20110034 Ver 1_Application_20110112

OD g@gVq
JAN 1 2 2011 a
MW-AA TFR?H STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
WuLk" W, SWKtA"1
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
BEVERLY EAVES PERDUE
Govs m
EUGENE A. CoNTT, JR.
sacaernnr
January 4, 2011
Mr. Tom Steffens
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Washington Regulatory Field Office
Post Office Box 1000
Washington, North Carolina 27889-1000
(Two Copies)
Mr. Rob Ridings
Wetlands/401 Unit
NC DENR Division of Water Quality
1650 Mail Service Center
.Raleigh, NC 27604-2260
(Three Copies)
1100
` A
Subject: NWP 14 request, for the construction of new Ioratim from NC
561 to SR 1619 i-jwi ?x C o n?1 W i?> s S ct cx,)3
Dear Sirs:
The proposed project will consist of a two-lane shoulder section. The new facility will
provide 12-foot travel lanes with 8-foot shoulders (2-foot paved) in each direction. The
project will be approximately 1.5 miles on new location. The new location will tun from
an intersection with NC 561 to an intersection with SR 1619. The proposed route
provides a safe and cost-effective transportation facility that meets current and future
needs of everyone in the surrounding region, while preserving a sense of community,
minimizing environmental impacts, and improving economic opportunities in a "tier one"
county.
Need For Proiect
The purpose of building the Halifax Access Road is to provide system linkage from the
existing NC 561 to the existing SR 1619. The link will create growth for industrial
development and a direct link to NC 1251NC903. SR 1619 was severed when the Halifax-
Northampton Regional Airport was built. The proposed road will provide better
connectivity for the community near NC 561 and SR 1618 by connecting SR 1619 and
NC 561. SR 1619 connects to NC 125 wfiich is a direct route to the city of Roanoke
Rapids which is the closes town providing goods and services including medical care.
(2 2) 237-6164 x 3532 [e-mail]
Post Office Box 3165, Wilson, North Carolina 27895-3165

Other Benefits
Halifax County has the "Tier One" designation, which means it is one of the state's most
economically distressed counties. The unemployment rate and median family income for
the Halifax/ Halifax County area is below the state average. This access road is needed to
serve the proposed economic development, and boost the potential for future economic
development.
Potential Indirect and Cumulative Effects from the proposed project are expected to be
low. Although the project will be constructed on new alignment, the proposed corridor
runs through the Halifax Corporate Park, which is already planned and zoned for
commercial industrial development. Access to the Corporate Park is already provided by
JS Pope Rd. to the north and NC 561 to the south. Empire Foods has already broken
ground (November, 2010) on a new manufacturing facility in the Park.
Despite an abundance of available land surrounding the proposed project, and the
Corporate Park, any induced development because of the project will be negligible.
Halifax County has experienced negative population growth (4.9%) and negative
employment growth (-3.9%) between 2000 and 2009 (US Census Bureau).
Direct natural environmental impacts are limited to the proposed roadway corridor which
contains one stream crossing. Impacts at this crossing will be addressed by NCDOT
through programmatic agreements with the resource agencies. This stream flows into
Quankey Creek which is 303141 list'-d Indirect effect to this stream will be minimal and
limited to the immediate vicinity of the project. The effects of any induced development
will be avoided or minimized through the implementation of local, state and federal
regulations.
With limited direct and indirect project effects, the cumulative effect of this project when
considered in the context of other past present and future actions, and any resulting impact
on the notable human and natural features, will be minimal. Therefore, potential indirect
and cumulative effects to downstream water quality should be minimal. Please contact Chad
Coggin at [phone] if you have any questions or need additional information. Your time
and effort are appreciated.
;7 74;2t??-?
Robert Lewis PE
Division Engineer - Division 4
[phone] x 3532 [e-mail]
Post Office Box 3165, Wilson, North Carolina 27895-3165
o2of wnrFgoc
r r o???
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.3 Dec 10 2008
Pre-Construction Notification PCN Form
A. Applicant Information
1. Processing
1a . Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps:
I N Section 404 Permit ? Section 10 Permit
1b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 14 or General Permit (GP) number:
1c. Has the NW P or GP number been verified by the Corps? ® Yes ? No
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
® 401 Water Quality Certification - Regular ? Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
?401WaterQualityCertfication-Express ?RiparianBufferAuthorization
1e. Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required? For the record only for DWQ 401
Certification:
? Yes N No For the record only for Corps Permit:

? Yes N No
1f. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in-lieu fee program proposed for mitigation
of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank or in-lieu
fee program. ? Yes N No
1g. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below. ? Yes N No
1h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)? ? Yes M No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project: New Location Road From NC561 to SR 1619
2b. County: Halifax
2c. Nearest municipality /town: Halifax
2d. Subdivision name: N/A
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no: N/A
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed: N/A
3b. Deed Book and Page No. N/A
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable): N/A
3d. Street address: N/A
3e. City, state, zip: N/A
3f. Telephone no.: N/A
3g. Fax no.: N/A
3h. Email address: N/A
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is: ? Agent ® Other, specify: NCDOT
4b. Name: RobertW. Lewis
4c. Business name
(if applicable): NCDOT Division 4
4d. Street address: 509 Ward Blvd
4e. City, state, zip: Wilson, NC 27895
4f. Telephone no.: [phone]
4g. Fax no.: [phone]
4h. Email address: [e-mail]
5. Agent/ConsuBant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name: N/A
5b. Business name
(if applicable): N/A
5c. Street address: N/A
5d. City, state, zip: N/A
5e. Telephone no.: N/A
5f. Fax no.: N/A
5g. Email address: N/A
Page 2 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification.
la. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID): N/A
1b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees): Latitude: 36.3146 Longitude: - 77.6119
(DD.DDDDDD) (-DD.DDDDDD)
tc. Property size: N/A acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to
proposed project:
UT to Quankey Creek
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water: C 303D listed
2c. River basin: Roanoke
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
Forestry and Agriculture are the predominant land uses in the vicinity
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
N/A
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
Approximately 200 LF
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
See attached purpose and need info in cover letter..
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
Grade base drain pave and erosion control on new location from NC 561 to SR 1619. Standard road and culvert
construction equipment will be used.
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
Comments:

® Yes ? No ? Unknown
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made?
? Preliminary ? Final
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): Byron. Bateman Agency/Consultant Company: NCDOT
Other:
4d. if yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
field visit from Corps and NCDWQ on Oct. 7, 2010
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past? ? Yes ®No ? Unknown
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project? ? Yes ®No
6b. if yes, explain.
Page 3 of 10
PCN Forth - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
? Wetlands ® Streams - tributaries ? Buffers
? Open Waters ? Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this questio n for each wetland area impacted.
2a. 2b. 2c.
Wetland impact 2d. 2e. 2f.

number- Type of impact Type of wetland
Permanent (P) or
Forested Type of jurisdiction
(Corps - 404, 10 Area of impact
(if known)
Temporary T DWQ - non-404, other) (acres)
W1 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
W2 ? p ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ?DWQ
W3 ?P?T s El Corps
?No DWQ
?
W4 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
W5 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
W6 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ?DWQ
2g. Total wetland impacts
2h. Comments: This project will not impact any jurisdictional wetlands.
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a. 3b. 3c. 3d. 3e. 3f. 3g.
Stream impact Type of impact . Stream name Perennial
Type of jurisdiction
Average
Impact
number- (PER) or (Corps-404,10 stream length
Permanent (P) or intermittent DWQ - non-404, width (linear
Temporary (T) (INT)? other) (feet) feet)
S1 ®P ? T Pipe placement UT of Quankey ® PER ® Corps 4 132
Creek ? INT ® DWQ
S2 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S3 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S4 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S5 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S6 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts 132
3i. Comments:
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then individually list all open water impacts below.
4a. 4b. 4c. 4d. 4e

Open water
Name of waterbody .
impact number-
Permanent (P) or (if applicable) Type of impact Waeerbody type Area of impact (acres)
Temporary T
Ot ?P?T
02 ?P?T
03 ?P?T
04 ?P?T
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments: There are no open water impacts associated with this project.
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction Pro Dosed. then complete the chart below.
5a. 5b. 5c. 5d. 5e.

Pond ID
Proposed use or purpose Wetland Impacts (acres) Stream Impacts (feet) Upland

b (acres)
num
er of pond
Flooded Filled Excavated Flooded Filled Excavated Flooded
P1
P2
5L Total
5g. Comments: No ponds or lakes will be created as a result of this project.
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
? Yes ? No if yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. See of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If projectwill impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If an impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a.
? Neuse ?Tar-Pamlico ? Other:
Project is in which protected basin? ? Catawba . ? Randleman
6b. 6c. 6d. 6e. 6f. 6g.
Buffer impact
number- Reason Huffer Zone 1 impact Zone 2 impact
Permanent (P) or for Stream name mitigation (square feet) (square feet)
Temporary T im act required?
B1 ?P?T ?Yes
? No
?Yes
B2 ?P?T ? No
? Yes
B3 ? P ? T ? No
6h. Total buffer impacts
6i. Comments:
Page 5 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December•10, 2008 Version
• Mnq.aU. ouauocauon ano mmgatlon
1. Avoidance and Minimization
la. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
This project was designed in a.manner that avoids all jurisdictional features except one stream crossing that transects the
entire property. Norther oad alignment has been shifted to the west in order to avoid one additional stream crossing
deemed to be jurisdictional by USAC a CDWQ regulators..
1b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
All construction equipment will be staged and operated from upland areas. DOT will also install silt fencing to protect the
stream and wetlands adjacent to this project, and safety fencing to delineate those environmentally sensitive areas.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State? ? Yes ® No
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply): ? DW Q ? Corps

2c K
yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project? ? Mitigation bank

? Payment to in-lieu fee program
? Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter) Type Quantity
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In-lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in-lieu fee program is attached. ? Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested: linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature: ? warm ? cool ?cold
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only): square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4f. Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
49. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested: acres
4h. Comments:
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan .
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Page 6 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) - required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires ? Yes ? No
buffer mitigation?
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.

Zone C.
Reason for impact 6d.
Total impact
Multiplier
Required mitigation
(square feet) (square feet)
Zone 1 3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2 1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank
,
pennittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in-lieu fee fund).
6h. Comments:
Page 7 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
Ia. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified

within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules? ? Yes ® No
1b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
Comments: ? Yes No
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project? 0%
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan? ® Yes ? No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
2d. if this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
Stormwater will be treated through grass swales based on design criteria outlined in current NCDOT Stormwater BMP
Manual..
? Certified Loral Government
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan? ? DWQ Stormwater Program
® DWQ 401 Unit
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local government's jurisdiction is this project? N/A
? Phase It
3b. Which of the following locally-implemented Stormwater management programs ? NSW
El USMP
apply (check all that apply): ? Water Supply Watershed
? Other: N/A
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been ? Yes ? No
attached?
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
? Coastal counties
? HOW
4a. Which of the following state-implemented stormwater management programs apply ? ORW
(check all that apply): ? Session Law 2006-246
? Other: N/A
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
? Yes ? No
attached?
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements? ? Yes ? No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met? ? Yes ? No
Page 8 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
F. Supplementary Information
1. . Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1a . Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federallstate/local) funds or the
use of public (federallstate) land? ® Yes D

1b.
If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an E E
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State ? Yes
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1c. If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
letter.) ? Yes ? No
Comments:
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H.0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards, ? Yes ® No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 28.0200)?
2b. Is this an after-the-fact permit application? ? Yes ® No
2c. If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
32. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in ? Yes ® No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b. If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. if you answered "no; provide a short narrative description.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
N/A
Page 9 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
habitat? ? Yes No
®
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
impacts? ? Yes ® No
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted. ? Raleigh
? Asheville
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
An NCNHP Database indicated no occurences of endangered species in the vicinity. Furthermore, existing stream
i
cond
tions (shallow but flashy) highly erodable fine sand substrate not compatible with the habitat required for
endangered mussels. Biological Conclusion of No affect confirmed by Jay Mays NCDOT biological surveys unit via
phone. There is no significant amount of mature pines in this vicinity to provide habitat for Red Cokaded woodpeckers.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat? ? Yes ® No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
ASFA GIS layer. Existing stream conditions (shallow but flashy) highly erodable fine sand substrate Not an Anadromous
fish stream. No moratorium
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
t
t ? Yes ® N

s
a
us (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in o
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
NCDOT HEU survey
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floc 0 Yes No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? NC FLOODMAPS,
I ?; a. 4?- -
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name Applicant/Agent's Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant
is provided.)
Page 10 of 10
PCN Forth - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
Figure 1 Topo of New location Road Area
COUNTY- Halifax f SITE=. 17+61 -L-
NO SURVEY REQUIRED FORM
PROJECT INFORMATION
Project No: na
WBS No:
F.A. No:
Federal (USACE) Permit Required?
4C.042010
Projecl Tracking No. (Internal Use)
10-08-0006 r
i
County: Halifax
Document.- MCDC
Funding ® State ? Federal
® Yes ? No Permit Type: Nationwide 14/buffer
na
Project De eription. NCDOT Division 4 intends to construct a new location connector from NC 561 to SR
1619, west of the Town of Halifax. According to preliminary plans provided, the new facility appears to
consist of two 18-foot travel lanes within a ca. 100-foot (30.48-meter) wide ROW over a 1.558-mile (2.507-
kilometer) distance. This facility is intended to serve a new corporate industrial park proposed by the Town
of Halifax. The new connector road will impact ca. 18.885 acres (7.642 hectares) within the 688-acre (278.424
hectares) industrial park.
SUMMARY OF CULTURAL RESOURCES REVIEW
Brief dermption of review activities, rerullt of review, and conclusions:
A review of the site maps and files at the Office of State Archaeology was conducted on August 23, 2010,
were it was revealed that Environmental Services, Inc. had conducted an intensive archaeological survey of
the proposed 688-acre industrial park in December 2008. That survey identified 29 archaeological resources,
of which 24 were recommended as not NRHP-eligible, three as "potentially" NRHP-eligible, and two were
located outside that project APE. None of the "potentially" eligible resources are located within the APE of
the new connector road. No archaeological survey is considered necessary. Should the proposed alignment
for the new connector change, further archaeological review will be necessary (especially with regards to the
Gary-Twisdale House and Cedarhurst Farm site).
"No Sn"ey Required"form far Minor Tmnsponmion Pmjeas w Qaal jed in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
NC907'Amhaealoo & Historic Ardineclum Groups
Btief F_ %planation of why the available information timpides a reliable balir for maronalil pretiding that there are no
unidentified butompmperties in the APE:
The current project APE falls within an area recently surveyed by Environmental Services Incorporated (a
firm frequently used by NCDOT as an archaeological contractor, though not for this project). The survey
methodology described in their draft report seems to have adequately covered all areas within the APE for
the current project. According to reported results, the proposed alignment does appear to impact four
identified archaeological resources: 31HX268/268**, 31HX282/282**, 31IM85**, and 31HX290/290**.
None of these sites was considered NRHP-eligible by the ESI researchers. According to the results reported
in their preliminary draft, sites 31HX282/282** and 31HX290/290** represent low-density scatters of late
historic and pre-Columbian artifacts on the surface and in the plowzone. Site 31EM85** appears to have a
higher density of more coherent late historic materials related to a domestic site, but has been severely
disturbed by the structure's destruction and subsequent agricultural activities.
Site 31HX268/268**, the Gary-Twisdale House and Cedarhurst Farm, appears to be somewhat more
problematic. According to the description of ESI's project area for the industrial park, the Gary-Twisdale
House is located on a narrow lot that lies outside the proposed industrial park. This property is recorded
with SHPO as a resource of "historical importance". The archaeological survey applied intensive survey
methodology to areas outside the extant house lot and makes no attempt to assess NRHP eligibility for
archaeological resources within that narrow lot. According to NCDOT's preliminary plans and the
preliminary site plan generated by ESI, the proposed new alignment passes to the west of the extant Gary-
Twisdale House lot, between the tree-lined driveway and a small grape arbor, through the area recorded as
"disturbed" by ESI researchers. While the NRHP-eligibility of the Gary-Twisdale House and Cedarhurst
Farm does not appear to be completely resolved (site 31I-fK268/268** was recommended as not NRHP-
eligible, but the house site remains unassessed), the proposed new alignment passes through an area that was
intensively surveyed and determined not to contain intact NRHP-eligible resources. Even if the Gary-
Twisdale House and Cedarhurst Farm were to be determined NRHP-eligible, the currently proposed
alignment should not impact any resources that contribute to that eligibility rating.
SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION
See attached: Corporate Site Overview; ESI Preliminary Draft Management Summary and Site Location
Map; Preliminary Plans Cover Sheet; ESI's preliminary draft site plan for 31HX268/268**; Aerial photograph
with project limits for the new connector near 31HX268/268**.
FINDING BY NCDOT CULTURAL RESOURCES PROFESSIONAL NO SURVEY REQUIRED
ARCHAEOLOGY . HISPORICARauTE=RE (CIRCLE ONE)

Uate
"No ,Purvey Required "form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 10071'rogrommmicAgreement.
NCWTArchaemogy & Historic Architecture Groups
Halifar Corporate Park Preliminary
MANAGEMENT SUMMARY
This report presents the findings of an intensive archaeological investigation of the proposed
Halifax Corporate Park outside of the Town of Halifax in Halifax County, North Carolina. The
Halifax Corporate Park project area is a 668-acre tract located in Halifax, Halifax County, North
Carolina. The project area is bordered on the south by SR 561 and is crossed in the north by SR
1619. This investigation was conducted by Environmental Services, Inc., (ESI) of Raleigh,
North Carolina, for Halifax County to comply with the North Carolina State Environmental
Policy Act (SEPA) as part of the North Carolina Department of Commerce Certified Sites
Program and requirements of the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) of
the North Carolina Office of Archives and History. The SHPO Environmental Review number
for this project is ER 08-1977.
Background research was conducted at various institutions including the Office of State
Archaeology (OSA), Halifax County Library, and the Halifax County Courthouse. Field
methods used during the investigation included general and systematic pedestrian inspection and
shovel testing. Areas of clear visibility, including agricultural fields and dirt roads were
inspected for historic structures, artifacts, and other signs of prehistoric or historic cultural
activity. Shovel tests were excavated at 60-, 30-, and 15-meter intervals for site discovery, site
documentation, and boundary delineation. No shovel tests were excavated in wetlands or on
slopes greater than 15 percent. All shovel tests were approximately 30 centimeters in diameter
and dug to subsoil. Excavation Units measured 1-x-1 meter in size and were excavated in
arbitrary 10-centimeter levels within natural strata. Field investigations occurred during
November and December 2008 and April 2009 and were conducted by Scott Seibel, who served
as Principal Investigator, Terri Russ, and Matt Postlewaite.
A total of 29 archaeological sites were documented as a result of the current investigation.
Table A presents a summary of the archaeological findings. Of the 29 archaeological sites
documented during the investigation, 24 are recommended not eligible for listing in the National
Register, three are recommended potentially eligible for listing in the National Register, and two
are located outside of the project area and is thus not assessed for National Register eligibility. It
is recommended that sites 31 HX264/264**, 31 HX277, and 31 HX279 within the project area and
sites 31HX280 and 31HX292/292** be avoided by development activities. If avoidance of these
sites is not possible, significance testing is recommended to determine their National Register
eligibility status. Additionally, if the boundaries of the proposed Halifax County Corporate Park
are expanded, additional archaeological investigations may be necessary, as determined in
consultation with the SHPO.
Table A: Summary of Archaeological Sites
Site Number
31HX264/264**
31 HX265/265 * *
Cultural Affiliation
Archaic and Early-Middle
Woodland/
Late 19'b to mid-20'h
Prehistoric Lithic/
Component(s)
Limited Activity and F
Term Habitation/
Domestic
Isolated Find/
National Register
Potentially Eligible
Not Eligible
ENVIRONMENTAL
SERVICES, INC.
Halifax Corporate Park Preliminary
Site Number
3 I HX266
31 HX267
31 NX268/268* *
31 RX269
31HX270**
31 HX27 I /271 * *
31HX272/272**
31HX273/273**
31 HX274
Cultural Affiliation
Prehistoric Lithic
Prehistoric Lithic
Late Archaic and Middle
Woodland/
Early 19"to Present
Prehistoric Lithic
20'
Late Archaic/
19'h-20 h
Prehistoric Lithic/
19'"-20 h
Prehistoric Lithic/
18th-19'h
Late Archaic and
Woodland
Prehistoric Lithic/
Mid-18th-20`h
Prehistoric Lithic
Prehistoric Lithic
Late Archaic/
Mid-19 h to mid-20th
Prehistoric Lithic
Prehistoric Lithic
Archaic to Woodland/
20th
Archaic/
19`h to 20"
Archaic/
19'h to 20th
Prehistoric Lithic
Mid-19 h to 20"
20'h
Prehistoric Lithic/
19'h to 20th
20'"
Prehistoric Lithic/
Early 19t' to mid-20'h
Unknown Lithic/
19th
Late 19t°-20th
Archaic/
Late 19'"-20'
Component(s)
Limited Activity
Limited Activity and Short
Term Habitation/
Domestic, Agricultural
Isolated Find
Domestic
Limited Activity/
Artifact Scatter
Limited Activity/
Isolated Find
Limited Activity/
Artifact Scatter
National Register
Status
Not Eligible
Not Eligible
Not Eligible
Not Eligible
Not Eligible
31 HX275/275 **
31HX276
31 HX277
31 HX278/278**
31HX279
31HX280
31 HX281 /281 * *
31HX282/282**
31 HX283/283 **
31HX284
31HX285**
31 HX286**
31HX287/287**
31HX288**
31HX289/289**
31HX290/290**
31HX291
31 HX292/292* *
Not Eligible
Not Eligible
Not Eligible
Limited Activity Not Eligible
Limited Activity/
Artifact Scatter
Limited Activity
Limited Activity
Limited Activity/
Domestic
Limited Activity
Secondary Lithic Reduction
Short Term Habitation/
Artifact Scatter
Limited Activity/
Artifact Scatter
Limited Activity/
Artifact Scatter
Isolated Find
Domestic
Isolated find
Limited Activity/
Domestic
Domestic
Limited Activity/
Domestic
Limited Activity/
Artifact Scatter
Agricultural
Primary Lithic Reduction/
Cemetery and Domestic
Not Eligible
Not Eligible
Potentially Eligible
Not Eligible
Potentially Eligible
Not Assessed
Not Eligible
Not Eligible
Not Eligible
Not Eligible
Not Eligible
Not Eligible
Not Eligible
Not Eligible
Not Eligible
Not Eligible
Not Eligible
Not Assessed
ENVIRONMENTAL
SERVICES, INC.
,'.'titltA'i'IgYNIM?AYtlmy 1_eR<F. Y?NIDN?V.VS'db Ml
NNI?r
O ?1 'n
\ ?{ ?^ X
J
Xc \ -_ O CI
2
1.G ? N LI
C
X', 08
X" 3X
U XC
n X X;V ' o
n J
Xu
X? ,- ®t7
N f
ra
®u
v X X
u X
F X"
G G 9'
^D
Y? O Xm'C?]. .?
] . t.?
X",
c N a n T
F
to
J (/
30 N i y 11 31 _r , ') P ,ll iJ J V 1 ?-
O L z IL z a.
.off( ® X
:J J
(1
T ti
02
ENVIRONMENTAL
SERVICES. INC.
Yi I•••N 1a?.rl

+? X o \
ti
E \ 0 U
y V
Q lL
:O
G ;s
f ?
Y - OC
? X
Site Plan-31HX268i268"
Halifax County Commerce Park
Hali!ax County, North Carolina
LJ
'n
D
Prujed. ER Da 1'28.00
Date: Dec 20U8
Drwarcnkd : MP+SS
Flgufe: 6.7

10-08-0006
t
NO PREHISTORIC OR HISTORIC PROPERTIES
PRESENT/AFFFC'TFI) FORM
PROJECT INFORMATION
Proiect A`o: Colon.:
Halifax
4C.042010 Uuconrrua: MCDC
I. R') 1-'lrmdin.g. X State ? Federal
1''cderal IUS.4('E? Permit Kegaire(1'1 X ),cs ? No Perini! Trycc NWP 14/ buffer
Proiect Description: Construct a new location connector from N('561 to SR 1619 (J. S. Pope Road)
to serve the proposed industrial park composed of two 18-foot travel lanes within a It)()- foot-wide
ROW and a 1558 miles in length.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
the ,,Vorth Carolina Department of Tramsporteirina (;1'C.'DO"1 j retie tted the .suhiect project acrd derernrbrec;
I listoric Arc hi I ccturcil-andscapes
There are no National Rcgislcr-listed or Study Listed Properties within the project's area of potentiai
effects.
There are no properties less than fifty years old which are considered to meet Criteria C:onsidcraion C.
within the project's area of potential effects.
? There are no properties within file project's area of potential effects.
? There are propenics over fifty }'cars old within the area of potential effects, but they do not meet dte
criteria for listing on the National Register.
? All propenics greater than 50 years of age located in the APE have hccn considered and all compliance
for historic architcc un+with Section 106 of the National I listoric Preservation Act and GS 121-12(a) has
been completed for this proicct.
X 'There are no, historic properties present or affected by this project. t.rttrrch um nt,tcc ur dr,crumerac (cc
rte«rded) -
Archaeoloi,,v
? There are no National Register-listed or Study Listed properties within the project's area of potential
effects.
? No subsurface archaeological investigtitions arc acquired for this project.
? Subsurface investigations did not reveal the presence of any archaeological resources.
? Subsurface invest igations did not reveal the presence ofany archacoiogjcai resources COnsidered eligible
for the National Register.
? All identified Archaeological cites located within the AI'E have been considered and all compliance for
archaeological resources with Section 106 of the National historic preservation Act and GS 121-I2(a)
has been complete() for this project.
-f here arc no historic properties present oraffected by this project. (21111)Ch rum teote.c 01- 10CUMCtIL. tit
meerled)
' 1'0 liisront i to;n•r!jrr PrcR'o!":wxv rOr .q;Va J,aAt/:urte,nua ilgirt:? ?n ;hu:(?liv.::re a.Y .'Y1' !'rrtirmm?!:ri.-,fp..•!,•,: r,;
.. , Or.V )I n ,..., niu?:.4 !livn..r : Pdurri:vr• :.. !vpe
SUMMARY Oh CULTURAL. RI:SOI:R('l S RICI'I1.11'
It.''2Y (!^.1?!'(111!U/I ul i, rc?7fitc !rf P; r -u, l+r.:• rr.cial:.r: NFIi quad m
. , aps, nis:or'ft:
designarions roster, ano indexes revie', ed on 24 Auqust 2010 and yielded nc NR, SL, DE, or LE) cr3p t:e5
and hvo SS properties in the Area of Puleprlial Effects (APE). ne A;'E is centered on the p ccoz> t
location of the new road and extends 207 feet to either side of presumed center line and at ear.h
terminus (sLe attached survev map). Halifax County current GIS mapping, aerial photography, and tax
information (viewed 24 Auqust 2010) revealed predominantly cultivated fields and woodland in the APF,
and several pre-1960 resources (tile previously recorded properties) on the hvn parcels intersected by the
southern third of the proposed connector. The presence of the surveyed sites, as well as the absence of a
comprehensive county study, indicated an architectural survey, conducted on 7 October 2010. The
survey included investigation of 1004fi of the APE by automobile and on font, and the identification.
photographing, and mapping of all above-ground resources over fifty years of age in the APE (see
attached survey map). The survey confirmed the presence of the Gary-Tw'isdale House (Halifax County
PIN 0601000) and its ad;+acent outbuildings and an associated tenant house and nearby cemetery Mallfax
County PIN 060IO01). The circa-1840 Gary-Twisdale House (FIX 356). heavily altered in the 1930s and
again within the last twenty years or so, is approached from NC 501 through an allee of venerable cedars.
The assemblage of outbuildings standing to its north and cast date to the early decades of the twentieth
century and the tenant house and cemetery (no visible above-ground markersl to the southeast to the
late-nineteenth or early-twentieth centuries. All the outbuildings, as well as the Gary-Twisdale House, are
recorded in the state architectural survey as Cedarhurst Farrn, HX 357. Intensive archaeological survey of
the proposed industrial park acreage conducted in 2008 by Environmental Services, Inc. recorded the
Gary-Twisdale House and its adiaceni outbuildings as site 31HX268i268- and the tenanr house and
cemetery as site 31HX265?265` (see attached site plans). The alignment of the proposed connector lies
immediately to the_ west of the cedar allee, ultimately moving northwesterly away from the identified
resources (see attached industrial park map and NCDOT aerial). As the project is state funded, GS 121-
17(a) applies; in addition, its Federal, Nationwide 14 permit areas are subject to Section 106 reviev. A
finding of "no historic properties affected" will satisfy both GS 121-12(x) and Section 106 compliance
requirements.
Should the design, funding, or permit requirements of the project change, please notify
NCDOT Historic Architecture as additional review may be necessary.
This review is confined to historic architectural resources in the new connector project area;
it doesnotestablish compliance for the entire 688-acre industrial park, which at this writing
appears to be incomplete for cultural resources.
SUPPORT DO('UMENTATION
See anached: Survey map (photographs on file, NCDOT Historic Architecture); proposed industrial park map and
profile; site plans of recorded resources (from ESI Archaeology report); aerial photography with project limits
(NCDOT), detail of Gary•Twisdaie House vicinity.
Silncd:
Cultirrarl Resources SpecialiFf. Nr:'IX) I' Date
t'lI111.......l.lJ.. !".'I Jf (lrr::. r'?rv)•rr:i.: ..r.r?.Wl -?1'!rl'r.ir'.I;
..r I.•. urrr '.Y li ?. i....f;l.r I.r r..lrt (?• ?: e,?a
T V
1?4 H IF
`Z o•
AREA OF •. I? ?\ M_ I 'T . c+ 1
'POTENTIAL EFFECTS (APE) '
I •. 7 --,, , 5R ?Big
Y / ry
i..
I I ? is f?rw? ? ? . W
I TENANT HOUSE ;i .<
< < ` AND CEMETERY,
\ (historically associated
with-Cedarhurst Farm)
1 11
CEDARHURSiFARt41 (HX 357), / -
Including GARY-TWISI)ALE' HOUSE (HX 356)
J House;;outbuildings cedarallee
Historic Architectural Resources WBS #4C.042010
New location connector Halifax County
Surveyed 7 October 2010 Base map: Halifax County GIS, NTS
NCCO'! h:isWnc Archdoclw0, October %0 10
PA Tmckmy 970.08 006

7-5
J
l
11
I
` i
'
T: TJ f-1 _ _ __
.1) U '? J>

yn o
anu.m 'v.

1\ t
l'J ? .• v T.
.. r U
?.Y v' m:l ?f L r / 1
73
o ! j
L L
71
( I ?r y V CL
?e 11 0 ?
eJ
LY
L•1
Sit?
I Halifax County Commerce Park
_.. ?..? .. F:nu°ar ?:•:)unty '.orr Ca-..lu:a
•V
ff
Me
i
i
I
Un I
I
f
1
o; i
L
F
X
WC, X
x \•
G
.........................
........... ?.....?•?..... i. N `?..`R X
O? X X
\ X x
1
1
...._._.............. ...........I... ' a\
X X x / 7-
x ?
eri I ;]
ry Vi L C N T_ c J
C n j y? .? u> .n c] S. v f;
Ca Li
i] T t) 9
C, a_ zLL z a W`
X ?a
? I \
1
O
\ _ e I
J?
Wf?'
0 / SLN? Ii I INC. 3;fe r •an-31NY2.S.??j^
Halifax County Commerce Park
o,,nn W rG Ca:COnc 7r .. t.
H.vdaxC

_ r.. J

mommm-wow

a Lam. ?? ? .

. "+Ii+1?Ctt N .e.?y
4, AT 4W
=Un-?=cnz
M TI = M-0
D C? D m -{
0
?C? -I 0
D z ? -
F-r-n=
O
N?m?o
(T1 V) FI-1 N
-d?I?ID
?tll?il-
?z
?n rTl D
D O fTl
F- --I z
O Cn CC 0
r,-l D ITI O
m ?
Z ?7 D
U) r 7l
I
777)
e

n
1
a
! h
v'

D
0

-u UO
u C 0-)
m -j rTI C -
F ? D
- ITI C') -{
FF-1 ?
I-
z C O
D
FFJ
77

- D
FF-1 0
) F- 0
O? ? TI

D O
°
D
_ o CD

0 U D
F-- F-
0 F-
z -o (jq
C-) IT1
ITl
z
cn

3

N?
N

a
V
Fo,
r
N
O
N
m
04
N
W
N
A
J

Spa
n
C
IA
Y,
n
1

P
C
b
U,
-r-
y
1 ;
D
U
N
Lf

1
1
1
1
I
I
1

s

/

N
L4 t l
1
I

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
f
I
1
1

N
b? 1