line
Hertford/Gates Counties
The above subject project has been reviewed by this office. The NC
DOT will need to. address surface water as well as wetland crossings
for impacts. A Water Quality 401 Certification will be required for
this project proposal. The NC DOT should also address the following:
1. Are there any practicable alternatives?
2. Have impacts been minimized?
3. Has acceptable mitigation been proposed? This office will
review the Environmental Assessment when submitted.
If you have any questions or comments, please call this office at
946-6481. Thank you.
DS/cm
A-23
• ,?.+?`?.. AA t off.`
. r
MAY-1 --?
~?? ,'? ?• t?:: ?.:i:1,- 991
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources': P
".,.'?
Bl1lu
James G. Martin, Governor Division of Archives an History
Patric Dorsey, Secretary William S. Price, Jr., Director
April 29 , 1991
MEMORANDUM
TO: L. J. Ward, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
Department of Transportation
FROM: David Brook, Deputy State
Historic Preservation Officer
SUBJECT: US 13 improvements from SR 1457 near Winton,
Hertford County, to Virginia State Line, Gates
County, CH 91-E-4220-0142, State project 6.079002T,
TIP No. R-2507
We have received notification from the State Clearinghouse concerning
the above project.
We have conducted a search of our maps and files and have located the
following structures of historical or architectural importance within
the general area of the project:
Stateline House (Freeman House). East side of NC 13 on North
Carolina/Virginia state line, Gates County. The Stateline House
was placed on the National Register of Historic Places on
September 23, 1982.
Thomas B. Riddick House. Southeast side of US 13, 0.2 mile
northeast of the junction with NC 37, Gates County. The Riddick
House was included on our state study list for eventual
nomination to the National Register on April 14, 1988.
AJ--6Q
Pipkin Savage Farm. Northeast corner of SR 1202 and SR 13, Gates
County. The Pipkin Savage Farm was included on our state study
list for eventual nomination to the National Register on April 14,
1988.
Story Family Farm. Northwest-corner of US 13/158 and SR 1200,
Gates County. The Story Family Farm was included on our state
study list for eventual nomination to the National Register of
April 14, 1988.
A-24
109 East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
. to,n) --,, -77zf%_

L. J. Ward
April 29, 1991, Page Two
However, since a comprehensive historical architectural inventory of
4 Hertford County has never been conducted, there may be other structures of
which we are unaware located within the planning area. We are also
aware of concern among several property owners within the project area.
Therefore, we recommend that a comprehensive survey be conducted by a
qualified architectural historian to identify the presence and significance
of any historic structures, buildings,.or districts.
A map showing the locations of the above properties was provided during
informal scoping for this project.
We have reviewed our files on the subject project and note that there are
two previously recorded archaeological sites, 31CA42 and 31GA61, within the
study area. However, there has not been a systematic survey covering the
entire study area and these sites probably do not represent all the
possible resources present. We, therefore, recommend an archaeological
survey be included in your scoping plans.
While we note that this project is to be state funded, the potential for
federal permits may require further consultation and compliance with
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act.
These comments are made in accord with G.S. 121-12(a) and Executive
Order XVI. If you have any questions regarding them, please contact Ms.
Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 733-4763.
DB:slww
cc: "State Clearinghouse
B. Church
4
MAY 1991
c'? 1j? i'JED
SEC r:1lu0A OFAOWE
?A-25

e•uNto
North Carolina Department of Crime Control and Public Safety
James G. Martin, Governor Division of Emergency Management µ
Joseph W. Dean, Secretary 116 W. Jones St., Raleigh, N. C. 27603-1335
[phone]
April 23, 1991
MEMORANDUM
To: N.C. State Clearinghouse, Department of Administration
From: J. Russell Capps, Division of Emergency Management,
NFIP Section )V
Subject: Intergovernmental Review
-----------------------------------------------------------
Re: State # N.C. 91-E-4220-0742
N.C. DOT - Improvements, US 13 in Hertford County
For information purposes, the Commission is advised that
on July 24, 1990, Governor Martin signed Executive Order
123, a Uniform Floodplain Management Policy, which must be
followed for development on any site.
A-26
qto SfATF o
ti
s NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
116 West Edenton Street, Education Building
Raleigh, NC 27603-1712
BOB ETHERIDGE
State Superintendent
April 18, 1991
mrmn ?AID m im
TO: L. J. Ward, P.E.
Manager of Planning and Research
NC Division of Highways
FROM: Charles H.
erintendent
Assistant *vcesr
Auxiliary RE
: US 13, from SR 1457 in Hertford County to the Virginia state line in
Gates County; Hertford/Gates Counties; State Project No. 6.079002T; TIP
No. R-2507
Please find attached communication from Bryan J. Salter, Superintendent for
Gates County Schools, relative to subject project.
mrl
Attachment
A-27
an equal opporninu a irmwirc anion emplover
BRYAN J. SALTER
:superintendent
ilublir 15r4nnl.s of (gntrs Tnunfzq
Office of the Superintendent
P. O. Box 125
GATESVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA 27938
[phone]
April 15, 1991
W
Dr. Charles H. Weaver
Assistant State Superintendent
116 West Edenton Street
Education Building
Raleigh, N. C. 27603-1712
BOARD MEMBERS:
Helen B. Jordan.
Chairman
William H. Harrell.
Vice Chairman
Pennie P. Battle
Emily B. Williams
J. S. Pierce
NPR 1 7 (? D
HOOLPLANNINGI
Re: US 13, from SR 1457 in Hertford County to the Virginia state
line in Gates County; Hertford/Gates Counties; State Project
No. 6.079002T; TIP No. R-2507
Dear Dr. Weaver:
This section of highway from the Hertford County line to the
Virginia State line across Gates County, has always been attributed
to a high accident rate. This project should reduce the number of
accidents by improving the quality of the highway.
The environmental impact should be minimal since the right-of-
way has already been cleared.
If I can be of further assistance, please contact me.
Br? arbY. Salter
Superintendent
BJS/tre
A-28
1?
o? .'
® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission 0
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee, Division of Planning and Assessment
Dept. of Environment, Health & Natural Resources
FROM: Dennis L. Stewart, Manager
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: April 24, 1991
SUBJECT: Request for Information from Mr. L.J. Ward of the North Carolina
Department of Transportation Regarding fish and wildlife concerns
associated with State Project 91-0742, proposed improvements to US 13,
from SR 1457 in Hertford County to the Virginia State line in Gates County,
North Carolina.
This correspondence responds to a request from Mr. L.J. Ward of the North
Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) for our concerns regarding impacts to
fish and wildlife resources resulting from ro osed improvements to US 13. The North
Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) is concerned over impacts to
fisheries, wildlife, and wetlands resources within and adjacent to the proposed construction
corridor.
Due to the limited information in Mr. Ward's memorandum of April 9, 1991, we can
express our concerns and requests for information only in general terms. Our ability to
evaluate project impacts and provide beneficial recommendations when reviewing the
environmental document will be enhanced by inclusion of the following information:
1. Complete inventories for fisheries and wetland resources
within, adjacent to, or utilizing the proposed project
construction corridor. Potential borrow areas to be used for
project construction should be included in the inventories.
2. Accurate data on State and Federally listed rare, threatened,
and endangered species, including State and Federal species of
special concern, within, adjacent to, or utilizing the proposed
project construction corridor should be provided. A listing of
designated species can be developed through consultation with
the Natural 11critage Program, N.C. Division of Parks and
Recreation, P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, N.C., 27611, (919) 733-
7795, and Cecil C. Frost, Coordinator of the NCDA Plant
Conservation Program, P.O. Box 27647, Raleigh, N.C. 27611,
[phone].
A-29
Memo (2) April 24, 1991
11
In addition, the NCWRC's Nongame and Endangered Species
Section maintains databases for locations of vertebrate wildlife
species. While there is no charge for the list, a service charge
for computer time is involved. Additional information may be
obtained from Mr. Randy Wilson, Manager, Nongame &
Endangered Species Section, Division of Wildlife
Management, N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission, 512 N.
Salisbury Street, Raleigh, N.C. 27604-1188, [phone].
3. Cover type maps showing wetland acreages impacted by the
project. Wetland acreages should include all projected related
areas that may undergo hydrologic change as ' A" result of
ditching, other drainage, or filling for project construction.
4. Cover type maps showing acreages of upland wildlife habitat
impacted by the proposed project. Potential borrow sites
should be included.
5. The need for channelizing, filling *or relocating portions of
streams/ditches crossed and the extent of such activities must
be noted.
6. The extent of habitat fragmentation in uplands and wetlands
and impacts associated with fragmentation.
7. Mitigation for avoiding, minimizing, or compensating for direct
and indirect degradation in habitat quality as well as
quantitative losses.
8. A cumulative impact assessment section which analyzes the
environmental effects of highway construction and quantifies
the contribution of this individual project to environmental
degradation.
9. ' A list of document preparers which shows each individual's
professional background and qualifications.
The information contained in the material which accompanied Mr. Ward's cover
letter is insufficient to provide a response to their request for specific information
concerning potential impacts to the fisheries and wildlife resources within the proposed
construction corridor. Be advised however, the NCWRC is not likely to provide a
favorable review for any alternative which does not clearly avoid, minimize, or mitigate
destruction or degradation of wildlife and fisheries habitat. Adequate bridging over
streams and wetlands for wildlife and fisheries movements as well as hydrologic
considerations should be included in initial project designs.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide input in the early planning stages for this
project. If we can further assist your office, please call on us. -..
DLS/lp hhq t) u r07t-
cc: Pete Kornegay, District 1 Fisheries Biologist I'V
David Rowe, District 1 Wildlife Biologist ?l
A-30

Distrit Late to:
Pcolc Vick_ ? O'Quinn
Dudeck Prevatt? Bruton
Wewnam Davis • Shuller
Norwood - SKIM Nedwidek
iviudlin Webb Springer
Tewell Elmore _
Grimes _
COMMISSION
Mr. L. J. Ward, P. E.
Manager, Planning & Environmental Branch
NC Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
P. O. Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611-5201
April 30, 1991
E c
s ?•'4
y
RE: Improvements to US 13 from SR 1457 in Hertford County to the Virginia state line; TIP
No. R-2507
Dear Mr. Ward:
Our territory in Region Q includes Hertford County but not Gates County, so my comments can
only address the segment of this proposal which affect Hertford County.
You have noted that sufficient right-of-way already exists for the Hertford County section of
improvements. The only problems you may encounter in this vicinity will be related to hydrous soils along
much of the length of US 13 and the presumed necessity for widening the bridge which crosses the Chowan
River in an area with relatively high soil erosion factors. Neither of these conditions represents a change
from those encountered when the highway was originally built.
Our agency has no regulatory authority in Region Q and, therefore, requires no permits or
approvals. Work within 75' of the river will require a Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) permit.
Hertford County also enforces a number of land use regulations which may require you to provide an
environmental impact statement for projects disturbing more than 1 acre of land. You will want to check
with the Army Corps of Engineers to determine if wetlands have been designated which require special
attention. My interpretation of the National Wetlands Inventory maps for this area is that you may
encounter 2 small areas in the Hertford County section. (As you cross into Gates County you are
surrounded by wetlands.) I hope this has provided you with useful information.
We are generally in favor of highway improvements within Region Q.
Sincerely,
Jane Daughtridge
Assistant Planning Director
cc: Jane Godwin
Planning & Zoning Administrator
Hertford County
P.O. Drawer 1787 Washington, North Carolina 27889 [phone] 4-

r%
MQ
A-31

414 Y 2 1 199j
RAY D. PE Y D?J?i
COMMISSIONER
'C?A
l?
CHIEF ENGINEER-PRECONSTRUCTIot
X- Z Sa 7
JUN 01 1993
y DES LI-PRE `r
_ TF,F_ rim,
EAU pt:S-_ CPU
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA -!?For Your tion
aro Appropriate Action
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION _ prepare Reply for _
1401 LAST 6ROAD STRL'ET Slggnatur©
RICHMOND, 21219 Suspense JACK F?ODGE
CN L.n
May 18, 1993 "
Improvements to Route 13
at North Carolina L
GEIv?
O
Mr. William G. Marley, Jr., P.L.
State Highway Administrator JUN 0
North Carolina Department of Transportation 2 1993
P. O. Box 25201 Z
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201 L DIVISIONOF
'TS HIGHWAYS
Dear Mr-.-A4- ? t ire y : P
V?RONN??
This is in response to your recent letter advising of North
Carolina's future plans for four-lane improvements on Route 13 to the
Virginia State Line, which would require a 1,500 foot transition into
Virginia.
It is noted that this particular section of Route 13 is not
anticipated for right of way acquisition or construction until after
the year 2000, which should allow sufficient time for VDOT to evaluate
its priorities, funding capabilities, and schedules.
VDOT updates its Six-Year Improvement Program annually for the
approval of the Commonwealth Transportation Board, and I am confident
that the Board will look favorably to adding Virginia's financial
responsibility for the transition to the program at the appropriate
time. The next update of the program covers fiscal years 1993-94
through 1998-99 and will be presented to the Board on may 20 for
tentative approval; and after public hearings are held and input
considered, final action will be expected on June 24.
We would appreciate being informed during the major project
development stages as to Virginia's estimated costs for each phase.
E?
1993
f?IV
TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21ST CENTURY
Mr. William G. Marley, Jr., P.E.
Page 2
May 18, 1993
At this time, we see no reason why Virginia could not
participate with NCDOT in this endeavor.
Sincerely,
J. S. Hodge
Chief Engineer
CC: Mr. Ray D. Pethtel
Mr. Claude D. Garver, Jr.

A-33
R e L O C AT 1 0 N R E P O R T North Carolina Department of Transportation
x E.I.S. - CORRIDOR _ DESIGN RELOCATION ASSISTANCE
PROJECT: 6.079002T COUNTY: Gates/Hertford Alternate 1 of 1 Alternate
I.D. NO., R-2507 F.A. PROJECT: N/A
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: LIS_13; from SR 1457 near Winton to the Virginia State Line, Hertford-
-- ` . ,
Gates Counties.
ESTIMATED DISPLACEES INCOME LEVEL
Type of
Displacee
Owners
Tenants
Total Minor-
ities
0-15M
15-25M
25-35M
35-SOM
50 LP
Individuals
Families 49 12 61 15 10 16 25 8 2
Businesses 7 0 7 0 VALLE OF DWELLING DSS DWELLINGS AVAILABLE
Farms Owners Tenants For Sale For Rent
Non-Profit 2 0 2 2 0-20M 0 $ 0-150 10 0-20M 0
1 $ 0-150 0
AN SWER ALL QUESTI ONS 20-40M 10 150-250 2 20-40M 35 150-250 3
YES NO EXPLAIN ALL "YES" ANSWERS 40-70M 29 250-400 0 40-70M 39 250-400 0
X 1. Will special relocation
i 70-100 7 400-600 0 70-100 14 -600 0

X serv
ces be necessary
2. Will schools or churches be
ff
100 LP
3
600 LP
0
100 LP
9
UP
1600
0
a
ected by displacement
X 3. Will business services still
b
il TOTAL 49 12 97 3

X e ava
able after project
4. Will any business be dis-
placed. If so, indicate size
All Residential Displacees counted as families.
type, estimated. number of 2. God's Healing Cathedral; small, 10-15 mbrs.
l
emp
oyees, minorities, etc. New Israel Church; small, 5-10 mbrs.
X 5. Will relocation cause a 3. Similar businesses, unaffected by this project,
H
i
h
ous
ng s
ortage will be available.
X 6. Source for available hour-
i
(li 4. Powers Tire and Auto Service; med,'4 emp.

X ns
st)
7. Will additional housing
b ABC Package Store; med, 2-3 emp.
Corner HI Grocery; sm, 2-3 emp.

X programs
e needed
8. Should Last Resort Housing
b
id
d Tarheel Bar-B-Que; med, 4 emp.
Triangle Drive-In; med, 4 emp.
'

X e cons
ere
9. Are there large, disabled,
ld
l Marsha
s House of Flowers; med, 4 emp.
Doris and Roger's Kitchen; med, 4 emp.
e
er
y, etc. families
ANSWER THESE
ALSO FOR DESIGN
10. Will public housing be 5. Rentals may become available and/or tenants may
become homeowners.
- d
d f
nee
e
or project 6. Multiple Listing Servicesr Realtors and Classified
11. Is public housing avail- Ads.
bl
a
e 8. As mandated by State Law.
12. Is it felt there will be ad-
equate DDS housing available
d
i
l
i
ur
ng re
ocat
on period
13. Will there be a problem of
housing within financial

means
14. Are suitable business sites
il
bl
(li
ava
a
e
st source) NOTE: There are two unoccupied business locations and
] ] 15. Number months estimated to two unoccupied residences, not counted above.
complete RELOCATION

iry Lou Su March 3, 1993
Relocation gent ate pprove mate
rm 15.4 Revised 5/90 Original $ 1 Copy: State Relocation Agent
2 Copy: Area Relocation File
A-34
James G. Martin, Governor Thomas J. Harrelson, Secretary
North Carolina ` ' ?•
Department of Transportation 0??t
Release: Immediate Dat6-Z._ *4-rr,,7._q7
Contact: Julie Goodnight, [phone] Distribution:
Release No:
INFORMATION WORKSHOP FOR IMPROVEMENTS OF U.S. 13 IN HERTFORD COUNTY
RALEIGH--The N.C. Department of Transportation (NCDOT) will hold the
second citizens, informational workshop Thursday, November 5, 1992, to
discuss proposed improvements to U.S. 13 in Hertford County from S.R.
1457 to the Virginia State line.
The workshop will be held from 4 p.m. to 7 p.m. in the county
commissioners meeting room in building number one of the County Office.
The office is located on King Street in Winton, N.C.
The public is invited to attend the informal workshop to review the
maps and discuss the project with planners and engineers from the NCDOT.
The project involves widening the existing two-lane highway to a
four-lane, divided highway.
Questions, statements or comments relative to this project may be
submitted to Mr. L. Jack Ward, P.E., Manager, Planning and Environmental
Branch, Division of Highways, NCDOT, Post Office Box 25201, Raleigh,
North Carolina, 27611.
For more information, contact Eric Midkiff, project planning
engineer, at [phone].
***NCDOT***
i

Public Affairs Division NC DOTLINE Rubie Britt Height
P. O. Box 25201, Raleigh, N. C. 27611 1-800-526-2368 Director of Public Affairs
[phone] Media Information Updates
FAX: [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
A-35
James G. Martin, Governor
North Carolina
Thomas J. Harrelson, Secretary
Department of Transportation
Release: Immediate Date: Feb. 5, 1992
Contact: Bill Jones, [phone] Distribution: 37,46
Release No: 034
IVYW MATION WORKSHOP SET FOR U.S. 13 WIDENING PROJECT
RALEIGH -- The N.C. Department of Transportation will hold an
information workshop Wednesday, Feb. 12, on a proposal to widen 17.5
miles of U.S. 13 in Hertford and Gates counties to four lanes.
The workshop is scheduled from 4 p.m. to 7 p.m. in the county
commissioners meeting room at County Office Building Number 1 on King
Street in Winton.
Construction has been scheduled in the Transportation Improvement
Program (TIP), NCDOT's planning document for highway projects, to widen
U.S. 13 from S.R. 1457 south of Winton in Hertford County to the Virginia
state line in Gates County, beginning in Fiscal Year 1996
The public is invited to attend the informal workshop, ask
questions, make comments or recommendations and submit material about the
proposed project. NCDOT officials are asking interested citizens to meet
with them on a one-to-one basis. This will give the department a better
opportunity to understand citizens' attitudes about the proposed project.
Other written material may be submitted to L. Jack Ward, manager of
Planning and Environmental Branch, N.C. Department of Transportation,
P.O. Box 25201, Raleigh, N.C. 27611.
For more information about the workshop, contact Schenck Cline at
[phone].
***NCDOT***
Public Affairs Division NC DOTLINE Joan P. Henderson
P. O. Box 25201, Raleigh, N. C. 27611 1-800-526-2368 Special Assistant to the Secretary
[phone] Media Information Updates for Public Affairs
FAX: [phone] A-36
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
TABLE Al
CAL3QHC: LINE SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL - MARCH, 1990 VERSION
JOB: R-2507 / US 13 HERTFORD AND GATES COUNTY RUN: US 13 (YEAR 2006 NO BUILD)
DATE: 061126111992 TIME: 14:21:06.48
SITE & METEOROLOGICAL VARIABLES
-------------------------------
' VS : .0 CM/S VD : .0 CN/S ZO : 10. CN
U : 1.0 M!S CLAS ATIM : 60. MINUTES MIYH : 400. H AMB = 1.9 PPM
LINK VARIABLES
--------------
LINK DESCRIPTION LINK COORDINATES (M) * LENGTH BRG TYPE VPH EF H N V/C QUEUE
* Y1 Y1 Y2 * (M) (DEG) (U'/MI) (M) (M) (VEH)
1. NB LINK -304.8 12.5 304.6 12.5 * 616. 90. AG 1230. 7.2 .0 9.F
2. SB LINK 304.8 16.2 -304.9 i6.2 * 610. 270. AG 1230. 7.2 .0 9.8
RECEPTOR LOCATIONS
------------------
COORDINATES ;M) t
RECEPTOR * V i
------------------------- *-------------------------------------*
1. REC 93 (EAST SIDE) ' .O -28.3 1.6 *
4
c
J
A-37'
TABLE A2
CAL3QHC: LINE SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL - MARCH, 1990 VERSION
JOB: R-2507 / US 13 HERTFORD AND GATES COUNTY RUN: US 13 (YEAR 2016 NO BUILD)
DATE: 06/26/1992 TIME: 14:1-1:58.99
SITE & METEOROLOGICAL VARIABLES
-------------------------------
VS : .0 CM/S VD : C CM/S ZO : 10. CM
U : 1.0 H/S CLAS : 5 (Ei ATIH : 60. MINUTES MI%H : 400. H AMB : 1.9 PPH
LINE VARIABLES
--------------
LINK DESCRIPTION LINK COORDINATES (10 * LENGTH BRG TYPE VPH EF H w V/C QUEUE
' Y1 Y1 E2 Y2 ' (H) (DEG) IG/HI) IHJ (H) (VEH)
........................ *----------------------------------------t..........................................................
1. NB LINP, * -304.8 1:.: 304.8 12.5 ' 610. 90. AG 1230. 7.1 .0 9.8
2. SB LINK r 304.9 16.2 -304.3 16.2 t 610. 270. AG 1230. 7.1 .0 9.8
RECEPTOR LOCATIONS
" COORDINATES (M)
RECEPTOR ' Y Y
------------------------- -------------------------------------*
1. REC 98 (EAST SIDE) * .0 -28.3 1.8 '
4'
r
7
A-38
TABLE A3
CAL3QHC: LINE SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL - MARCH, 1990 VERSION
JOB: R-2507 / US 13 HERTFORD AND GATES COUNTY RUN: US 13 (YEAR 2006 BUILD)
DATE: 06/261/1992 TIME: 14:72:50.90
v
SITE & METEOROLOGICAL VARIABLES
-------------------------------
? VS = .0 CH/3 VD = .0 CH/S ZO = 10. CM
U = 1.0 M/S CLAS = 5 (El ATIM = 60. MINUTES MI%H : 400. M AMB = 1.9 PPM
LINK VARIABLES
--------------
LINK DESCRIPTION r LINK COORDINATES (M(
r zl Yl E2
........................ r---...-----------------------
1. NB LINE, t -304.6 -111.3 304.8
2. SB LINK t 304.8 14.3 -304.8
r
Y2
----------.t
-14.3
14.3 t
LENGTH BRG TYPE
(M) (DEG)
----------------
610. 90. AG
610. 270. AG
VPH EF H W V/C QUEUE
(G/MI) (N) W (VEH)
----------------------------------
1230. 6.6 .0 13.4
1230. 6.6 .0 13.4
RECEPTOR. LOCATIONS
------------------
t COORDINATES (M) t
RECEPTOR * Y Y Z t
------------------------- t ------------------------------------- r
1. REC 96 (EAST SIDE) t 0 -28.3 1.8 t
Y
A-39
e
TABLE A4
CAL3QHC: LINE SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL - MARCH, 1990 VERSION
JOB: R-2501 / US 13 HERTFORD AND GATES COUNTY RUN: US 13 (YEAR 2016 BUILD)
DATE: 06/26/1992 TIME: 14:23:40.39
M1
SITE & METEOROLOGICAL VARIABLES
-------------------------------
VS : .0 CM/S VD : .0 CM/S 30 : 10. CM s
U : 1.0 M/S CLAS : 5 (E) ATIM : 60. MINUTES MIYH : 400. N AMB : 1.9 PPM
LINK VARIABLES
--------------
LINK DESCRIPTION r LINK, COORDINATES (M) * LENGTH BRG TYPE VPH EF H W V/C QUEUE
%1 Y1 I2 Y2 Y (M) (DEG) (G/MI) (M) (M) (VEH)
........................t........................................Y..........................................................
1. NB LINK * -304.8 -14.3 304.8 -14.3 ' 610. 90. AG 1230. 6.5 .0 13.4
2. SB LINK R 304.8 14.3 -304.8 14.3 = 610. 210. AG 1230. 6.5 .0 13.4
RECEPTOR LOCATIONS
------------------
t COORDINATES (M) t
RECEPTOR * I Y 2 =
......................... *-------------------.......-----------t
1. FBC 98 (EAST SIDE) .0 -28.3 1.8
A-40

Widening of US 13
From SR 1451
to Virginia State Line
Hertford and Gates County
TIP # R-2507
State Project # 6.079002T
Natural Resources Technical Report
R-2507
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL BRANCH
ENVIRONMENTAL UNIT
TIM SAVIDGE, ENVIRONMENTAL BIOLOGIST
MAY 20, 1993
1#4 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction ............................................1
1.1 Project Description ...............................1
1.2 Purpose ...........................................1
1.3 Physiography Soils and Land Use ...................I
1.4 Methodology ........................................3
2.0 Biotic Resources .....................................
2.1 Terrestrial Communities ...........................3
2.1.1 Roadside ..................................3
2.1.2 Agricultural Field ........................5
2.1.3 Successional Field ........................6
2.1.4 Cutover ........... 6
2.1.5 Mixed Bottomland Forest ...................?
2.1.6 Cypress/Gum Swamp .........................8
2.1.7 Wet Pine Flatwoods ........................9
2.1.8 Mixed Pine Upland Forest .................10
2.1.9 Pine/Scrub Oak Sand Ridge .................10
2.1.10 Young Pine Regrowth ...................... 11
2.2 Aquatic Communities ..............................12
2.2.1 Small Stream ..............................12
2.3.2 Chowan River ....... 13
2.3 Anticipated Impacts: Biotic Communites........... 14
2.3.1 Terrestrial ...............................14
2.3.2 Aquatic ...................................15
3.0 Water Resources ................ 17
3.1 Water Bodies: Characteristics ....................17
3.2 Best Usage and Quality ...........................18
3.2 Anticipated Impacts: Water Resources .............19
4.0 Special Topics ........................................20
4.1 Waters of the United States ......................20
4.1.1 Permits ..................................20
4.1.2 Mitigation ...............................21
4.2 Rare and Protected Species ....................... 21
4.2.1 Federally Protected ........... ..........21
4.2.2 Federal Candidate Species ................24
4.2.3 State Protected ........................... 25
5.0 References .............................................26
Appendix A: Glossary of Terms ...................... .......27
Appendix B: Species Observed List...... ................ .29
Wm. David Webster, 1992. The Geographic Distribution of the
Dismal Swamp Southeastern Shrew (Sorex longirostris fisheri)
in North Carolina.
Resource Agency Correspondence pertaining to TIP 4 R-2507
,o
4or
1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The following Natural Resource Technical Report is
submitted to assist in the preparation of a Federal
Environmental Assessment (EA) for this project.
1.1 Project Description
The proposed project calls for widening of the existing
two-lane roadway to a 4-lane divided facility for the entire
length of the project. Four lane right of way (ROW) already
exists for part of the project. On the remainder of the
project, the ROW will transition from side to side to reduce
impacts on several historic structures. Additional right of
way is required in various stretches of the alignment. These
areas are marked on the aerial photograph of the project.
1.2 Purpose
The purpose of this document is to describe and
inventory the natural resources identified within the project
vicinity and estimate potential impacts to these resources.
Recommendations are made for measures which will minimize
resource impacts.
1.3 Physiography, Soils and Land Use
The proposed project occurs in Gates and Hertford
counties (figure 1), in the Coastal Plain physiographic
province. Gates county is largely rural, and contains no
towns with populations over 1000. Hertford county has a
population around 24,000, however the area of Hertford county
within the project area is sparsely populated.
The topography of the area is characterized as flat to
gently undulating with associated broad forested bottomland
floodplains. The smooth plains have low local relief and in
some areas there is less than 1.5m elevation difference in 3
to 4 km stretches.
Sediments are marine, sound and estuarine in nature,
with some fluvial elements,.from the early to late
Pleistocene epoch (< 2,8 million years old). The minerologic
soil classes vary from kaolinitic to a mixed minerology (more
than 10% expanding 2:1 clay mineral).
The soils of the area are generally poorly drained loams
and sands. The fine sandy.loams, Noboco and Goldsboro, are
the prominent soil units in the northern section of the
project, along with the hydric soil unit Rains loam. The
soils of the mid-section of the project are predominately
hydric Bladen loam series, with scattered small pockets of
non-hydric Craven loam series. In the southern end of the
project, Alaga sand and Pactolus sand units, along with
k
2
hydric Ballahack loam unit are the predominant soils.
Numerous other soil mapping units occur less frequently,
throughout the project area.
The project lies west of the Suffolk Scarp, a major
topographic feature in northeastern North Carolina, which
extends from southeastern Virginia south through eastern
Gates County to western Washington County and southward
before becoming an insignificant landscape feature in western
Carteret County. This scarp is a major remnant shoreline
from a geologic period when the Atlantic Ocean extended much
further inland than present. Elevation changes from west to
east of the scarp show a drop from approximately 40 feet -
above mean sea level (amsl) to about 6 feet amsl. Elevation
ranges from 75 feet amsl, to 4 feet amsl in the project area.
Forestry and agriculture are the two major land uses in
the area. Much of the natural forested habitats.have been
drained, timbered, or cleared as a result of these practices.
Hunting is also popular, as is evidenced by extensive NC
Wildlife Commision Game Lands in the southern region of the
project limits. Fishing, recreational boating, transportation
and paper pulp production are the major water uses in the
area.
1.4. Methodology
Preliminary resource information was gathered and
reviewed prior to site visit. Information sources include:
U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey (USGS) quadrangle maps
(Gates, Winton, Ahoskie, Gatesville), NCDOT aerial
photographs of project area (1"=500'). Soil Conservation
Service (SCS) soil maps (Gates, Hertford County), Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) list of protected and candidate
species and N.C. Natural Heritage Program (NC-NHP) database
of uncommon and protected species and unique habitats.
General field surveys were conducted along the proposed
project alignment on November 16-18 by NCDOT Biologists Tim
Savidge and Hal Bain. Plant communities were identified and
recorded. Wildlife was identified using a number of
observation techniques: active searching and capture, visual
observations (binocular), and identifying characteristic
signs of wildlife (sounds, tracks and burrows). Cursory
surveys of aquatic communities were conducted using a hand
held dip net; organisims captured were identified and then
released.
Specific surveys were conducted for the federally
protected Dismal Swamp southeastern shrew (Sorex longirostrus
fisheri), on August 13-14 by David Webster Ph.D. (principle
Investigator), and NCDOT Biologists Hal Bain, Susan Corda,
Tim Savidge, Janet Shipley and Matt.Smith (Section 4.2.1).
??- }rol .o uu END PROJECT `"°" ?utr
IY utt lltz ? 111 slu ??? r ` s•;ri.
121! ? -?
lIa• ` !? IJ ? 11? 1?L ?
. ? fag - V +? ? 114i
+ !7e1 7 7!f Itrywddwn ?+> ? ?
tZLI
-2 l2m - 17p , ?? `? ry ML lls4
0
? 1L ? ? 707 +,16"i'? 1 »i °?? 11? I.s
i. o • W7
)707 - _NI
?? 7 ? GaM
? ''1 t 707 ??? Y 1102 ?
" ?`? 171 ? ' L
WHITEOAK ( , ?o ??e
/ POCOSIN
!? ??, I •J 1jl• ? 114i t
koddand
'? ® ? 12L h c
O ti "
1 1] 1771 1 A C
tt? ? 17 1]°
lj IM All fK 1
' / ??? 3. 2.. ? ROdllc» 77a 1111 /
i ??? To.flwl ' a'7 7.0
l 11 GATES COUNTY
y ' LM / com- M;Qh . 111? 1131 W%4. Oat , 47K-
p o . I?
a0anor,
44 ? ,???,{N n i Lo ? an. .z
1126 AP
' ? ??, ? ? ? ? ?. 111. - +? ?
i
111
ills ' .\ ,?? ; 11 111• `? 111
1 ? •f 177 •O a n J
L
1 ??? , I r .t. .3 Elw.r L2 AS
,;,?? * !? .a. 64.03. Ise 1•=
??? 117f 1_?> TA )YZ .1` 11 1. 1 Y• 130 1
Ilil ? lJ Ilia 1j GATESVILLE
b9 I_1ta f? rot. 303 `
* 10.
J r
I ` : a? WIIYTON 1170 v L4L
?' , ?OI. 873 1?1 \ _
is • d J,
?i l'?t. \ ,:::• lSf24 Vim! ? ` t ? QQ . r'. y7 +
T y T'uwa '^tr 111
la' ISQ1 ' d 1m
Oilc A! • i \ ? "
MEGIN PROJECT' \
I?iz 11R i ca.
1 /
JAAL
' ... .:3 +; 1w0 NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
7.1
TRANSPORTATION
_9a I..s DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
?I 7* 1? ?? o ?? 14a 3.7 PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
u BRANCH
\ _ Y
110
? JAW •. I•1Z %` 1 o US 13
FROM SR 1457 NEAR WINT
11
1 I441 TO THE VIRGINIA STATE LINE
ERTFORD COUNTY
'a. CpN RI GATES-HERTFORD COUNTIES
t?1 WtCC? STATE PROJECT NO. 6.079002T
Lin TIP NO. R-2507
10 i?t ' M91 FIGURE 1
ti F . r
aip

.
3
Surveys for the federally protected red-cockaded
woodpecker (Picoides borealis) were conducted on December 21-
22, by NCDOT Biologists Tim Savidge, Hal Bain and Mark
Landrum (Section 4.2.1).
2.0 BIOTIC RESOURCES
The following section is a description of the ecosystems
encountered in the project area. This section deals with the
relationships between floral and faunal components of the
ecosystem(s). This project will impact a variety of
Terrestrial systems. Descriptions of the Terrestrial systems
are segmented into floral community classifications.
Representative animal species which are likely to occur
in these habitats are mentioned, along with brief
descriptions of their respective "roles" within that
community. For complete listings of flora and fauna which
occur in Gates county, a composite of specific references
listed in section 5.0, should be consulted. Animals that
were visually observed or ones that identifying signs were
noted during site visits are denoted by (*) in the text, and
are listed in Appendix B.
Scientific nomenclature and common names (when
applicable) are used for plant and animal species described.
Subsequent references will include the common name only.
2.1 Terrestrial Communities
A total of ten distinct community types occur within the
project area, however there is some degree of overlap between
communities, particularly with the faunal components.
Numerous terrestrial animals are highly adaptive and populate
a variety of habitats, therefore many of the species
mentioned may occur in any number of the different community
types described. Specific community types may occur numerous
times throughout the alignment, with slight variations from
location to location. All of these community types have had
some degree of human impact (I.E. logging, farming,
residental development).
2.1.1 Roadside Community
This maintained community occurs throughout the entire
project alignment, along US 13, and is composed of saw grass
(Cladium iamaicense) coastal bermuda (Cvnodon dactylon)
finger grass (Chloris petraea), silverling (Baccharis
halimifolia), winged sumac (Rhus copalina), poison ivy
(Toxicodendron radicans), Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera
Japonica), trumpet creeper (Campsis radicans) and morning
glory (Ipomoea sp.). Ditches exist along the roadside, which
are semipermanetly flooded. Juncus (Juncus effusus), spike
rush (Eleocharis microcarpa), cattail (Typha angustifolia)
4
and knottweed (Polygonum sp.) occur here.
Although plant succession is suppressed by human
activity, numerous opportunistic animal species utilize these
areas primarily as a foraging habitat. This includes various
species of birds and mammals which feed on seeds, berries and
roots. These species include: the Carolina chickadee (Parus
carolinensis)*, northern cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis)*,
rufous-sided towhee (Pipilo erythropthalmus)*, and eastern
cottontail (Sylvilagus floridanus)*.
A large number of insects are attracted to this habitat.
The dense weeds are fed upon by grasshoppers and other
insects. Honeysuckle flowers attract pollinating insects
(bees, butterflys), and the disturbed soils of this habitat
harbour numerous worms and other burrowing invertebrates.
These invertebrates are preyed upon by various species of
snakes, such as black racer (Coluber constrictor) and smooth
earth snake (Virginia valeriae)*, a small secretive snake,
which is rarely seen above ground. The five lined skink
(Eumeces fasciatus)*, a small lizard common throughout the
state forages on small insects in this habitat and can often
be found under trash and other debris along the roadside.
Birds such as American robin (Turdus migratorius)*,
Carolina wren (Thryothorus ludovicianus)* and white-throated
sparrow (Zonotrichia albicollis)* feed on the many insects
and earthworms attracted to this type of habitat. The house
wren (Troglodytes aedon)*, is a common winter resident of
brushy areas and thickets particularly in residential areas
along roadsides, often nesting in gourds or birdhouses.
The eastern harvest mouse (Reithrodontomys humulis),
which feeds primarily on seeds and the house mouse (Mus
musculus), which consumes a wide variety of food items,
including insects, grains, and animal material, are also
common occupants of this habitat. These mice often build
their nests along the road shoulder out of grass and
discarded paper/cardboard.
Virginia opossum (Didelphis virginiana)*, and raccoon
(Procyon lotor)* frequently forage nocturnally in these
habitats. On poorly lighted rural roads, these animals are
often roadkill victims. Consequently roadkills attract a
large number of scavenger species including turkey vulture
(Cathartes aura)*, black vulture (Coragvps atratus)* and
common crow (Corvus brachvrhynchos)* as well as domestic dogs
and cats.
The ditches along the roadside are semipermanetly to
permanently flooded in some areas and range in depths from
one inch to two feet. Various species of frogs (Rana sp.)*
and tree frogs (Hula sp.) inhabit these water bodies during
developmental (tadpole) life stages. The livebearing eastern

w
s

5
mosquitofish (Gambusia affins)*, which has been introduced
into many areas of the United States, for mosquito control is
very abundant in these ditches.
2.1.2 Agricultural Field
Approximately 25-300 of the area has been cleared and
drained for agricultural purposes. Soy bean, peanut, cotton
and corn are the major crops grown in this area.
Numerous rodents occur in farm fields and are considered
a nuisance by farmers, because they feed on roots, leaves and
fruits of the cultivated crops. The eastern kingsnake
(Lampropeltis getulus), and eastern milk snake (L. triangulum
triangulum), which feed in this habitat on small rodents, are
welcomed inhabitants by the farmers. The common grackle
(Ouiscalus quiscula)* feeds in very large groups in crop
fields on sprouting corn and other grains as well as insects
and worms. These birds, also disliked by farmers, are often
shot at when they flock in the fields.
Because of the open nature of the field habitat, birds
of prey, such as the red-shoulder hawk (Buteo lineatus)* and
American kestrel (Falco sparverius)*, along with the grey fox
(Urocvon cinereoargenteus) are some of the predatory animals
which feed in this habitat on small rodents, birds, and bird
eggs. Hawks usually soar above the open field to spot their
prey, where as the kestral hunts from a perch of some kind
(powerline, tree limb). The grey fox will also consume
insects and fruits, particularly in the summer months.
White-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus)* feed heavily
on agricultural crops, particularly corn and soybeans, often
resulting in great economic losses to the farmers. In these
cases legal and illegal removal of deer occur.
2.1.3 Successional Field
Numerous fields in various stages of succession occur
throughout the project area. These are fields which have
been used for agricultural purposes in the past, but
presently are uncultivated. In addition to remnants of the
cultivated species (corn, grains, soybean etc.) various
successional plant species are becoming dominant. These
include broomstraw (Andropogon-sp.), dog fennel (Foeniculum
vulgare), lespedeza (Lespedeza sp.), Queen Anne's lace
(Daucus carota), blackberry (Rubus sp.) and rabbit tobacco
(Gnaphalium obtusifolium). Numerous other herbaceous species
likely occur in this habitat, and would be evident during
spring and summer months.
The faunal organisms which utilize this habitat for
various purposes, are likely to be found in the agricultural
fields and roadside habitats mentioned earlier. Because this
6
community has.undergone successional stages, and thus is more
complex, animal diversity and populations are expected to be
greater than in the other two community types. Rodents,
which utilize the dense fortis in this habitat for cover and
nesting, will particularly be more abundant here.
Consequently with a larger number of rodent species,
ground predators, particularly ones which use sense of smell
rather than sight to hunt (snakes, grey fox), are expected to
be more abundant than predators which rely on sight (hawks).
Ground-nesting birds such as the rufous-sided towhee,
and the popular gamebirds; mourning dove (Zenaida asiatica)
and bobwhite (Colinus virginianus) utilize the thick
overgrowth to nest, and feed on weed seeds and insects. The
brown-headed cowbird (Molothrus ater)* is a common resident
of the coastal plain, which feeds in old fields on grains,
seeds and insects. This species does not construct nests,
rather it lays its eggs (usually one at a time) in nests of
other birds such as the rufous-sided towhee and solitary
vireo, and then removes one of the hosts' eggs. The host
bird broods the foreign egg until the young bird leaves the
nest shortly after hatching.
2.1.4 Cutover
Forestry is a major land use operation in the project
area. In most sites logging practices have been selective for
valuable timber. A-lthough large-scale clearcutting is not
common in the area, there are small tracts scattered
throughout the project line, which have been clearcut, and
are in varying stages of post-cut succession. Soil compaction
has occurred in these areas, particularly in deep ruts caused
by machinery used in the logging procedures. As a result of
this, much of the ground is soggy or has standing water up to
one foot deep.
In the more recently cut areas, living vegetation is
sparse and consists of wool grass (Scirpus cYperinus), cane
(Arundinaria gigantea) and blackberry. In the older cutover
areas various shrubby plants, including silverling (Baccharis
halimifolia), wax myrtle (Mvrica cerifera), sweet bay
(Magnolia virginiana) and bitter gallberry (Ilex glabra), are
the dominant vegetative cover along with red maple (Acer
rubrum) and tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera) saplings.
There is a substantial amount of cut down timber
remaining on the ground, which eastern fence lizards
(Sceloporus undulatus) commonly use for refuge. The
canebrake rattlesnake (Crotalus horridus atricaudatus) is
another reptile attracted to cane thickets and woodpile
refuge. This species is becoming increasingly rare, because
of public fear towards the highly venomous snake, which is
usually killed if encountered by man.
t
r
}

7
The pine woods treefrog (Hvla femoralis)*, a species
usually found high in trees and thus rarely seen, can also
adapt to existence on the ground after an area has been.
cutover. They are often abundant in cutover habitats, which
is most likely a result of being more visible and
concentrated around remaining debris.
Species of birds which populate open cutovers include
blue-gray gnatcatcher (Polioptila caerulea)*, eastern
bluebird (Sialia sialis)*, white throated sparrow, slate-
colored junco (Junco hvemalis)* and indigo bunting (Passerina
cyanea). These birds feed on a variety of seeds and insects
and use the cover of the thickets, and fallen debris to avoid
predation.
Red-tailed hawk (Buteo _iamaicensis)*, loggerhead shrike
(Lanius excubitor) and red-shouldered hawk utilize the open
nature of this habitat to prey on small birds, rodents and
reptiles which are exposed.
3.1.5 Mixed Bottomland Forest
This community type is most common in the northern
section of.the project area and is generally a wetland
community. The canopy is dominated by red maple, sweet gum
(Liquidambar stvraciflua), black gum (Nyssa sylvatica),
overcup oak (Ouercus lyrata), swamp chesnut oak (Q.
michauxii), loblolly pine (Pinus taeda) and pond pine (P.
serotina). The density of the mid-story varies from site to
site and is dominated by sweet bay, red bay (Persea borbonia)
American holly (I. opaca), sweet gallberry (I. coriacea) and
fetter bush (Leonia lucida). A thick vine layer of grape
(Vitis sp.) cat briar (Smilax sp.) cross vine (Anisostichus
capreolata) and trumpet vine (Campsis radicans) may occur as
well. Due to the time of the year and the heavy leaf litter,
the herbaceous component of the community was not well
surveyed. Sensitive fern (Onoclea sensibilis) and netted
chain fern (Woodwardia areolata) were observed during site
visit.
The faunal component of this community is very diverse.
The forest floor is heavily covered with leaves and fallen
branches, providing habitat for southern toad (Bufo
terrestris), eastern narrow-mouthed toad (Gastrophyryne
carolinensis)*, marbled salamander (Ambvstoma opacum)* and
cotton mouse (Peromyscus gossypinus)*, all of which live
under the litter layer and in hollow logs, feeding on various
species of beetles, ants and other insects, as well as
herbaceous plant material. Brimley's chorus frog (Pseudacris
brimleyi)* deposits its eggs on twigs and other debris in the
wetter areas of the community. These species, although often
found in other habitats, can adapt to a periodically semi-
flooded environment.
s
8
Other species which are associated with the forest floor
are the golden mouse (Ochrotomys nuttalli), which builds its
nests several feet off the ground in vines, or shrubs.
The eastern box turtle (Terrapene carolina), a common species
feeding on plant material, fungi, insects and small animals,
and the swamp sparrow (Melospiza melodia)*, which feeds on or
near the ground on seeds and small insects are other common
occupants of this habitat.
Stumps, roots and tree cavities provide shelter for
numerous bird and mammal species including: solitary vireo
(Vireo solitarius)*, downy woodpecker (Picoides pubescens)*,
evening bat (Nycticeius humeralis), a nocturnal forager,
feeding on mo.ths, beetles and flying ants, which often roosts
in vacated woodpecker holes, and the grey squirrel (Sciurus
carolinensis)*, the nests of which, are a common sight in
most forested habitats in North Carolina.
Barred owls (Strix varia) are common predators of these
habitats, feeding primarily on rodents. These large birds
nest in mid winter in abandoned hawks or crows nests.
2.1.6 Cypress/Gum Swamp
These communities border the blackwater stream svstems
located in the project area and are permanently saturated by
stagnant water. Bald cypress (Taxodium distichum), black gum
and tupelo gum (Nvssa aquatica), are the dominant canopy
species. The understory is sparse to absent, consisting of.
red bay, sweet bay, water ash (Fraxinus caroliniana) and
sweet pepperbush (Clethra alnifolia). The herb layer is
sparse to moderate and consists of lizards tail (Saururus
cernuus), netted chain fern, knottweed (Polygonum punctatum),
pennywort (Hydrocotyle sp.) and, most likely, other seasonal
species.
The Cypress-gum Swamp communities grade into Bottomland
Forest habitats therefore the faunal assemblages of the two
communities are very similar. The Cypress-gum Swamp will also
contain organisms adapted to a more aquatic existence.
Hollowed cypress buttresses are preferred hiding places
for the poisonous eastern cottonmouth (A4kistrodon piscivorus
piscivorus) a very aggressive snake which consumes a wide
variety of prey including fish, amphibians, birds and small
mammals.
Along the east side of US 13, north of the Chowan River,
the bordering Cypress-gum swamp canopy is also populated with
Atlantic white cedar (Chamaecvparis thvoides). Atlantic
white cedar stands are recognized as special communities by
the NC Natural Heritage Program, and are becoming
increasingly rare due to logging. The wood was highly sought
after for construction of boats, fence posts, shingles and
r
9
telephone poles. A group of the gregarious cedar waxwing
(Bombvcilla cedrorum)* was seen here perched in the treetops
during site visit.
2.1.7 Wet Pine Flatwoods
This community is charactered as an open mature loblolly
pine stand, which is semipermanently to permanently
saturated. A dense low shrub layer of cane, red bay, bitter
gallberry and white bay is present along with a sparse to
nonexistent herb layer, dominated by bracken fern (Pteridium
aauilinum), and three awn grass (Aristida sp.).
The dense cane thickets serve as cover for white tailed
deer which were observed bedded down during site visit.
Numerous woodcock (Scolopax minor)* were also stirred up.
This highly prized game bird nests in leaf-line.d depressions
in the low wet woods.
The pileated woodpecker (Drvocopus pileatus)* the
largest woodpecker in the state, often tears away large slabs
of bark in search of wood-boring beetles and grubs. This
species adapts well to disturbed or logged habitats, and is
likely more abundant today than ever before, due to the
extripation of the ivory billed woodpecker (Campephilus
principalis) from this area. This bird, presumably once a
competitor with the pileated woodpecker, was not able to
adapt to the loss of large areas of forested habitat, and is
near extinction.
Pine warblers (Dendrocia pinus)* are very abundant
(particularly in the winter months) in these habitat types of
the eastern part of the state. They often congregate in
multi-species flocks with eastern bluebirds, tufted titmice
(Parus bicolor)*, brown-headed nuthatches (Sitta pusilla)*,
and Carolina chickadee.
Red-backed salamander (Plethodon cinereus)* and slimy
salamander (Plethodon glutinosus)* are very abundant under
the many logs found in this habitat. The red-backed
salamander is a cool weather species, which is very rarely
seen in late spring and early summer. Diet of these species
consists of earthworms, grubs and small insects.
The southeastern shrew (Sorer longirostris
longirostris)*, inhabits the ground surface of the cane
thickets, under a cover of leaves and vines. The shrew preys
on insects, slugs and worms, and appears to search for food
constantly. Because of high metabolism rates, these shrews
starve after only a few hours without food. This shrew along
with the woodland vole (Microtus pinetorum) a burrowing
herbivorous mouse common to this habitat, and other small
mammals are preferred prey of screech owls (Otus asio)* and
10
grey foxes.
2.1.8 Mixed Pine Upland Forest
This community type occurs throughout the project
alignment in small areas distinguished from the other
habitats, by higher elevation. This community was likely
pine dominated however fire repression has resulted in the
invasion of numerous hardwood species.
Loblolly pine, short-leaf pine (Pinus'echinata), red
maple, southern red oak (Ouercus falcata), post oak (Ouercus
stellata), flowering dogwood (Cornus floridia), American
beech (Fagus grandifolia), and sweetgum comprise the canopy.
The dense midstory is composed of black jack oak (Ouercus
marilandica), American holly, red maple, red bay, cherry
(Prunus serotina), sweet bay, horse sugar (Svmplocos
tinctoria) and privet (Linaustrum sinense). A thick vine
layer is present composed of cross vine, trumpet vine, cat
brier, grape and poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans). This
vine layer along with blackberry and hercules'-club
(Zanthoxvlum clava-herculis) forms inpenatrable thickets in
areas of these communities.
Organisms which occur in these communities can be found
in the surrounding communities described earlier. There are
some species that are adapted to dry conditions which are
likely to be found only in this community type.
The ground skink (Scincella lateralis)* the. smallest
lizard in North Carolina is commonly found under logs and
debris in dry upland habitats.
The brown creeper (Certhia familiaris)*, ruby-crowned
kinglet (Regulus calendula) and white-breasted nuthatch
(Sitta carolinensis)*, are found in these habitats, nesting
in knotholes and other natural cavities as well as abandoned
woodpecker cavities.
The great horned owl (Bubo virginianus)* a fairly common
permanent resident of dry woodlands throughout the Carolinas,
feeds on rodents, small snakes, frogs, and large insects
(grasshoppers, bettles). Wild.turkey (Meleagris gallopavo)
are also found in this habitat. This species which feeds
primarily on acorns, insects and berries is hunted in some
parts of the state during a restricted season. Reward
posters for capture of this species have been solicited in
the area by the Wildlife Resources Commision.
2.1.9 Pine/Scrub Oak Sandridge
This community occurs in the southern section of the
unusual geomorphic feature, the Chowan Sand Banks, which runs
from Gates County northward into Virginia. It is postulated

I
11
that the sandbanks were formed by eolian (wind blown)
deposits, caused by prevailing westerly winds blowing sand
from the floodplains onto the eastern banks of the river.
The NCNHP recognizes the Chowan Sand Banks as a "Special
Natural Area", because it is the northernmost area with
Sandhills type vegatation and.it contains the most extensive
stand of mature old-growth loblolly pine. Longleaf pine
(Pinus palustris) occur in this habitat although few
longleaf remain in the project area of impact, due to
selective logging and nearly a century of fire suppression.
There is presently no degree of protection offered to this
unique natural area.
The canopy of this community is dominated by loblolly
pine and numerous other invading hardwoods (mostly oaks) such
as southern red oak, turkey oak (Ouercus laevis), post oak,
scrubby post oak (Ouercus margaretta), red maple and black
cherry. The herbaceous component is sparse due to shading
from the invading species.
Faunal composition is similar to the mixed Pine Upland
community. The black bear (Ursus americanus) reportadly
occurs in this area. This bear occupies large realativly
undisturbed forested areas. Clearcutting and development have
threatened its exisistence in unprotected lands.
One tract of this community has been selectively logged
for hardwoods, leaving an open mature loblolly pine stand,
which is populated by the federally protected red-cockaded
woodpecker (Picoides borealis) (see section 4.2.1). Other
woodpecker species are abundant in this tract, including
pileated woodpecker, red-headed woodpecker (Melanerpes
erythrocephalus)*, red-bellied woodpecker (Melanerpes
carolinus)*, downy woodpecker, common flicker (Colaptes
auratus)* and yellow-bellied sapsucker (Sphyrapicus. varius)*.
2.1.9 Young Regrowth Pine
These communities are uniformly planted with loblolly
pine, or long-leaf pine of the same age and size (10-15 feet
high), for silviculture management (needle raking/timber).
Other vegetation is rare to absent in these tracts; however
foresters occasionally have problems with lespedeza invading
and shading out small newly planted trees.
Organisms found in a number of the other habitats
described may occur in these tracts. Because of the uniform
nature of this tract however, animal numbers and diversity is
expected to be low compared to the other forested
communities.
2.2 Aquatic Communities
12
There are six bodies of water crossed in the project
alignment, five small streams and the Chowan River. Two
aquatic. community types will be described here, small
stream, and the Chowan River. Physical characteristics of
each water body are described in section 3.1.
2.2.1 Small Stream
Coastal swamp streams such as these have a high fish
diversity, realitive to stream channel size. This diversity
is related to an abundant food supply and physical variation
within the stream. Underwater roots of cypress and gum trees
offer cover to various fish. Research has shown fish to be
highly attracted to solid objects such as roots, rocks and
floating vegatation. This behavior is defined as
thigmotropisim. The fish species found in these streams are
generally small in size and may be the smallest members of
their respective family groups. They are also adapted to
sluggish waters with low oxegen contents.
A large amount of area outside the actual stream channel
is inundated throughout most of the year. These areas have a
substantial amount of leaf and branch litter in the water,
which is utilized as cover by mudsunfish (Acantharchus
pomotis)*, bluespotted sunfish (Enneacanthus gloriosus)*,
black banded sunfish ( E. chaetodon), pirate perch
(Aphredoderus sayanus)*, eastern mudminnow (Umbra pygmaea)*,
a small minnow sized fish which can utilize atmospheric
oxegen by gulping air at the surface, eastern mosquitofish,
flier (Centrarchus macropterus)*, swamp darter (Etheostoma
fusiforme)* and lined topminnow (Fundulus lineolatus)*.
These fish feed primarily on insects falling into the water
and insect larvae, which are found in the mud and leaf litter
on the substarte. The lined topminnow and eastern
mosquitofish feed at the water surface, mainly on aquatic
insects and swimming insect larvae. The bowfin (Amia calva),
a large, primitive fish, stalks its prey of small fish, frogs
and dragonfly nymphs, primarily using sense of smell. The
bowfin is also able to utilize atmospheric oxygen.
Various crayfish (Cambarus sp. and/or Procambarus sp.)
species, which scavange on dead fish, and other animal
material as well as consume live prey, were captured here
during site visit.
Raccoon and mink (Mustela vison), are common in swamp
habitats, feeding in the standing water areas on the fish
species mentioned, as well as on frogs, crusteaceans and
freshwater molluscs. The introduced Asian clam (Corbicula
fluminea)* was found in large numbers during site visits.
41
s
Another common fish species occuring in these streams,
the golden shiner (Not.emigonus crvsoleucas)* feeds on aquatic

13
vegatation. Golden shiners are extensively raised in fish
farms and is the most common baitfish sold in the United
States. This fish usually stays near the shore, but may
venture in schools, into the stream channel, feeding on
floating vegatation. The warmouth (Lepomis gulosus) and the
redfin pickeral (Esox americanus)* the smallest member of the
pike family, are predatory fish, which usually stay in the
deepest part of the stream channel, near the bottom. Their
diet includes small fish, frogs and insects.
A beaver (Castor canadensis)* dam is constructed in one
of the streams crossed in the alignment (section 3.1). The
shallow impoundment (beaver pond) formed by the dam is
inhabitated by wood ducks (Aix sponsa)* which build nests in
natural cavities of living or dead trees in or near the
water. Cypress cones and galls, duckweed and acorns are
preferred foods of the wood duck.
2.2.2 Chowan River
Numerous anadromous fish species use the Chowan River
enroute to spawning areas in the river and in various
tributaries of the river. Many of these species belong to
the genus Alosa, and are refered to collectively as Alosids.
Alosids have been important components of recreational and
commercial fisheries in this area since pre-American
Revolution times. The primary species which occur in these
waters are blueback herring (Alosa aestivalis), alewife (A.
pseudoharengus), American shad (A. sapidissima) and hickory -
shad (A. mediocris).
The fishing season on these species generally runs from
late January to early May, when the fish migrate upriver from
saltwater. These fisheries are regulated by the Division of
Marine Fisheries below the inland fishing waters line, and
the NC Wildlife Resources Commision in waters above that
line (project area is in inland waters). Gear types, which
have changed little since the late 1800's, include anchor and
drift gill nets, pound nets, and haul seines. The commercial
harvest of these species was greatest in the late 1800's and
drastically decreased in the 1960's. This decline can be
attributed to overfishing, diminishing water quality, and
environmental factors (weather events, etc.). Since the
1960's, management practices have aided in a slight
resurgence of the species stocks, however current landings
are only a fraction of landings from the 1890's.
In 1991 reported landings of river herrings (blueback
herring, alewife) for the Chowan River were 1,202,535 lbs,
valued at $87,799. American shad landings reported for this
area are 60,602 lbs. valued at $39,029 (NC Div. Marine
Fisheries).
The striped bass (Morone saxatilis) is another

14
anadromous fish occuring in this river. This species is a
very popular gamefish in the mid-Atlantic states, and was
once a very important commercial species in these states as
well, but landings have declined drastically in recent years.
In 1991, only 3,967 lbs of striped bass were commercially
harvested in the Chowan River, valued at $5,829 (NCDMF).
Spawning times for these anadromous species generally
occur in late winter-early spring when water temperatures
range from 54* to 67*F.
Numerous other popular game fish species occur in the
Chowan Rives as well. These include largemouth bass
(Micropterus salmoides), black crappie (Pomoxis
nigromaculatus), bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus)*, chain
pickeral (Esox niger), white catfish (Ictalurus catus) and
channel catfish (I. punctatus).
Non-game species found in the Chowan River include
lake chubsucker (Ermvzon sucetta), golden shiner, spottail
shiner (Notropis hudsonius), tessalated darter (Ethostoma
olmstedi) and the carp (Cyprinus carpio) which was introduced
to the United States in 1832 from Europe, because of its
popularity as a food fish. Today few people will eat this
abundant and widespread species, as it is considered a
"trash" fish of inferior quality. This assumption is
erroneous, for food quality of this species is highly
dependent on water quality and diet.
Piscivorous bird species such as the great blue heron
(Ardea herodias)*, belted kingfisher (Meaaceryle alcvon)*,
ring-billed gull (Larus delawarensis)*, a coastal species,
becoming increasingly more frequent inland and the fish crow
(Corvus ossifragus)* were seen near the river banks during
site visits. In addition to consuming small fish, fish crows
habitually raid heron and gull nests, preying on the eggs and
hatchlings.
2.3 Anticipated Impacts: Biotic Communities
Construction of this project will have various impacts
on the biotic communities described. This section quantifies
and qualifies impacts to these resources in terms of area
impacted (cleared/modified), and ecosystem effects. Temporary
and permanent impacts are considered here.
2.3.1 Terrestrial Community Impacts
Project construction will result in clearing and
degradation of portions of the nine plant community types
described. The estimated acreage loss to these communities
is listed in table 1. It should be noted that estimated
impacts were derived using the entire proposed right of way.
Project construction often does not require the entire right
15
of way and therefore actual impacts may be considerably less.
Table 1 Estimated Impacts to Biotic Communities
Community Acres
RC 25.3
AF 28.5
SF 11.2
Co 42.6
MBF 92.7
CGS 7.8
WPF 25.1
MPU 47.4
POS 8.4
YRP 54.9
Estimates in Acres, based on variable right of way, depicted
on the aerial photograph.
RC, AF, SF, Co, MBF, CGS, WPF, MPU, POS and YRP, denote
Roadside, Agricultural Field, Successional Field, Cutover,
Mixed Bottomland Forest, Cypress/gum Swamp, Wet Pine
Flatwoods, Mixed Pine Upland, Pine/oak Sand Ridge and
Young Regrowth Pine, communities respectively
The plant communities found along the project alignment
serve as shelter, nesting and foraging habitat for numerous
species of wildlife. Loss of habitat is likely to reduce the
number of faunal organisims, and concentrate them into a
smaller area, which causes some species to become more
suscepetible to disease, predation.and starvation.
Individual mortalities are likely to occur to animals closely
associated with the ground (snakes, small mammals, etc.),
because of construction machinery used during clearing and
grading activities.
Displacement of faunal organisms will occur during
construction activity. These animals may return to the area
following construction, however the amount of forested
habitat will be reduced. The four lane roadway will further
disect the forested communities, causing habitat
fragmentation. This will likely isolate species populations
on one side of the roadway from populations on the other
side, because many animals will be detered from, or will be
unable to cross the widened road.
2.3.2 Aquatic Community Impacts
Because there are no new structures proposed for this
project, there will be limited habitat loss in terms of
permanent fill, as a result of construction. Ensuing impacts
to the aquatic communities can be attributed to construction
r
16
related sedimentation and erosion. Although sedimentaion and
erosion may be temporary processes during the construction
phase of this project, environmental impacts from these
processes may be long-lived or irreversible.
The aquatic environment serves as a major food source
for many terrestrial organisms such as raccoons, various
species of snakes, birds, turtles and amphibians. It also
serves as a means of predator avoidance for amphibians (frogs
and salamanders), reptiles (snakes and turtles), and
mammals (muskrats, mink and beavers).
Potential impacts to aquatic systems from project
construction include, disturbance of benthic habitat and
increase of sediment load. Strict enforcement of
sedimentation control measures should be observed.
Benthic non-mobile organisms, such as filter and deposit
feeders, and macro and micro alga, are particularly sensitive
to construction activities such as dredging, filling, pile
driving operations and slope stabilization. These
construction activities physically disturb the attachment
substrate, resulting in loss of sessile benthic organisms.
Many of these aquatic organisms are slow to recover, or
repopulate an area, because they require a stabilized
substrate which may take very long to develop. Therefore
changes in community composition are likely as a result of
substrate disturbance.
Light penetration is essential for photosynthetic
species, the primary producers in the food chain. Siltation
greatly reduces the amount of available light in the water
column. Clogging of feeding apparati of suspension feeders
and burial of newly settled larvae of these organisms, are
other effects of siltation. These species, often the primary
consumers in the food chain, are a major step in the aquatic
food web. Impacts to these organisms may directly effect
organisms higher in the food chain, such as game fish,
raccoons and mink.
Mobile aquatic organisms are generally not directly as
sensitive to siltation, however gills of fish, crustacean and
larval amphibian and insect forms can become clogged and
dysfunctional as a result of sedimentation.
An increase of toxic compound (gasoline, oil, etc.)
concentrations in the stream is also likely, coming from
construction related machinery and road paving activities as
well as probable increased traffic loads. If measures are not
taken to reduce the amount of these compounds entering the
stream, mortalities to numerous types of aquatic organisms
are likely.
17
Replacement of the existing bridge over the Chowan River
is likely to impact the anadromous fish population in the
river. A construction moratorium on the Chowan River bridge
should be observed during spawning months of the anadromous
fish species present (Feb-mid-May), to avoid hindering
spawning efforts, and larval. survival. Construction related
practices may deter fish from migrating upstream, because of
physical disturbances, reduction of water clarity, and
changes in water flow. The eggs and newly developing larvae
are very sensitive to changes in water quality, which are
consequences of construction.
3.0 WATER RESOURCES
The proposed alignment crosses six streams, classified
as sites 1-6, with site 1 at the southern end of the project
area and site six at the northern-most end. The existing US
13 traverses the 100-year floodplains of most of these
streams. Project design should attempt to minimize
encroachment from the proposed widening into the floodplains,
to avoid potential flood damage on the numerous dwellings
along these floodplains.
3.1 Water Bodies: Characteristics
Site 1: Unamed Tributary of Mill Branch. This stream
flows into Mill Branch, which is a tributary of Potecasi
Creek, which in turn is a tributary to the Chowan River.
Stream width is narrow (<10 ft.), and up to five feet deep
just before the roadway crossing. A beaver dam constructed in
the stream channel at this point creates the depth. The
stream is diverted into the roadside ditch on US 13,
approximately 500 feet, until it is crossed using a single
54" reenforced corrugated pipe (RCP). Depth and width of
channel at crossing is approximately one foot and two feet
respectively. Flow rate is not availible. The substrate is
mostly an unconsolidated muddy bottom, with little
variability.
Site 2: Chowan River. This river, which headwaters
arise in Virginia, flows into the north shore of Albemarle
Sound at Reedy Point, in Chowan County near the town of
Edenton. Channel width is approximately 800 feet at
crossing. Depth information was not availible, but the
channel has presumably been dredged to accomadate logging
barge travel. Average daily flow is 4600 Cubic feet per
second (cfs). Substrate is mostly coarse sand with a fine
silt layer. The existing structure is a 1121' bridge, which
is to be replaced with a dual 1120' foot bridge at the same
location. '
Site 3: Buckhorn Creek. The headwaters of this stream
arise approximately 2 miles upstream of US 13 crossing where
it begins to flow southeastward into the Chowan River
18,
approximately 2.5 miles downstream of crossing. An extensive
cypress-gum swamp is associated with the stream, which is 20-
25 feet wide and up to 7 feet deep, with a fine grained sandy
sediment. Average daily flow is 14 cfs. The existing
structure is an 84' bridge, which will be replaced with a
dual 110' bridge at the same location.
Site 4: Unnamed tributary of Flat Branch. This small
stream begins approximately .3 miles upstream of crossing and
flows eastward into Flat Branch .3 miles downstream from
crossing. Flat Branch flows into Cole Creek and then to
Sarem Creek before flowing into the Chowan River 4 miles
south of Gatesville, approximately 12 miles downstream of
crossing. Stream width is less than 10 feet and depth varies
from 2-4 feet. The substrate is a soft fine silt. The
existing structure, a 2 @ 42 " RCP, is to be replaced with a
1 @ 60 " RCP at the existing location. Flow rate is not
known.
Site 5: Flat Branch. Flat Branch begins 1.4 miles
upstream of crossing and is crossed by US 13 .5 miles north
of Site 4. Channel width is 12 feet, widened to 20 feet at
the existing culvert. The substrate is fine sand with a silt
top layer. The existing 3 @ 42" RCP will be replaced with a
2 @ 8.' X 8' RCBC. Average daily flow is 2 cfs.
Site 6: Mill Swamp Creek & Riddick Swamp. Mill Swamp
creek begins in Northwest Gates county at Riddick Swamp,
near the state line and flows northwest into Somerton Creek
in Virginia. Somerton Creek flows westward into the Chowan
River in extreme northwest Gates County, NC. This stream is
associated with an extensive Bottomland swamp, which
surrounds the stream near the existing structure. Channel
width is 20 feet, widened to 30 feet at the existing culvert
and depth varies from 3-8 feet. The substrate is a very soft
fine sand-silt. The existing 3 @ 120" CMP will be replaced
with a 3 @ 9' X 9' RCBC. Average daily flow is 7cfs.
3.2 Best Usage and Quality
Best usage classifications of Mill Swamp Creek, Flat
Branch, Buckhorn Creek and their respective tributaries, are
class C NSW, as assigned by the North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and Natural Resources (DEHNR),
Classifications and Water Quality Standards Assigned to The
Waters of the Chowan River Basin, 1993. Class C designates
waters suitable for aquatic life propagation and survival,
fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation and agriculture. NSW
designates Nutrient Sensitive Waters, which require
limitations on nutrient inputs.
The waters of the Chowan River are given a
classification of B NSW. Class B designates waters suitable
for primary recreation (swimming) and any other usage
19
specified by the class "C" classification. This river is
very sensitive to nutrient imputs, and experienced major
algal blooms in the late 1970's, caused by high nutrient
levels. Fish larvae are extremely sensitive to
eutrophication, because dissolved oxygen is severly depleated
and toxins are often produced by the algae.
The Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN),
assesses water quality by sampling for selected benthic
Macroinvertebrate organisms. The species richness and overall
biomass are reflections of water quality. The Chowan River
has been sampled regularly by BMAN in Hertford County at SR-
1319, approximately 5 miles upstream of project crossing.
Ratings since 1984 have flucuated from "Good" to "Excellent".
The most recent bioclassification was "Excellent" in July
1991.
The DEM National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) report lists no point source dischargers to any of
the water bodies near the project impact area.
No waters classified as High Quality Waters, Outstanding
Resource Waters, WS-I, or WS-II, occur within one mile of the
project area.
3.3 Anticipated Impacts: Water Resources
Potential impacts to the waters affected by the proposed
project, caused by construction-related sedimentation and
turbidity, include decreases of dissolved oxygen, and changes
in temperature. This is due to vegetation loss (covered with
sediment) and reduction.of water clarity.
Alterations of water level, due to interruptions or
restrictions to surface water flow are also likely,
especially if the replacement structure has a different
surface area for the stream to flow through (i.e. change in
pipe culvert diameter). The recommended replacement bridge
over Buckhorn Creek will be 26 feet longer than the existing
structure. Construction of this structure will involve fill
to the bordering Cyprees-Gum Swamp community, which may also
effect stream water levels, by confining the water to a
smaller area.
If rechannelization of any stream crossed in the project
becomes necessary, consultation with the USFWS will be
required, per the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, as
amended (16 USC 661-667d).
41
20
4.0 SPECIAL TOPICS
4.1 Waters of the United States
Wetlands and surface waters fall under the broad
category of "Waters of the United States" as defined in 33
CFR 328.3, in accordance with provisions of Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act (33 U.S. C. 1344).
Wetland communities were identified using the criterea
specified in the 1987 "US Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands
Deliniation Manual". For an area to be considered a
"wetland", the following three specifications must be meet;
1) presence of hydric soils (low soil chroma values), 2)
presence of hydrophytic vegatation (Appendix A), and 3)
evidence of hydrology, or hydrological indicators, including;
saturated soils, stained, matted vegatation, high water marks
on trees, buttressed tree bases and surface roots.
Surface waters and wetlands will be impacted by project
construction. Approximately 143.8 acres of Palustrine
forested decidous and evergreen forested wetlands (see
Cowardin et al. 1979, section 5.0) will be impacted (filled)
with the current project design. The majority of the wetlands
occur to the north of the Chowan River bridge (Map #s 1-3).
4.1.1 Permits
The North Carolina Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA)
has primary authority in issuance of wetland development
permits in the 20 coastal counties of North Carolina, which
includes Gates County. CAMA requires a permit if the project
is in or affects an area of environmental concern (AEC),
which include an estuarine AEC, an ocean hazard AEC, public
trust waters AEC, or a natural or cultural resource AEC.
The Chowan River, Buckhorn Creek, and Mill Swamp Creek
are recgonized as public trust AEC's. This project will
require a major develompent permit. This project will also
impact non AEC wetlands and surface waters, which will also
be under the authority of CAMA, because impacts from the
entire project will be considered cumulatively for permitting
purposes. Although CAMA is the primary permitting agency
involved in this process, the COE may require Individual 404
permits for the non-AEC wetlands and surface waters. Final
permit decisions lie with the CAMA and the COE.
. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1341)
requires each state to certify that state water quality
standards will not be violated for activities which require
discharges into "waters of the United States", or involve
issuance of a federal permit or license. A North Carolina
Division of Environmental Management (DEM) Section 401 (1665)
Water Quality General Certification will be required, prior
21
to issuance of.a CAMA Major Development permit and/or an
Individual 404 permit. Projects that require individual
permits are those which may have a significant impact on
surface waters and/or wetlands, due to the size or location
of the proposed activity. These projects are reviewed on a
case-by-case basis following public notification of intent.
A U.S. Coast Gaurd bridge construction permit 33 CFR 114
and 115, will also be required for the Chowan River bridge,
under authority of the General Bridge Act of 1946 as amended,
and the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899, as amended. Permit
application should be submitted at the same time.of the CAMA
major develompent and 401 water quality permits; however the
Coast Guard will not act on this permit until all other
appliciable permits are issued.
4.1.2 Mitigation
North Carolina state policy requires for projects
impacting coastal lands and waters, that if no prudent
alternate design, or location of project is reasonable,
project design must minimize adverse environmental effects,
and a satisfactory mitigation plan must be proposed and
submitted to the Coastal Resources Commision (CRC) for
approval. Mitigation procedures for Individual 404 permit
issues will also be applicable, for non-AEC wetlands.
Attention should also be given to the development of
effective wildlife passage corridors, particulary near water
bodies. Large mammals such as white-tailed deer and black
bear are two species of primary concern. Without passage
corridors these animals are susceptible to collisions with
automobiles, which poses saftey hazards to motorists.
4.2 Rare and Protected Species
Federal law requires that any action, which has the
potential to have a detrimental impact to the survival and
well being of any species classified as federally protected,
is subject to review by the USFWS and/or the National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS), under the provisions of the
Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended. Endangered
species receive additional protection under separate state
statutes. In North Carolina protection of plant species
falls under N.C. General statutes (G.S.) 106-202.12 to 106-
202.19 of 1979. Wildlife protection falls under G.S. 113-331
to 113-337 of 1987.
4.2.1 Federally Protected Species
Plants and Animals with federal classifications of
Endangered (E), Threatened (T), Proposed Endangered (PE) and
Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under provisions of
section 7 and section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of
22
A
1973, as amended. As of May 13, 1993, the USFWS lists the
red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis), and the Dismal
Swamp southeastern shrew (Sorex longirostris fisheri), for
Gates County. Scientific surveys were conducted for each of
these species to determine if these animals occur in the
project area. Brief descriptions of these organisims'
physical characteristics, habitat requirements and survey
methods employed are provided below.
Picoides borealis (red-cockaded woodpecker)
Status: E
Family: Picidae
Listed: 10/13/70
The adult RCW's plumage
except for small red streaks
male. The back is black and
and the breast and underside
There is a large white cheek
cap, nape, and throat.
is entirei_v black and white
on the sides of the nape in the
white with horizontal stripes
are white with streaked flanks.
patch surrounded by the black.
RCW's use open old growth stands of southern pines,
particularly longleaf pine (Pinus Palustris), for foraging
and nesting habitat. A forested stand must contain at least
50% pine. These birds nest exclusively in trees that are
>60 years old and are contiguous with pine stands at least 30
years of age. The foraging range of the RCW is from up to
500 acres, and this acreage must be contiguous with suitable
nesting sites.
These woodpeckers nest exclusively in living pine trees
and usually in trees that are infected with the fungus that
causes red-heart disease. Cavities are located in colonies
from 12-100 ft above the ground and average 30-50 ft high.
They can be identified by a large incrustation of running sap
that surrounds the tree, which is referred to as
"candel-sticking". This is arguably used as a defense
against possible predators. A clan of woodpeckers usually
consists of one breeding pair and the offspring from previous
years. The eggs are laid in April, May, and June and hatch
38 days later. Clutch size is from 3 -5 eggs. All members
of the clan share in-raising the young. RCWs feed mainly on
insects but may feed on seasonal wild fruits.
Suitable forageing and nesting habitat exists in various
areas along US 13 within the project boundaries (Map #s 1-3).
These areas were surveyed using methods described by Henry
(1989). This was done by walking north-south line transects
(cavities usually face east/west) visually searching for
cavity trees, which are easily identifiable by the "candel-
sticking" effect. At least two biolgists should be used to
survey, and spacing between them should provide 100% coverage.
of the tract.
23
The NCNHP database revealed one reportedly abandoned
cavity tree, along the roadside of US 13, just south of the
US 13/SR 1200/NC 137 intersection (assuming US 13 runs north-
south) (Fig. 2). Eight cavity trees were reported in the
northwest quadrant of this intersection, approximately 0.7 to
1.0 miles from the roadside tree, in habitat which is
contiguous with the habitat along US 13.
Thirteen cavity trees (three active) and four "cavity
starts", which were not on the NCNHP database were identified
during site visit (Map #2). Several adult birds were also
observed in the area the cavity trees.
Biological Conclusion The red-cockaded woodpecker occurs
within the project boundaries. Project construction (clearing
trees for roadway expansion) may impact these colony's
existience. Further forageing habitat analysis surveys must
be conducted to determine if removal of trees along this
section of US 13 will have a detrimental effect on this
species.
Sorex longirostris fisheri (Dismal Swamp shrew)
Status T
Family: Soricidae
Listed: 9/27/86
This subspecies of the southeastern shrew is found only
in the Dismal Swamp in southeastern Virginia and northeastern
North Carolina.
This shrew measures 72-116 mm in total length and has a
tail that is roughly half of the body length. It has a long
pointed nose, tiny eyes, and small pinnae. The pelage is
brown on the dorsal side and is lighter on the underside. In
appearance the fisheri subspecies is similar to the
longirostris subspecies except it is larger and duller in
color.
The Dismal Swamp southeastern shrew is found in a
variety of habitats, from mesic mid-successional forested
areas with grassy or shrubbery understories, recent
clearcuts, stands of cane, to stands of softstem rush. It is
uncommon in mature pine and hardwood forests.
The Dismal swamp shrew is found in the highest densities
in early successional stage wetlands. They prefer areas with
thick ground cover and a deep organic layer. They need the
habitat diversity provided by forested areas but there is a
distinct preference for wetlands-. Shrews have been found at
the.edge of cane breaks and around rotting logs on drier
ground in thickets of myrtle, blackberry, poison ivy, and
holly.
24
They are active both day and night and feed in
underground tunnels or under the leaf litter. Food for this
shrew consists of terrestrial and subterranean arthropods,
snails, slugs, worms, caterpillars, and occassionaly plant
material. Nests of dry leaves are built on high ground in
fallen logs and rotting stumps or under rocks, in early
spring.
Little was known of this species distribution range in
North Carolina, proir to the 1992 investigation by Wm. David
Webster, The Geographic Distribution Of The Dismal Swamp
Southeastern Shrew (Sorex longirostris fisheri) In North
Carolina (Attached Report). During this investigation,
surveys were conducted for this species at various locations
along US 13 within the project boundaries, using 5 x 5 grids
of 25 # 10 cans (coffee cans) sunk into the ground so the
open end is level with the ground surface. These pitfall
traps are designed to capture animals travelling near the
ground surface. Traps were checked twice daily for a period
of 4 days, resulting in 100 trap-nights at each site per
collecting trip; four collecting trips were made during the
course of the investigation, resulting in a total of 1600
trap-nights.
Shrews often enter open discarded drink bottles along
roadsides and become trapped. Bottles along the roadway were
also sampled during the investigation.
Biological Conclusion This study concluded that in Gates
county, the Dismal Swamp southeastern shrew is found only
east of the Suffolk Scarp, also the closely related
southeastern shrew was captured in the project area during
the study. Dr. Webster stated that these two species are
not sympatric (inhabit the same areas). Project construction
will not impact this species.
4.2.2 Federal Candidate Species
There are a total of five federal candidate (C2) species
listed for Gates and one for Hertford County (Table 3).
Candidate 2 (C2) species are defined as taxa for which there
is some evidence of vulnerability, but for which there are
not enough data to warrant a listing of Endangered,
Threatened, Proposed Endangered, or Proposed Threatened at
this time. The North Carolina statuses of these species are
listed here also. These species are mentioned here for
information purposes, should they become protected in the
future.

25
TABLE 3. Federal Candidate Species Gates/Hertford County
Scientific Name
Ammodramus henslowii
Plecotus rafenesauii
Litsea aestivalis
Orconectes virginiensis*
Potamogeton confervoides
Trillium pusillum var.
virginianum
Common Name Habitat NC
Hennslow's sparrow Yes SR
Rafinsque's big- Yes SC
eared bat
Pondspice Yes C
Chowan Rives crayfish Yes SR
Conferva pondweed Yes C
Virginia least No E
trillium
NC Status: SC, C, E, denote Special.Concern, Candidate,
Endangered, respectively. SR denotes Significantly
Rare which is not offered State Protection.
* Listed for Hertford County
4.2.3 State Protected Species
Plants or animals with state designations of Endangered
(E), Threatened (T), or Special Concern (SC), are given
protection by the State Endangered Species Act and the N.C.
Plant Protection and Conservation Act of 1979, administered
and enforced by the North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission and the North Carolina Department of Agriculture.
A search of the NC-NHP data base of rare plants and
animals found records of the coopers hawk (Accipiter
cooperii), (NC Status SC) from Gates county. This species
was observed throughout the alignment, on several occassions
during site visits.
26
5.0 REFERENCES
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet and E.T. LaRoe. 1979.
Classifications of wetlands and deepwater habitats of
the United States. Prepared for the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, U.S. Dept. of Int. Washington D.C.
Daniels, R.B., H.J. Kleiss, S.W. Buol, H.J. Byrd and J.A.
Phillips, 1984. Soil Systems in North Carolina. N.C.
Agricultural Research Service, N.C. State Univ. Raleigh
N.C. Bulletin 467.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands
Delineation Manual, "Technical report Y-87-1, U.S. Army
Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss.
Henry, G.V. 1989. Guidlines for preparation of biological
assessments and evaluations for the red-cockaded
woodpecker. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Southeast
region, Atlanta Ga.
Martof, B.S., W.M. Palmer, J.R. Bailey and J.R. Harrison III.
1980. Amphibians and Reptiles of the Carolinas and
Virginia. Chapel Hill, The Univ. N.C. Press.
NCDEHNR-DEM. 1993 Classifications and Water Quality Standards
Assigned to Waters of the Chowan River Basin. Raleigh
Dept. of Environment, Health and Natural Resources.
NCDEHNR-DEM. 1991. Biological Assessment of Water Quality in
North Carolina Streams: Benthic Macroinvertabrate Data
Base and Long Term Changes in Water Quality, 1983-1990.
Potter, E.F., J.F. Parnell and R.P. Teulings. 1980. Birds of
the Carolinas. Chapel Hill, The Univ. N.C. Press.
Radford, A.E., H.E. Ahles and G.R. Bell. 1968. Manual of the
Vascular Flora of the Carolinas. The Univ. N.C. Press.
U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1984.
Soil Survey of Gates and Hertford Counties, North
Carolina. N.C. Agriculture Experiment Station.
U.S. Dept. of Transportation; Federal Highway Administration.
1981. Effects of Highways on Wildlife. Report # FHWA/RD-
81/067.
Webster, W.D. 1992. The Geographic distribution of the Dismal
Swamp southeastern shrew (Sorex longirostris fisheri)
Final Report submitted to NCDOT
Webster, W.D., J.F. Parnell and W.C. Biggs. 1985. Mammals of
the Carolinas, Virginia and Maryland. The Univ. N.C.
Press.
27
APPENDIX A
Glossary of Terms
abiotic pertaining to nonliving or physical (air, water,
soil) aspects of an environment
benthic pertaining to the bottom of a body of water; a
benthic organism lives on or in the bottom substrate.
biotic pertaining to living aspects or specific life
conditions of an environment.
canopy the uppermost layer of vegetation in a plant
community.
carnivore an organism that feeds on animals.
channel an open conduit either naturally or artifically
created which periodically or continuously contains moving
water.
disturbed community a community that is not in its natural
state. Sources of disturbance include human activity, fire
and wind.
ecosystem a biological community plus its abiotic (nonliving)
environment.
Endangered a taxa that is threatened with extinction
throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
eutrophication nutrient enrichment of waters resulting in
rapid growth of aquatic vegatation (mostly algae), often
causing increased decomposition with its associated
depletion of oxygen.
fauna animals collectively, of a particular region.
flora a treatise describing the plants of a region.
fluvial produced by the action of a river or stream
food chain specific sequence of organisms, including
producer, herbivore, and carnivore, through which energy
and materials move within an ecosystem.
herbivore an animal that consumes plant material.
hydric soil soil that is wet long enough to periodically
produce anaerobic conditions, thereby influencing the
growth of plants.
hydrophytic vegatation plants which grow in water or on a
substrate that is at least periodically deficient in
oxygen as a result of excessive water content.
livebearer an ovoviviparous fish (produces eggs which hatch
inside the body).
nocturnal animals that feed or are active at night.
omnivore an animal which feeds on both plant and animal
material.
photosynthesis conversion of radiant energy (sunlight) into
chemical energy (food).
piscivore an animal that feeds primarily on fish.
primary consumer organisms that are the second step in a
community food chain, feeding on the producers. .
primary producers organisms capable through photosynthesis to
manufacture their own food through direct capture of light
energy: producers compose the first step in a community
food chain.
28
Proposed Endangered a species that has been formally proposed
as Endangered; species formally proposed receive some
legal protection.
Proposed Threatened a species that has been formally proposed
as Threatened; species formally proposed receive some
legal protection.
sessile an organism which permanently attaches itself to the
substrate.
spoor the track or trail of an animal, particularly a wild
animal.
succession The process of community change through time,
with an orderly sequence of seral stages, the organisims
(plants, animals) of.each stage modify the environment,
making it less suitable for themselves, and more suitable
for the next. The end point or climax perpetuates itself.
Threatened a taxa that is likely to become Endangered in the
foreseeable future.

29
APPENDIX B
Class
Mollusca
Crustacea
Osteichthves
„
,
„
„
Amphibia
it
Repti1ia
Aves
„
it
it
it
It
„
„
„
of
it
„
„
„
ORGANISMS OBSERVED DURING SITE VISIT
Common name
Asian clam
crayfish(s)
blue gill
blue spotted sunfish
eastern mosquitofish
eastern mudminnow
flier
golden shiner
lined topminnow
mudsunfish
pirate perch
red-fin pickeral
swamp darter
warmouth
Brimley's chorus frog
marbled salamander @
narrow-mouth toad @
pine woods treefrog
redback salamander
slimy salamander
true frog (tadpole)
ground skink
sotheast 5-lined skink
smooth earth snake
American crow
American robin
American cardinal
American kestral
black vulture
bluebird
blue-gray gnatcatcher
brown creeper
brown headed nuthatch
Carolina chickadee
Carolina wren
cedar waxwing
common flicker
Cooper's hawk
cowbird
downy woodpecker
fish crow
grackle
great blue heron
great horned owl*
house wren
junco
kingfisher
piliated woodpecker
Habitat
substrate (SS,CR)
channel,pools (SS)
stream bank (CR)
pools (SS)
drainage ditch(to)
pools (SS)
pools,channel (SS)
channel (SS)
stream bank (CR)
pools (SS)
channel,pools (SS)
channel (SS)
rock substrate(CR)
channel (SS)
trees (MBF)
leaf litter (MBF)
leaf litter (MBF)
woodpile (Co)
logs (WPF)
logs (WPF, MPU)
ditches (RC)
logs (POS)
trash,logs (RC,BF)
ground (RC)
(RC, AF, SF)
(RC, SF, WPF MPU)
(RC, MBF, MPU,YRP)
(RC, SF)
overhead (To)
(WPF, SF, Co)
(Co)
(MBF)
(CO,YRP, MBF, WPF)
(To)
(To)
(CGS)
(WPF, POS)
overhead (To)
(Co, AF)
(POS MPU, MBF)
(CR, AF)
(AF, SF)
stream bank (CR)
(POS)
(RC)
(To)
(CGS, SS CR)
(POS, WPF, MBF)
30
APPENDIX B Cont.
Class
" pine warbler (WPF)
" red-bellied woodpecker (POS, WPF, MBF)
" red-cockaded woodpecker (POS)
" red-headed woodpecker (POS, MPU)
" red shouldered hawk overhead (To)
" red-tailed hawk overhead (To)
ring-billed gull overhead (CR)
" ruby crowned kinglet (Co, To)
" rufous sided towhee (RC, AF, SF,)
screech owl (MBF)*
" solitary vireo (MBF)
" swamp sparrow. (WPF)
tufted titmouse (MBF, CGS)
turkey vulture overhead (To,RC)
" white-breasted nuthatch (WPF, POS)
" white-throated sparrow (WPF)
" woodcock (WPF)
" wood duck overhead (CR, SS)
" yellow-bellied sapsucker (WPF, POS)
Mammalia beaver (ss)
" cotton mouse (POS)
" eastern cottontail (rk, WPF)
" grey squirrel trees (To)
" raccoon* (To, rk)
" southeastern shrew @ (MBF)
" Virginia opossum (rk)
white-tailed deer (WPF, SF)
RC, AF, SF, Co, MBF, CGS, WPF, MPU, POS, Y RP, SS and CR
denote Roadside, Agricultural Field, Su ccessional Field,
Cutover, Mixed Bottomland Forest, Cypre ss/gum Swamp, Wet
Pine Flatwoods, Mixed Pine Upland, Pine /oak Sand. Ridge,
Young Regrowth Pine, Small Stream and C howan River
communities respectively
To denotes throughout most of the project area
* denotes spoor and/or sound evidence
c denotes captured in pitfall traps durin g shrew
investigation

THE GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION OF THE
DISMAL SWAMP SOUTHEASTERN SHREW
(SOREX LONGIROSTRIS FISHERI)
IN NORTH CAROLINA
Wm. David Webster
Associate Professor and Curator of Mammals
Department of Biological Sciences
University of North Carolina at Wilmington
Wilmington, North Carolina
[phone]
Final Report
20 April 1992
INTRODUCTION
The Dismal Swamp southeastern shrew (Sorex
longirostris fisheri) is a federally-listed 'Threatened'
subspecies (Federal Register, 1986, 51287:26) thought to be
restricted to the Dismal Swamp region of southeastern
Virginia and northeastern North Carolina. Although the
geographic distribution of S. 1. fisheri is relatively well
known in southeastern Virginia, there has been no
comprehensive attempt to determine its distributional limits
in northeastern North Carolina. Three historical capture
records from North Carolina exist (Lee et al., 1983)--
Chapanoke (Perquimans County), near South Mills (Camden
County), and near Coinjock (Currituck County). More
recently, however, Robert K. Rose of Old Dominion University
and his graduate students have focused their attention on
the geographic distribution of S. 1. fisheri in Virginia,
but occasionally they forayed into northeastern North
Carolina where they also have taken S. 1. fisheri. The
specimens collected by Rose and his students have only
recently been mentioned in the literature (Padgett et al.,
1987; Rose et al., 1987; Jones et al., 1991).
Because of the dearth of information about Sorex
longirostris fisheri in North Carolina, the purpose of this
investigation was to conduct field investigations in the
northeastern part of the state in an attempt to define its
geographic distribution. Other goals of this research are
to define the habitat requirements of this taxon and to
collect tissues that can be used in genetic analyses.
I would like to thank the North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission for supporting this research through
its Nongame Small Grants Program. The N.C. Wildlife
Resources Commission and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
gratiously provided collecting permits. The Department of
Biological Sciences of the University of North Carolina at
Wilmington provided office, clerical, and logistic support.
METHODS
This investigation was comprised of field work in
Gates and Chowan counties, a critical reappraisal of
pertinent information included in the literature (Rhoads and
Young, 1897; Lee et al., 1983; Padgett et al., 1987; Rose et
al., 1987; Webster 1987; Jones et al., 1991), and the
results of a meeting on 10-11 February 1992 at Old Dominion
University, Norfolk, Virginia, attended by personnel
representing the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the
Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, the Great
Dismal Swamp National Wildlife Refuge, and others interested
in delineating the geographic distribution of Sorex
longirostris fisheri in Virginia.
Field work consisted of installing grids of 25 pitfall
traps as described by Rose et al. (1987) in Gates and Chowan
counties (Figure 1). Pitfall traps were checked twice daily
for a period of four days, resulting in 100 trap-nights at
each site per collecting trip; four collecting trips were
made during the course of the field investigations,
resulting in a total of 1600 trap-nights. (Grids are still
in place and will be functional at irregular intervals
throughout 1992.)
The results of extensive field investigations in
southeastern Virginia were discussed at the meeting at old
Dominion University, and participants were able to identify
with some degree of precision the geographic distribution of
S. 1. fisheri in Virginia. They were unable to define
entirely the distributional limits of S. 1. fisheri in North
Carolina because relatively little work has been done in the
state. The results of this meeting, however, provide
ancillary information about the geographic distribution of
S. 1. fisheri in North Carolina and identify areas in the
state that need additional work (Figure 1).
RESULTS
Eight species of small mammals were captured in the
pitfall traps during the course of this investigation,
including one specimen of Sorex 1. longirostris that was
captured in Gates County at a place 0.5 mi N Storys on SR
1200, ca. 3.3 mi NE Chowan River and Hwy 13. No specimens
of S. 1. fisheri were captured, but it is appropriate to
mention that it was my intention to begin trapping well away
from the Dismal Swamp and work towards the swamp to minimize
the likelihood of taking S. 1. fisheri.
The following list of capture sites provides all
locations in northeastern North Carolina from which
specimens of Sorex longirostris have been taken, with
comments about the taxonomic identity of each. These sites
are shown in Figure 1.
Currituck County Naval Security Group Activity Northwest,
Grid 5 Red River Road, ca. 3/4 km W Carolina Road.--Three
specimens from this location in the extreme northwest
corner of the county were collected by Thomas M. Padgett;
eventually all of Padgett's shrews will be housed
permanently at the U.S. National Museum of Natural History
in Washington, D.C. These individuals were identified in
the recent taxonomic revision of Sorex longirostris by
Jones et al. (1991) as S. 1. fisheri..
Currituck County west of Hwy 158, 0.7 mi E Intracoastal
Waterway.--Steven P. Platani.a captured one female at this
site, which appears to be south of where the Intracoastal
Waterway crosses from Currituck Sound to the North River.
voucher material (NCSM 2722), identified by Lee et al.
(1983) as S. 1. fisheri, unfortunately was not included
in the revision of Sorex longirostris by Jones et al.
(1991) and the location of capture is far south and east
of the Dismal Swamp. The identification of this
individual needs independent verification, which I will do
the next time I am in Raleigh.
Currituck County collecting locality(ies) not known.--
Additional specimens of S. 1. fishers, collected from
unspecified locations in Currituck County by Robert K.
Rose, have been mentioned in the scientific literature.
Jones et al. (1991) included one individual in their
revision of Sorex longirostris and Rose et al. (1987)
reported on eight individuals; it is possible that one
specimen was used in both investigations.
Camden Countv: 4.2 mi NE South Mills.--One shrew taken at
this site by David A. Adams is housed in Raleigh (NCSM
377). This specimen was not included by Jones et al.
(1991), and its allocation to S. 1. fisheri by Lee et al.
(1983), which is based primarily on the location of
capture, appears to be accurate.
Gates County:
Transect, G
Two specimens
S. 1. fisheri
1 mi E Hwy 32 and SR 1002, 1 mi NE
eat Dismal Swam National Wildlife Ref
taken here by Tom Padgett were identif
by Jones et al. (1991).
White
cge - -
ed as
Gates County: Corapeake, 1 mi ESE intersection Desert Road
(SR 1333) and SR 1332, Maness Transect, Great Dismal
Swamp National Wildlife Refuge.--Tom Padgett captured one
shrew, which was identified as S. 1. fisheri by Jones et
al. (1991), at this site.
Gates County: Weyerhauser Transect, 1.6 mi N Hwy 158,
Great Dismal Swamp National Wildlife Refuge.--Four
individuals from this locality were identified as S.
1. fisheri by Jones et al. (1991). These specimens were
also collected by Tom Padgett.
Gates County: collecting locality(ies) not known.--There
are other specimens of S. 1. fisheri, collected by
Bob Rose (and possibly Tom Padgett) from unspecified
locations in Gates County, that have been reported in the
literature. Rose et al. (1987) mentioned 10 specimens,
Padgett et al. (1987) alluded to three others, and Jones
et al. (1991).included five individuals in their revision
of S. longirostris; however, it likely that some of these
specimens were used in more than one investigation.
Gates County: 0.5 mi N Storys on SR 1200, 3.3 mi NE Chowan
River and Hwy 13.--I collected one specimen of S. 1.
longirostris at this site. The specimen (WDW 3151) will
be housed permanently at UNC-Wilmington.
Perquimans County: Chapanoke.--One individual from this
site, a male collected by R. T. Young and deposited at the
Academy of Natural Sciences in Philadelphia (ANSP 10573),
was considered by Rhoads and Young (1897) to be an
intergrade between S. 1. longirostris and S. 1. fisheri.
The identification of this specimen, therefore, is
critical to delineating the geographic distribution of S.
1. fisheri in North Carolina. The specimen was not
examined by Jones et al. (1991), but Lee et al. (1983),
without examining voucher material, identified it as S. 1.
longirostris. I will examine this individual the next
time I am at the Academy of Natural Sciences.
DISCUSSION
Based on the information collected during the course of
this investigation, the geographic distribution of Sorex
longirostris fisheri is much more restricted than previously
thought. In North Carolina S. 1. fisheri definintely exists
in the northern parts of Gates, Camden, and Currituck
counties, it probably inhabits parts of Pasquotank and
Perquimans counties, and it also may occur in Chowan County.
In North Carolina Sorex 1. longirostris definitely exists in
parts of Gates County (and ostensibly the rest of the state
west of the Chowan River and south of the Albermarle Sound),
and it also might occur in Chowan, Pasquotank, Perquimans,
Camden, and Currituck counties as well.
In Gates County, so far is known, S. 1. fisheri is
found only east of the Suffolk Scarp. Padgett's specimens of
S. 1. fisheri all come from the Great Dismal Swamp National
Wildlife Refuge, whereas Webster's specimen of S. 1.
longirostris is from near the Chowan River in the western
part of the county. The zone of intergradation between the
two subspecies has not been located in Gates County.
Sorex longirostris has only been taken once in Camden
County, that being the specimen collected by Dave Adams from
near South Mills. Lee et al. (1983) considered this specimen
to be S. 1. fisheri, and based on its location of capture
there is little reason to doubt this identification.
Sorex 1. fisheri also occurs in Currituck County, where
the limits to its distribution are unknown. Padgett's
specimens indicate that it inhabits the extreme northwestern
part of the county. Platania's specimen of Sorex
longirostris from the middle of Currituck County needs to be
examined carefully; it should not be blithely classified as
S. 1. fisheri solely because it comes from the "northeastern"
part of the state.
No specimens of Sorex longirostris have been taken from
Pasquotank County, but surely S. 1. fisheri exists in the
northernmost part of that county. The status of S. 1.
fisheri in Perquimans County remains enigmatic; the only
specimen from the county represents either an intergrade
(Rhoads and Young, 1987) or S. 1. longirostris (Lee et al.,
1983). Clearly this specimen needs to be carefully examined
to determine its taxonomic identification.
Isolated populations of S. 1. fisheri may exist in
disjunct fragments of swamp habitat in northeastern North
Carolina that represent remnants of a more ubiquitous "Dismal
Swamp" before it became disunited by changes in climate and,
more recently, man's modifications to the landscape. This
situation exists in southeastern Virginia, where five
"populations" of S. 1. fisheri were identified by the group
meeting at Old Dominion University. In North Carolina,
disjunct swamp habitats that potentially are inhabited by S.
1. fisheri include Bear Swamp in southwestern Perquimans
County and eastern Chowan County, Great Swamp in southeastern
Camden County and central Currituck County, and that part of
Currituck County north of the Northwest River.
This investigation, as is typical of most early
reconnaissance, has identified several questions that must be
answered before the geographic distribution of Sorex
longirostris fisheri can be fully and accurately delineated
in North Carolina. Although the information included herein
clarifies the distributional status of S. 1. fisheri at many
sites in the northeastern part of the state, it clearly
identifies where additional work is needed. It is my
intention to examine specimens in the U.S. National Museum of
Natural History, the Philadelphia Academy of Natural
Sciences, and the N.C. Museum of Natural Sciences during the
course of the next year, to continue the field work already
in progress in Gates and Chowan counties, and to seek
additional funding to support field work in other counties in
the northeastern part of the state.

LITERATURE CITED
Jones, C. A., S. R. Humphrey, T. M. Padgett, R. K. Rose, and
J. F. Pagels. 1991. Geographic variation and taxonomy
of the southeastern shrew (Sorex longirostris). J.
Mammal., 72:263-272.
Lee, D. S., J. B. Funderburg, Jr., and M. K. Clark. 1983. A
distributional survey of North Carolina mammals. Occas.
Papers, N.C. Biol. Surv., 1982-10:1-70.
Padgett, T. M., R. K. Everton, and R. K. Rose. 1987. The
identification of the threatened southeastern shrew
using multivariate statistical techniques. Virginia J.
Sci., 38:351-357.
Rhoads, S. N., and R. T. Young. 1897. Notes on a collection
of small mammals from northeastern North Carolina.
Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, 1897:303-312.
Rose, R. K., R. K. Everton, and T. M. Padgett. 1987.
Distribution and current status of the threatened Dismal
Swamp southeastern shrew, Sorex longirostris fisheri.
Virginia J. Sci., 38:358-363.
Webster, W. D. 1987. Sorex longirostris fisheri Merriam,
pp. 22-23. In: Endangered, threatened, and rare fauna
of North Carolina. Part I. A re-evaluation of the
mammals (M. K. Clark, ed.). Occas. Papers, N.C. Biol.
Surv., 1987-3:1-52.
FIGURE 1.--The known geographic distribution of the Dismal
Swamp southeastern shrew, Sorex longirostris fisheri, in North
Carolina (cross-hatching outlined in red) as defined by museum
specimens and information provided by members of the shrew
recovery team that met at Old Dominion University on 10-11
February 1992. Cross-hatching outlined in green represents
areas where S. 1. fisheri might occur as defined by the shrew
recovery team (northeast to southwest cross-hatching) and by
this report (northwest to southeast cross-hatching). See text
for comments about the taxonomic identity of individual museum
specimens (red dots). Green dots indicate sites where pitfall
traps failed to capture southeastern shrews.
1,7
do ?/ y tryk7G? - ? :rs'?' ??? ? ` `?? I . _ ? r? ? . ??•' 4 y '? -
1; 5
C-
1. t
1'?
....
.....
L1
13
J ?J n
SEP 2 9 1993
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
28 September 1993
MEMORANDUM
TO: Nancy Smith
Regional Manager
FROM: Deborah Sawyer o
Environmental Technician
SUBJ: A-95 Review
Project No. 94-0149
N.C. Dept. of Transportation
Division of Highways
U.S. 13 from SR 1457 near Winton to the Virginia State Line
Hertford/Gates Counties
The above subject document has been reviewed by this office. The
proposal will fill approximately 149.2 acres of Palustrine forested wetlands.
This activity will require a CAMA Major Permit and aSection 401 Water Quality
Certification. As required by 15A NCAC 2B .0109, this office will be guided
by 40CFR Part 230, Subparts A through F, in reviewing this project. The
project must show that there is no practicable alternative to the wetland fill
activity, that the impacts to wetlands have been minimized, and that
acceptable mitigation is proposed. This office will review the CAMA Major
Permit application upon receipt, and a recommendation for issuance of the
Section 401 Water Quality Certification will be forwarded to the Central
Office.
If you have any questions or comments, please call this office at
946-6481. Thank you.
cc: ,,j,6hn Dorney

SEAT(°
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
James G. Martin, Governor June 18, 1991 George T Everett, Ph.D.
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee, Division of Planning and Assessment
FROM: Alan Clarl?,`?Water Quality Planning Branch
SUBJECT: Project No. 91-0742; EA Scope Request for Proposed
Improvements to US 13 in Gates and Hertford Counties
This memo is in response to an NCDOT request for information
and comments on the proposed highway improvement. The responses
will be used by NCDOT to assist in preparation an environmental
impact document (EA or EIS). According to the request, the
existing 2-lane highway will be enlarged to a four or five-lane
section. The Division of Environmental Management's Water Quality
Section is concerned with potential impacts on water quality and
wetlands.
The prime concern from a water quality standpoint is
sedimentation from highway construction. Implementation and
conscientious maintenance of sediment control BMPs should help
minimize these impacts. However, onsite sediment control
measures are generally not better than trapping about 70 percent
of the sediment eroded at a site. The EA should discuss
sediment trapping capability of control measures and assess what
impacts, if any, will result from sediment that escapes the site.
The other area of concern is wetlands. Wetlands are
considered by NCDEM to be waters of the state. Filling or
alteration of wetlands under jurisdiction of the Corps of
Engineers will require a 401 Certification from this office.
NCDOT is urged to avoid wetlands impacts, if possible. However,
if there will be unavoidable impacts, DEM requests that the
following information be contained within the EA. This
information will be useful in reviewing the project from the
Regional Offices
Asheville Fayetteville Mooresville Raleigh Washington Wilmington Winston-Salem
704/251-6208 919/486-1541 704/663-1699 919/733-2314 919/946-6481 919/395-3900 919/761-2351
Pollution Prevention Pays
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
J

Melba McGee
June 18, 1991
Page 2
standpoint of issuance of a 401 water quality certification.
1. A wetlands delineation of the project area (preferably
certified by the Corps of Engineers);
2. A description of the type (s) and acreages) of wetlands
that could be impacted within the project corridor(s). The
wetlands description should include an assessment of wetlands
values and a vegetation list for each type;
3. A mitigation plan for unavoidable wetlands losses.
We appreciate having the opportunity to comment on this
project. Any questions relating to the wetlands impacts should
be addressed to Mr. Ron Ferrell of this office.
91-0742.mem/SEPA3
I

y9i/
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
? Project located in 7th floor library
Division of Planning and Assessment
Project Review Form
4)
Project Number: County: Date: l Date Response Due (firm deadline): c-c
!cam ?? l ?" L >/?
This project is being reviewed as indicated below:
Regional Office/Phone Regional Office Area In-House Review
? Asheville ? All R/O Areas
\ Soil and Water Marine Fisheries
? Fayetteville ir Coastal Management Water Planning

Mooresville
El Water Water Resources Environmental Health
Groundwater ildlife ?Solid Waste Management
? Raleigh Land Quality Engineer orest Resources ? Radiation Protection
tNashington ? Recreational Consultant
? Coastal Management Consultant and Resources David Foster
arks and Recreation Other (specif
)
Wilmington y
nvironmental Management
? Winston-Salem
APR 19 i99!
Manager Sign-Off/Region: Date: In-House Reviewer/Agency:
SEC IT
Response (check all applicable)
Regional Office response to be compiled and completed by Regional Manager
? No. objection to project as proposed
? No Comment
? Insufficient information to complete review
? Approve
? Permit(s) needed (permit files have been checked)
? Recommended for further development with recommendations for
strengthening (comments attached)
? Recommended for further development if specific & substantive
changes incorporated by funding agency (comments
attached/authority(ies) cited)
In-House Reviewer complete individual response.
? Not recommended for further development for reasons
stated in attached comments (authority(ies) cited)
?Applicant has been contacted
? Applicant has not been contacted
? Project Controversial (comments attached)
? Consistency Statement needed (comments attached)
? Consistency Statement not needed
? Full EIS must be required under the provisions of
NEPA and SEPA
Other (specify and attach comments)
RETURN TO:
Melba McGee
, Division of Planning and Assessment by Due Date shown.
-5404
I 21
1 ! 7
tam ? :.:' ?:.'. ,.A 6 f 4 ! 4 A @ f ! ! . ill ?@c'a'cy"+ 1A ?? I)
I @ @ 9 @ ! B @ 4 @ @ $ 9 @ @ ! ! ! Hit
''\ `x^, U ? ?l // ? l; i. fs+?, II(I1:?.1'\?,' lifli i.l ll•_?I ,I,, 111 1.1{1.1 11, I '1,?';' I ? i u?? ?
n !l _ - 1 ?I ., _ // I ? II' 1' \? ,{I lil' .D4 I 11 1 ' 'r 11'l l? ? 1 ? _ c f s? -
` t?'?. - ` /, ;Ir "? I Irr.rr I 1 If { r { 1 1 p•lar'?^ p, s Zo,?,
?S ° /? ?' % 1 ?, ?/ { I { ?r?llp,e l 11 1 JI'+ 1 : a
\ >< J ? I 1 C i 1 f f l 1 1 I f' e
c 1?.-' \`-'w /mil / ?i /' y9e! "i I I+rr 1`rl' Ili`I,? 11.!1?1?{ { {+'i• I l',.1 j i ?2 a? a =
10 '•,. 1? % /(- ?1 ,.'rI- i'.l?;ItY ' {,11 I?1yll II'1 '111 1'11 1,.}'1 111// ' ' 'I? oS ?A
33
' ? ,{ ? Y ! ^ I r l', + 1' , i ' I+ \:I'1 ? 1 t 1 f , f / ? / I "\ = S? ? m a
7a - /, .'? .II {. ',1 'I , ?1y II 11,1 {. 1 1 '. 1 I? ••, /'G! 1
a "•' ? ? •.? - 1 ? . 1 1.?, t I ' ? 1 I li 11 1 x.11 j. `? 1(' •?.?L ? ? ,
j. •. 0 1 , I f'Irl 1 C 11) 11 7 { /??.Ir?'_,u^,,?+d'F? .-I
7° 1/ ? ?. ! ? i 1/7 f r111 i', t7?111 11) fl,hf' 1'?{f'{ f,' y4Q /? I ?,??? < (?-
. .?. ?? h b ••,° rj f ? ?•t.? 111 11I1 I:n1'1{111 ,I {',i{Ir 1 If ?????-I? ?;?? °c ?
11:' J 1.1 ',i 11') 111?? {I, 1.1 ?s4 !f
1
A
ia1 f
?? C ?%??, ???:• ?= ?/?y p^V I{ ', {.1 „1.(I,?11. ,1 i?{I l(.11';1'y'. ('(l/i?1, 1- a??.' s ?
°?? I ?f ? !' ?<` ?? ,? ? ,'???J?' 1, 'v 7{ i :.rv .F •t' II +,Ili? , ? I}' Ij ?I? ? i,? 2a F
I >; ? VA0 ?? 1 y ..? I { 1 _ I 1 111.1 1 ' {'i'1 ?: ?:
1 •?'
\1I \? / ?I '•?......^?• ,\ 1/ /+"U If l'1,1, 7 ? ',{',11.','{{1'171:71 I I?rII II'I .I
, \•/ +' t l I '+ ? U 1 ?1 r 11' I t. 1 111 ? I 111 16s as
fr' 1I "1` ? J^ ? fl/ 1!1111 11) / !?-,1' 1 11-. ?,.-,8"'.
_111, ?/? '? f of `. /r ,A.? t? I ,11' 111 (( 171 ?1 ll?Irn 11 ?'I I f ri' ;
I q , 1?
c I' 1 `. / ( ? 1 I ?l1 'b _ s'2 ?' 1 111 1 : 1 f , 1 1 111,, i I ? 1 , ? 11 ? ? (} ? / y?
r J %?`r" _ g
O ??' 1 ?, ??•'•,•?' :.?? ? > i -?S ? ?I,i 111117'II I?t if rl '{?1111'I„',111 r,l 11 j1??'I /I 'G,: /` 1?:L .. 41:t n
?/ 111 1 I /
-'?"11'/\`?
•''-}?? ?.`. I - ?? ,r I ' •?. (- ' '.?.r I: 11, , ?'; 11 I I: il?? /r e? ? ?? 9-
1' !, 'D ? ,.0- ? ? 111.11 ?.. `'? I n, 1? ,i• I lr ,? 1111 if J m VVV /+.;. _a
I P.-? - - ii'' •1 , I 1 111 1' 1 1.1 ' ,' Y ' 'Y 4 ?: -
--------------------
, ' 71"•- '?"? ; -_ ?-?.? n4c :/-T / I I a,,;- I ' 11 I .' E , 1 I ' 1 r ' i / } -
1 ?
"°:c ?. ?•,. '__ ? r ,-. ? <'rrr 1 1 r l I 1 r If ?? ,??j?c !r .•C'+' ? ? i ? m rn
-1.
•?Y> - 1 ( I i:. I lal. I 'o '1 11'{' 11 ?1+ / IArA-?,A ,t/ ?d ?' r-' u u
8.•500 '''? •.? ..'•? ?' ' ----------
7 -\ r' '' •??._ ?-' pNl I, ,',' rr raga .r?1 11 i,' 1 '1, I?:IT 'I'f S= F E-
.1 1 t•1 ,\nJ S3 \ 1 ?'• `- - -T"__'___' _ bS ff - 1a r 1 , I > 1 D <
l
1 { 111 r?$\bs - '•.....
'r ,. 1 11+. I. .?\ {. I. •?..•I a--?'"? 'Y I :711 ?I r?1'11. ?11 r/ ? It?y#'? _f °?: ? < ' °z- w ..
1 I 1 I , / { . { 1 a 1 1 I ' f 1 I''' 1 - `_ _ / '? • p, ' 1 1' 1,. 1 "1 I r f 11 1 I ' 1 ' I'' - \ ' )' _ 1 5 ° i `? a a+
1 1 I I Y I ,• ? , 1 11.. ?_ 1 ' 11 ? ' ' - I:: G _ ? VJ ed
.< 111 il 1?11i1.,.it f 'If', ?-,. I I L1 •T ,..1 •'',I,rr 'r' 1.'I',?1,'If ??i/.???r%tiA'?. ?Z ,?? e: zlc Lz V
,z , y I 1 'iltl 1 ?' - - ,,1 ,11,'•1,' f, j •?+- f i,l •11,1 rr ,,?.,t I f. r,1 I,1, , `3 may, .. .F :, $ u, ts., So
' r ''I'1' I 'r ?.1 'It'i '" a I '.11' ?•.,• } 1 :_. f ,11 1 '? ? `? ? g
r 1 ' 1 r`. r 1 1 t q
.. lll.arrl,.nlli Ir `- RI.d7;,It.???f'?I ..- k• "o ' iN
n!' y? 1 z 3
u \atq 1 j Y .............
?..
-eel -11,11".I if larl 1, ''fl,•?.)'??., ?yj ,?l ' ,I;;, 1 I'' ;r ,r•IIl, rl ;Its f 1t I l.f1 '1",'?I la'1'e''',/, ( ./-.z li j? •? ?I > ==0.?_.e i
fe? I '11 ! I{ ,?-.fir x/./11 II_II: ••t.. _ .^L.' ,'{r,; l'} rj 1'I+Ie I'1 I ?' .-t.. ,/ - zm
•:....
1 ' 1 f r 1?? ?3?' ? 1?1(. ? '.' "??••' IIr Ilr IN.rl 11'' 111 Lr?.r ,r.l C ??. ? 'y?_ \Y (, ? z s ua z 2 P
'11,,1'1 ,1,'111 1 1,1'1 it Ir+-o?, 11'1 '?_' r?, 11.,1 , r'1. ` 111'111 r', 1111, ,\A e. '? l5 /f.?..!."'"•\ \\, I.J. ? z - 55
±L•! e ' 1i 1 ?- ? 1 ,'I .11;'N`ep 1'.;111 1' I'r 1' 1111111' h,'111 If i'i',.U ? 1..? ( ,/;+ ° f1 ? ac \` Z2",? „mi+
<' ?'?' ', ,.'+, ,.{ , I'1?.1 r f?, ',r?,, ,.111,?1.'I, ,a1. _ •.•,, "-mss 11111111.'1.1 ., r.f. r1 r /I/ ??1 1 `J ? ? •'? 3 ? °`a ?; puF=i' :.
'„ I ,111'1 ,, 1-.?.r ?1 i1?) I .?'' I' {r. I u{,al Y,'r 111' I Y U ..1 i \v' 1V ( ? C'e>..
771.
.1 11 I','.I iI 1 11/ 1 ?? l't ' 111 'rl;rl I' '1 II ' 'Y' ---"? -~ ?? ?-__'?_-'1/y.?'? f1?°.. I ,"' ; '- ? f 1 ? yz ?t., 1?}=
,
I 'I II 11'1 ? ?.L as i? .?1 ??vI ' I?/;/ I L - ?_,._.?? /?'< IV' `-rl II i? ?? ? 1 c` F 6
•?? .1 - !`.1 ?I r 1. 'il, t 111 i•--• b/NOHj_- i / 11.1 ,. f'r I1.? , r.1 , , ?.•?_- i? CN ???,? !x= -••?•,•. 11' °? ', @? "
-- 1 1 1' 1 I f 1 1 1 1 ' i /I ' I I +' ' + f (?? ?V' ..?? I
'? L7 fl ? ?'' 1111' '11 f 1 rl 1 1'')i , '. ..-a•n ?. ; JJ •? i` ? 1
'? ? i ? I 1 \ V? ?V 1 107
.:. ?, ,e? ?' i V -? 1 I '. i.?1 + ' ,I I I ;,. •dl _ I f??I1 .?'(-( I; \` La _ ?, ? ? 1 i
I ???? \ '?? ,II 1111 ? ?I ?• ? ?.' - ? V.• ? i?
' r .- ?u .+•g ? II'11? 1 III L? =-?''_ ??? I ?\ _ 23
I
1 1 4\ .1 1 1 I . ? I \ ??\ _ y11n
[? ..?• ?? r • ..? . 111a??? I 1 i L, ' 1 ; 1, 1 ??.r- I? I ?0,.?? - f ?j? (`1 _ _ _
`? 1116. / 6• I1 '''lu j ^? f °'>
?•,• ?!) /11 I' /T° m?rrlll/1 ? i I ? ,'•'1111',`-• I )?:` ?f -up ~g? _ •? a>'
_
.J I? • { I,fd 111 I /.?- y •i / I 1! ?/, i Ir /( ?I - I'?--' = u " i = u c as
IJ ? ` ?r I ''' 11 211:1`1 ,.:^II ?:. 1 ?' ?1 i I I ?1?\''•' ? ? ? 'r,?% / ,?i-. a ? ? E m 6 Y.
_f ?; •o c.
l y "? •'?`. '!, 111-' 11+ ??? ? I,i f ••??1 .ills \ i% %'? I 'N'-N iN 1<`' _ sE9 v?
)V F', ^-? `.`• ? w i r. :",??' ?' .1 11: h'i{I' ' %I/i• IIi ? i ?I/,'?':-?`?- _v .? ?:, ? - ':? c, - s °E!?' ? ai v
?0 II' \? '?\ 1? f.,?, ,?L? ?,?,I"I 1,?/r11 , ? I j I?' f? ,I I !/,'i I"")t33x-Y ??ta? ?\: ? ? I' / I ? ?':_ ?`i?:
r,.. ^e / \ ?1' /:_ I 1.'__?_ ', / j( ,J' i _". J ? ?r ?7 / ? rs_ • _ ?E^:?
• ? "v °n~ n ' w1•Ir ? c • .. 1,,.01.11.,..,11 g g1- r z ?"

v
vAk1. N
U
S
w <
J a,
0
p'J0,
0 I-
;; <Z
auw
?wH!
yZwl
w
"Zc
i
Iw
u
J
znJ<
Z
C n
Op
? h
2~
z zz
<_ZC
N «
0
ICiI
h?
Z
w
<-P
IA L' <
006
r -E,
Z UJ
?f0
<
W I
o

k
f k ??+fit
>p" r e - E• h rmlrsr•"n1,.11?.r.wla.uee.en, R e e . ,:/ r. r r
.
4,, ,: r
? ? _`•.
1•
tl
`
I - . ?,? ;"°,.
, x-q?: ;? '?'` -.+I °l
•' .4 1.
1 r
~ l?? ? 'E /- lw y`I _ 1,.• =Yq
+ +?? J I /f , 1 :' I .? :.
e. 1 (_.° rJ ^M1 - r
`
I
' Jl p `1, }, /,'11. +'}
'++*'1,/' }: 'l t} 1? 1, , ?
1 Q1 111 luj 1.
?
'
'
? ,, '/ ?i,. }, S/p?
1 gg i`I 11'+\'?'/'1' /1
If, 1 111 '111 1
+
+
'
l
l,
=
? ill ..
' `
•
` I1 /-??.\'6?•
+,/ S: +
` r:'
-,?S ;? ll?('I'?u
r.
, -•._/ ,`; 1 ?
•?,1
: i
' t ;,1 {
ty
l+d
'lj1
,''?
?I'•••=?
,,}}._'?',?: 1 '\ ?, .....? row .... '1_ _?.,
^
?( ? ? i?.' ??`4• } ?1 p,' 1\ ? E \.. ? -
M'r.?.=t?
II 1'+r:l?- :/'- 1 I I
:'??
Y
+
•?? h•- ?
i
+ ~
'
'
'
I•, •i l.i•/ .+? I/u •'1?1'Stq.°tE
.?1?ryf... '' r1.1 +111,,1
rr'•.
i, :
?'
S
'
'
}'
+ ?}Iltifl+11'1'1+1
'1? 1},,, 1, 1
???'
?1
'
'
'+
f ? ?
\11
C ,iJ
`\ :?
`
:;\
,
.
n l
'?r
!
V.
11;1
,1,
11
1
. •
„I1
!q
:
I t,
'
'
J/.? .\i \ t ?.
• _ II ' 1 1
', 1 II 1 1
, 1 "tea

'' _

p ±
I t -
?.-; ? , ?-? _ 1L ,.
/ ..+_'? .Q•: ? ?
I
,, r1
' 11 V / I '?/ ,?
, ? 1 { ',' ,, Il /1/• ?. ?I,! ., I, ?'?\:'??'?,1
- ''I ry, ,?" b 1)? ?>I•-.;' f I >l
? ? I
? ? J f„I}? I ,'1 ', 1, 1
6 11 ,J +??, 1„' 1,, 1, + 11,

J1
?+l ' !Y !/ 1'} I I' 11 1
l•I
1.
f
11
0^
1
-
t '1}11+'+111'1 ?; 1f 'i
1 r+ l?? 11, ,. l +li
",} t ' '1
1 ,I
1 (' 1,.

n F

a
- ? ,
\ ..-.
^q •, I
ll } t/ ' 1• _?.!'f ?Y' ,?_ ? 1 „\t'.
••' I . ?? , 1 t , 111 1 1 I} I 1, ,y - }
, '+h1., y{ ;`.- I 111 I?r ? ?1??'/ •: i-•'
0 7 ?d+II ' , +'},}•.?'! ?
ili ?` 1 f
(
'?i '?
E•
?
' . ..
,
,
1
1
1
'
i.-
1,, 1, h
TI; M1 i' 1 I 1, 1
I 1 , 1 1 ,1 +11
y;G 1S •.• I I fl+ /?.+' +1
1
1•-'
1
• ,
1 i t 1+ 1•; I
I } f•.
1 , 1 .111
:?F ,, ,+ 1, :i.1 ,1 ;
I
.
?
1 /'?j'r ??.•'
'?- ,
.
,
. I \ C
/
y ?'ji 4 11 I ,;• 1 I
/'
,1 ++ } r.?f, 1 n•?• ?,!y, +I. t ?/?. ? `I?1' > /I,' ,`y?????(/l 'J'
•11'1' + ??y.','• 41: _^'?y
rI
J?1 ??
?) ? / blvd
\^•
I+{
' `'/I'
I
'O \
+
l
'
I
•
• ,
11
I 11;+,1++'p l',) },1 }11
$f{'p
i/11 ?\
1
11 ??I
1
'1.11,'1}1''+
l?J
??
,,
?' 'I! I
,1 '1+1" +++11'1
'??+1
j It 1"', •1' '1
?.
? -
-?i ? ?-_. !
p
?.
f
r: ?)
.J,II'
/???'
1
L
I
' •?9: J',
e
)
y `l'
l
I
`\ i i
.
f
l,
i
?
,.
? ? 1 1 1,, , '},//
,I
'111": ,
( (, li
,
I
J
\ - I .Y. +. C 1 \, `'
V 1 +
°•\ n - I•AI, 1 11.E
L, /1 q, i'I rl

?l. _? ? ' a} 1.
_ 6
l I
f
.? t
w
i
I t,
1 11 19:1
- I r
"/,•• _ ._ ?
_ +i'l in P'?1 ?, ?d 1Jj/?\i (J / f,:
+ '1ti 1 v
_ '? Ir'.^u, '...?;. f\ ?I„/•1 UI) (.I
\`?i. r.; , 1^.,O Il', ,r ,t;i Cu U
IN
t 11? 11 _ ,? I ,,' F I , ?, ?:)
i i ' 1 ?l• + ':?? 11.x:,} 1'7?1x 1 1 ?
1
+
•
N
'
? 1
1
J , , 1 1 }, } 11 rl„ /', ,, '
+IY '1 , ? } i} 111'
1•d+l},a „1'
\11 1111 1 I 1' '
1 1
4 1{ x/11,1 111 1./ '1 11{,}1
111{\`-t111,??1111',1''1 j'21
?'' f l/ 'CI , /' f l+, 1' Iy1
1t11. ,?1, 11.1 ,1 11,, ,, IUIf
y
?
' 11 11 /1•'I 111] (
,
\ 1 1 1.) 1 + , 11, I I
I,? ( 1, }+,
11'? 1}!1 1 1. :1
II• 1 11 11

+ 1 +1!

1111111,U1,1111
II.11 I, I I Ul:'I7)
I, ,I? }/ , 1, 1 ,t
1 +
l+
•/?--. '11 ?

rQ- I _\ jl
_ yl1"
11 1
` 1}'
t11
]. (
?
h 11 ., I/ ?Y.y^
1 ?• V
' /i, leJ' },
•,
?1
',?1•.1 4/- ? ' ?•? Fi?? `` 1 1.1
1?
` ?
°
\ .'1'',,,1'1} tll",:,}1.11 11
V II ,1 I nl l; 11. l ? }
,l ,li
/l
f '+II 1 +} ?1
''„?
Ily 1 11' ,
r
1
J.P,
1
' '
r
11 -,,,_„??\ .? t?\ jam, r f/'
?'?'-•.. \ S
?• ---',, ?.?,?` J
r '\ _ - \ a I?\ ? /' .:!,... ?
? \\ .. \I ?Y _._. \ i '?. ''
, 1 ? - ' .1
?l•?.. \II I I ._ +i ] •'!•-?_ 11
•r" r r'T ',' ?? ,1 Tf T l?
_ ?': l•?1 l Ii Y+1.'7 II f ?A?"^a, 1, ' }
•Y ,N 7'' ?\?F?? yam' A 1 ; \ ',_'' ,
? '
Y' ,1 1 1 1 1 1
^l
1} .? ?dl? ? , 1 1 /1111?II I
, 1';,. 1 1 11 1'
?- 11 ( I x11111'
? 1 +,il ll',,1,'I.I 1 1 ''-? 1 ' 1,1•\ .•? 1 r 1
t?11.1 ,, 1
1 .'.1?1?.1'I
1 }ti, ? 1 ,, h,l
1'i :.'1??, 1./ II'.I
1
!+ti ?-•r' ?/`` I ?':' 1 '1 , ? ? 1
=I ? r ?- VI^-??-.E.,'? I ?t= I / J ?? -„I
?7
? O I 1
I : ? - l 1f! , 1 - ?I ?
/ I ; i ? 1,, ?. ?r = f ?• r
- 1' I+ 1}, 1 0 4 I r 1.. 1 V
1 1.12 , , ?I ? , 1 , 1? ?n
1 ' 1i, ?' 11;?;•
? ;'
° I
• f l 1?+? " 1 1 i 1, o
j ? ,? 1 1 I , ?!•
L, ,?,
1''t1 '? ? "1"

I ,.-_.,
/ w l \ ; p I
, 1 I > ?
? i
T
_
I , ,.1 ? } , . e? I,
, }, ,111 1
?•
„ I ?. / /!
( \\•`,J !"'
???? _.
"?,,?; 1 4
I
' I .? 11
? \ \ \ .r?:u
\. +>\'le'/ "'•
? / I
' ?r'1I ? N\-' •?`?v. - E I? ?€ F (
.'y4 ? I. \, \ ?_ ?' '? ?I / '''d ^?
I- :\ ?g III ;.
I ? _\ I /., JI •' ? .i } 1 1
?? _ 11 1 1 1 1 ,
'.. 11 I r'_ v/."1 •?11 I!t
,I,I ;. M1 9,la.,.,ll
9.. } ???' ,IE,P .t ,', Il
..•,y? 11,1'111,111,,,1 ', I1'i
''1 11t j11i 1'i11i ?''II
}:,p 11+/l 1,, 'r
rl{1 _11}1 j, 1 11 I'll

?J f' . '
/./
?I ! ? ,I
1 tC
?\ I ~ ? 4
I?
..r•': ?, d`lE ? 7? / ?' x'11' J
; it
?
I I`vM .., 1.'.r'7_'?T

LI 1,,.111 VIII Ij 11'11,1
I'
'
' }.
/? ; I • r
/ ..
1 I'1
1
•_',
` _
!'
Si
.? I \ ?+•
?
, ''r• i I
.\
? .. - I I!` I:
i n1 ?, 11
,, I I,I
?'V , Sor' .1j 1111'
,,
',' , , , / X
,1 1
++11 tl I i
,1'11
? 1'.I _
\Iv i
= ( ..:i ///•••' yli"t•-? ?? [?'•] . j
? \ / ', /'1it' Y\•,..• ;
1 ,
••?
1 \ !
(? j,' _ , I ` r
\ ?'t ,? ?
?
J
/r
? ?
`
, 1
,
d , 11 LI, r-r. l 11
- , I'Iq' I'I ??'' I
'
1
? ,
1
(;',''}! ' , 1 I ry I
1
1
.
,? y
S£. '. I 1
i ?ii ? ?•
f' `.
f iltl
I _ V
/
te. I
6" .J
I , 11,, ',1 ,1
+ 1
i ;r'.';,
I
'111 I 1 „ 1 1
,.1, 1
,1
1 I
I 1'11; 1' 1 111
%
..
I
,
- ?-J

• '^? ?Ir ?1

t ? ?? - A

I
? ?' ' ? I >,` II ?u'--•vV? `. Q' s??? ., ?

`' ? I I I - ?•r? 9S'\ I.? 1 -

\
?
? 1 .14
,l'1'?r 11 j'lll l' l
' '? '1'; I ? , 1'1 '
i I???II J?1'?, 11, 1111
+' '.1111 , "'' '!I-
I
I! _ `? i d, I I• I
?v )] ? f,F '
?\ I, ?
?
? ?
' L ?, • ? 11 '1 ,?'.1?1 Ir"
1
+ ' ,
? 1''11 'I' ?I'?
' n
'

?+
I
I I
II
I -. W

'J
I '..
j. y
I ? ? , /' E 7 •V '
\ -?'.-I 1 •1'
4. 1 I
fem.- ? (
I
1
`
?c I ?J ? 1 , 1 ( 111

,:II 111' 1 1
a
, 11
11
1
'
' +
I ? ( ,
?'?
1
11 „'.1, 11. 1 YI
II"1 f}I.1 1111
}
f i
,' 'F.
/? /
J.•?
J \
[ I
•I , -
?
V 1
I
1 (1
11
III
t. . X
I:
}
.
1
.,/
'' I , ? i J
eL ? !
.I i
?g ?1- l
. ? ,.. F r?........• ? i•. \? ? v I `'?,? - 1 rDg°' . 1 ? I _
,? ? •s+.... .. ??._ ? 1?1 ? 1 \ I
1 - 1 \ •?? .' .1 ? IItj1 11 1
,"? I, 1 1
it I L,Y?11) 1 '. 1' "I
I C ,. ? +. t 't• ?l. 1} I1
, ?I,11 }„
? 1 1'
i 1111'11 l''i?r{11' ?,,i°e
h + 111 ?I ' '., Iii
10 i / I \ / \-\ '?j•
?- \„(_ - ?r' I _•t!?
/ II `??1} 1}'I'?, 11'1 1 I:?I' Il i''!''?111+'1' '?
??
/
M ^ I w
'' ' ?
? '
?
' l-"-.l 1 1?
1

t'

' ?.'l

•

?

.'1
lef • ?
I I_ L'
I
''?0•' 1
I
I, .' ^.
•
1?•f`'
.'.' %'

?t /1 \ O P
t
11
` I F
?? ?-?o
? ?i '? I I
t,
, ' fll
1> 1,1i.
I y
•,l, 1 1

?E '111. f
:l l\' 1
I,.r
'.? fit,. 1
1' I
t' 1
)I 1 FI "
5 1' '' 1,1 '' N
/I.+lyl l?l l}Il
1111 t' } '
it 1
, 1
Ali '
• 1 ,, ' - J.1 ,1, 1
1 / /'?Il ltl
./''11 I,
'I I ..
1
.11
' +I
l! I "'''1
t!II 1'1'1 1
It l,l ?/1+11 '1 11_ll
I 1.1 L1}1 ?1'1?1'?
' ..• . ,

,
+ I /
,\ (= \ ? 1 '•... i
•. ? I: ``
,, J
? / i \, o
\
•?\
`
•• '.li 1
1 ! I I°I' 1
1
} y,; ? I 'die°"- 1 ,1!1 '1
?? 1 {?' h11f '+'+ ' h+''Ii?Y
?+?'+i '.'}1`1 j?
'
t
, `
'•1c. -?
r - I ? 1 +
?
? ,
1 +
'
1 /
:
I
11
!
P

_ ?
'
/
,.J ?
I'f .I
,? - ,
?\G. 1 , 1 ,f
,.
,rl ,wnl + I I .., 1. '1
111
.:1 , 111e tIN
..
11
I
} 11 I,' I'

e ,I
` ? 1
!\ \?"
,
+
( •E r `1X 111
y.W \\ I
? I''''I I/IV`':
iIJ
.
' 1,11+'
?t
l"?; I' ?' )' `
j `.},'1? 1• Id I ,I II_I 1 ,, 1?t
1?1 /i1M ?Ilfl+l .', pp1 fi
r"
mil

f - o
? }
i '
J/ ,}
?
!0 ,
?,
J '
r l tl' t
r
II «lt
? it
' 1 1} 1
f.
1
1
I i'1f 1 r
},,,1 t,
11 f, 1 1 1
/ ', 1 111x: q

•
' +I
t .?
? / 4
` I
• 11
:/ 1 I
rI _ ? I I,
}
/ l
11 ..x.1 .
1
' C
'
?
rl 9:;
1?'/
_ JJ
J :
,

.. ?•

+,

- --• D I

I
_.- " ? i 11 }11 I
? 1 _
IN..--• ?1+ 1111 .1i
'•% 1?` ?:
+ iig ?
?'
.. - ,
..

?
,.? ?y?"
` `
? :F•
I /
1 I S?' C` _
/? \\
_,.1 7\

L- 'O,
- 1'' 1 r'
.11,±,1111
I, 1'LI r..

?111? t
?
' ?
/c 1''•
1,. ?h1 ?r 1'1
', .l i'.tl
I:e ?. ?••;/ ' 11 ??
I{t'} '?1 +IM1?1'1
1}f?l?+?,}Y'?+, 1;
', /1' l ?
i'(,1.?I II11
,1 '`.
,,!
'
1
j9„ /,
,
, ,/
111! ?? 1
11./''1'\?'i
'1''• ±„1,
r
- [ .
i
9:
` ?
v
' I \
+'
-?` •
1
1
'
'? 1 i•.
•
i • ,
,,
,,
_
,,''
!'1 , }
't
'+'.
d '}I
+'
' O1 X1
r

(?1 .
3 n'!
II

'
4 - U ^.I„
I! '? 1111..
/??t )
•
'ti
'IJ
-
?• l
,.?.,. ?rl.
1,7 :'i _ 1
?..'/
?,
':IJ.•?( 1
,
,.
I
1 ?
\.
r 1 1 p, 1
1 1 j
«'111, 1 (.
r•?+:y-
1 .,,<
. ,.,
:I;'a.Y• 'd 1 •' 1
f11,1 1 1
,.d;l, 'v 11 l
• / '
1
.;
r
•, 1'i ?,' 11 y'li
•, } 1111 ''1,
•+1111} 1i 1
r
,
l ,t, 111' }
? 4 ' '
; ,,Ili },111
Ir
_ „ I I . .
I ° .? Y ,
},14. 1,11: } 1 .
1 1 .
II .
qr
tin
6
R
Z. tl
' 2
10

"s uCi

`mo!
i2
w x

i

t
0
J ? cW
Y ? u=<ii
C
1 5 3.
1?. AA :U <
<e
I LL TiI SZi
? !C Ei r
E
8 F° sEf ?'
o t ?F i 05!
b ?
{1 , $
Z? Z5
I ? °E
IIi
I ? n1 <
?> S
?^ - E a
ti g
o w - ss
? u ? e -u
aY F ?c3
ioo EY
E sq :4f "as"
' Y,^, E 7 ZC„i
p0 E. F? G=>t„s•
s F: E:
a a >2 a ¢s^°.?=
12
5 P? a i :fD•<<:e=
IL
` E }' i atB:EE":

N
11?
Z
I
_ : ce
q ?
? a
c. ?
6 ,y
•O ?
h
v ?
m
So
r

,.`4'O R y rr
as '? /r^n __ - t
- it
;'oa ?•?,: ?.. _ ',,,a,.?_---- ?'?„ -_ J r/^p '? ? ?'Y?5) tci ?_ ?? 1 € 'rlx s?r _ -_ I .. ?u,dr r ?e
EI^i,, ,.?1 \?C7Y".'" ItNYn'NxgII° 6ic? >mn
z 5:
= vV?"
c> -7 1
o I
w "? f '\?\ .. ?' "aJ? \ '.., _ '?\?" - %. ,1 il'f 3_'I. S F' H si .j C _s t - w?'"
NUQ
S / y Op \`-? ..I (r II!! 1 _ i of (_? ,?r.._f(JJ °s.i ?E= G0? n
C ? ? i ? J .'?\\ 'I ??` ?.?.. ""5"•.?1r day r =I.1'i ?. - (.. _ ?' ?V _ _ .? ? ? - E Y i v O n <
U Z_ 0? .(J \ 'ICJ = I ?.
a
I T. i'm
a 1 ?? ? ? °S ??-? ?/j +?c,?J ? (v ? n \?, I \ .' ? V? J '•a#n `? ?II?>a? I F
'? \J Jac ? ? r `? :'v... S' S l^ ,•/'` )?? ° c'. ?- , ? ?({? ? ??\ 1 ? " i1 ? (
< ? r`. ?/ \? `? "') b _ ? J _ ?r C\? `?'`' ?' J yJ ,/ ?? ^.e ?r ? ? .?. ? ':\?,I - '1 ( // o ? d
42
o L
C7
\\ II I'
l q ?1 r \/e ?'' u 4?I _ Ego:
14' n_ l C
5.z; 6
g f i I ? ; !II ' ? '^? :.,? ?? F",. ^".' ' v(' i ?' s` , •,'A ? ;. >? ( _ Ioi? i "? y?i, .. / i;! ? 1 E • _
Ao:
_?//?
< •`?` G ) j? I` ?l? b' Y'.` /'{?f-a f-- ? r ??? \, ?, ?'ti" ti Ir'' ??? ?- _( G ? ,•?T, r;' 7-'? _ l
? " ?% 111 ? i ?1 ? ' ?'11 1i I f ?\;' <> ;\, I,• j ' c `? c?-?' i { ? Iys,?,? ti`^`? ` r? i ? / ( ''.'.__ _ '??.
Tl?
?^?/qp? :Ii?l??l( j:/.?-? II 1 e j?? mo'w'^,I L1 a? li I •'? ,1
51!i I.,
l'?? 1-"' ?: :IF ?? -'? l t?"? __ _ _ ;SE=s a?_
> All
NZ
wwa/'"rrl
€ -
GSy
E
d;
NFU .,?{ ?` •-? i - - "` I ?.-'' -A ! }' f ?'? r? »., e( ?n IF
Z w -) e ? / 1, .? I (? >?.,.. ,?--..:may, S ; u € `• S € ; - -
t EE
O o \ •yl,?);I ?' I. ?' ( .a ?? '? ,``?.. i ? 1, Il ? NEI1vk ?-, s+;l ^ i I I y.?p ? 1 '1 ,, r ! ?±•? ?^? `:8ra=a - _
IL
oe
?? Y 1 n d I f V ._ `8 w` -
n
A
i
fw ?
% d
y 6
e ?
b
? U
a
Y
i, ,