20160787_NC 125 (10)_20110207

Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Project Review Form
Project Number: 11-0186 County: Martin Date Received: 02/04/2011
Due Date: 2/28/2011
Project Description: Finding of No Significant Impact - NC 125 Williamston Bypass, Martin
County, TIP Project No. R-3826
s ro?ec is emg reviewe as m ica e e ow:
Regional Office Regional Office Area In-House Review
Asheville Air _ Soil & Water - Marine Fisheries
_
Fayetteville Water Coastal Management _ Water Resources
Mooresville Aquifer Protection Wildlife _ Environmental Health
_ ? Wildlife- DOT Solid Waste Mgmt
Raleigh Land Quality Engineer _
_ Forest Resources Radiation Protection
Washington _ -
Land Resources Other
Wilmington
Parks & Recreation
Winston-Salem "
_ Water Quality
Water Quality - DOT
Air Quality
Manager Sign-Off/Region: Date: IIn-House Reviewer/Agency:
Response (check all applicable)
l ,U)
No objection to project as proposed. L?No Comment
Insufficient information to complete review _ Other (specify or attach comment
0
If you have any questions, please contact: FES I
Melba McGee, Environmental Coordinator at Melba.McGeeknedenr.eov 7 ?011
NC 125
Williamston Bypass
From SR 1182 (East College Road) southwest of Williamston
to NC 125 northwest of Williamston
Martin County
Federal-Aid Project STP-125(1)
State Project 8.1090501
WBS Element 34553.1.1
TIP Project R-3826
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
U. S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
And
N. C. Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
Submitted pursuant to 42 U. S. C. 4332(2)(C)
APPROVED:
Date Pohn F. Sullivan III, PE
Division Administrator, FHWA
/ete fJregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Manager,
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch, NCDOT

NC 125
Williamston Bypass
From SR 1182 (East College Road) southwest of Williamston
to NC 125 northwest of Williamston
Martin County
Federal-Aid Project STP-125(1)
State Project 8.1090501
WBS Element 34553.1.1
TIP Project R-3826
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Documentation Prepared in Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch By:

Ull,? L Gib r
John E. R' hards, III, El
Project Planning Engineer QaaEe?E9`eee o°c
?
Project Development and nvironmental Analysis Branch P
4sd°de

?. _ V lC ed s?,irJ??
? m

J A. McInnis Jr., PE
s
4
1
Project Engineer ?b
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch es? e,n:
,
• ?
y
e
c
1/3/p1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PROJECT COMMITMENTS ............................................................................... .....................1
1. TYPE OF ACTION ..................................................................................... .................... I
II. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION ................................................ .................... 1
III. SELECTED ALTERNATIVE ..................................................................... .................... 2
IV. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ..................................... .................... 5
V. COMMENTS AND COORDINATION ...................................................... .................... 6
A. Distribution of the Environmental Assessment ............................ .................... 6
B. Comments on the Environmental Assessment .............................. .................... 6
C. Public Hearing ............................................................................... .................... 7
D. NEPA/404 Merger Process ........................................................... .................... 8
VI. REVISIONS TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ................... .................... 9
A. Avoidance and Minimization ........................................................ .................... 9
B. Right of Way and Access Control ................................................ .................... 9
C. Relocation of Residences and Businesses ..................................... .................... 9
D. Corrections to the Environmental Assessment ............................. .................. 10
E. Update to the Environmental Assessment .................................... .................. 13
VII. BASIS FOR FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ......................... .................. 14
MAPS AND ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure 1 Project Location Map
Figure 2 Proposed Improvements
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 - Project Cost Estimate ............................................................................................. 2
Table 2 - Alternatives Presented at Public Hearing ............................................................... 3
Table 3 - Comparison of Alternatives 1 and IA .................................................................... 4
Table 4 - Summary of Environmental Effects ....................................................................... 5
Table 5 - Correction to Table 9 of EA Project Effects on Streams ....................................... 11
Table 6 - Correction to Tables S 1 and 5 of EA Alternative Comparisons ............................ 12
Table 7 - Correction to Table 1 of EA Project Cost Estimates .............................................. 13
APPENDICES
Appendix A - Agency Comments on the Environmental Assessment
Appendix B - Division of Highways Relocation Program/Relocation Report for Selected
Alternative
Appendix C - NEPA/Section 404 Merger Process Concurrence Forms
PROJECT COMMITMENTS
NC 125
Williamston Bypass
From SR 1182 (East College Road) southwest of Williamston
to NC 125 northwest of Williamston
Martin County
Federal Aid Project STP-125(1)
State Project 8.1090501
WBS Element 34553.1.1
TIP Project R-3826
NCDOT Rail Division
Formal approval for the at-grade rail crossing for the proposed bypass will be
obtained from CSX Transportation prior to construction of this project. The Slade Street and
SR 1410 (Cullipher Road) crossings must, be closed prior to CSX Transportation granting
formal approval for the proposed at-grade crossing for the bypass.
NCDOT Roadway Design/Geotechnical Unit/Division One Construction
Steeper side slopes (3:1) will be used in jurisdictional areas.
Side slopes steeper than 3:1 will be investigated during project design for the UT 3
stream crossing.
NCDOT Division Office/Area Traffic Engineer
The Area Traffic Engineer will re-evaluate need for a traffic signal at the proposed
intersection of the NC 125 Bypass with SR 1420 (McCaskey Road) prior to project
construction.
NCDOT Location and Surveys Unit
Unmarked graves may exist on property along the east side of existing NC 125 near
the northern terminus of the project (Whitley Farm). NCDOT will investigate this area and
determine whether or not graves are located within the proposed right of way prior to right of
way acquisition.
Finding of No Significant Impact - R-3826 Page I of 1
January 2011
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
PREPARED BY THE
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
IN CONSULTATION WITH THE
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
1. TYPE OF ACTION
This is a Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Finding of No Significant
Impact (FONSI).
The FHWA has determined this project will have no significant impact on the
human environment. This Finding of No Significant Impact is based on the April 30,
2009 Environmental Assessment (EA) which has been independently evaluated by the
FHWA and determined to adequately and accurately discuss the need, environmental
issues and impacts of the proposed project and appropriate mitigation measures. The
following documentation provides sufficient evidence and analysis for determining that
an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required. The FHWA takes full
responsibility for the accuracy, scope and content of the Environmental Assessment.
II. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION
This project involves constructing a NC 125 bypass of Williamston, mostly on
new location, from SR 1182 (East College Road) to existing NC 125 northwest of
Williamston. The proposed project is approximately 2.7 miles long.
A three-lane roadway is proposed from SR 1182 to the CSX Transportation rail
line north of US 64 Alternate. A two-lane roadway on multi-lane right of way is
proposed for portions of the bypass north of the rail line. It is anticipated approximately
100 feet of right of way will be required between SR 1182 and the rail line and 200 feet
of right of way will be required north of the rail line. Partial control of access (one access
per parcel for properties with no other access) will be obtained between US 64 Alternate
and existing NC 125 northwest of Williamston.
The proposed project is included in the approved 2009-2015 North Carolina State
Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). The project is scheduled in the draft
2011-2020 work plan for right of way acquisition and construction in federal fiscal years
2013 and 2015, respectively.
The latest cost estimate for the selected alternative for the project is presented
below.
TABLE 1
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
Right of Way Acquisition
(Including Utility Relocation) $3,030,000
Construction $9,800,000
Wetland/Stream Mitigation $468,000
Total $13,298,000
The cost estimate for the project included in the draft 10-year work plan is
$15,453,000. Of this total, $4,455,000 is estimated for right of way acquisition and
utility relocation, $498,000 is estimated for wetland and stream mitigation and
$10,500,000 is estimated for construction.
III. SELECTED ALTERNATIVE
Alternatives 1, 2N and 4 were presented to the public at a hearing held on
September 17, 2009 in Williamston (see Section V-C). A description of the alternatives
is included in Section I11-13 of the environmental assessment.
Following the public hearing, NCDOT selected Alternative 1 as the preferred
alternative for the project. The NEPA/404 merger team concurred with the selection of
Alternative 1 as the Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative (LEDPA)
at a merger meeting held on February 23, 2010. A copy of the concurrence form from
the meeting is included in Appendix C of this document.
NCDOT has selected Alternative 1 because it will affect fewer homes, less
wetlands, and will cost less than alternatives 2N and 4.
2
TABLE 2
ALTERNATIVES PRESENTED AT PUBLIC HEARING
Alternative
1 2N 4
Residential Relocatees 9 11
Business Relocatees 1 1
Wetlands Affected (Acres) 1.59 3.15 `ti 3328`:
Streams Affected (Feet) 596 1";4'9:1i 257
Open Water Impacts (Acres) 0 0 0
Protected Species Habitat? No No No
Effect Protected Species? No No No
Effect Historic Properties? No No No
Involve Section 4(F)? No No No
Receptors Impacted By Traffic Noise 2 3
'JP
° 8 _4
tp
Forested Areas Affected (Acres)* 14.3 2 A 9.2
Prime and Important Farmland Affected (Acres) 45.4 43.6 47.5
Length New Location (Miles) 1.9 1.8. 2.0
Total Length (Miles) 2.7 2.6 3.5
Total Cost**
(Millions)
$15.1
$15.3
Impacts computed based on approximate width required for future four-lane
typical section for the project.
Shaded cells in table indicate highest impact or most unfavorable response.
*Forested acres based on forested areas shown on aerial photograph.
** Total Cost as presented at public hearing, see Table 7 for corrected cost
estimates.
Two farms make up approximately half of the land crossed by Alternatives 1 and
2N. These farms are located between SR 1420 (McCaskey Road) and existing NC 125
northwest of Williamston.
At the September 2009 bearing, concerns were expressed that Alternatives 1 and
2N would severely disrupt the operation of these two farms. Following the hearing, a
modified alignment for Alternative 1 was developed which would have less impact on
these farms. The alignment for Alternative 1 was only modified on the two farms so as
not to increase impacts to other property owners. Alternative IA is within the original
project study area boundary identified in Figure 1 of the environmental assessment.
3
The modified alignment for Alternative 1 will affect 0.03 acre more wetlands and
approximately 174 feet less streams than the original alignment. The NEPA/404 merger
team concurred with the modification to the original alignment for Alternative I as an
avoidance and minimization measure at the February 2010 merger team meeting. A copy
of the concurrence form from the meeting is included in Appendix C. Table 3 below
compares the modified alignment for Alternative 1 A with the original alignment for
Alternative 1 and includes updated cost estimates.
TABLE 3
COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES 1 AND IA
Alternative
1 IA
Residential Relocatees 9 3
Business Relocatees 1 0
Wetlands Affected (Acres) 1.59 1.62
Streams Affected (Feet) 596 422
Open Water Impacts (Acres) 0 0
Protected Species Habitat? No No
Effect Protected Species? No No
Effect Historic Properties? No No
Involve Section 4(F)? No No
Receptors Impacted By Traffic Noise 2 2
Forested Areas Affected (Acres)* 14.3 21.7
Farmland Affected (Acres)** 20.5 15.1
Length New Location (Miles) 2.0 2.0
Total Length (Miles) 2.7 2.7
Total Cost
(Millions) $13.6 $13.3
Impacts computed based on approximate width required for
future four-lane typical section for the project.
*Forested acres based on forested areas shown on aerial photograph.
**Land being actively farmed, not necessarily prime and
important farmland.
IV. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
Table 4 presents a summary of the anticipated environmental effects for the
selected alternative.
TABLE 4
SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
Alternative
IA
Residential Relocatees 3
Business Relocatees 0
Wetlands Affected (Acres) 1.62
Streams Affected (Feet) 422
Open Water Impacts (Acres) 0
Protected Species Habitat? No
Effect Protected Species? No
Effect Historic Properties? No
Involve Section 4(F)? No
Receptors Impacted By Traffic Noise 2
Forested Areas Affected (Acres)* 21.7
Farmland Affected (Acres)** 15.1
Length New Location (Miles) 2.0
Total Length (Miles) 2.7
Total Cost
(Millions) $13.3
Impacts computed based on approximate width required for
future four-lane typical section for the project.
"Forested acres based on forested areas shown on aerial photograph.
"Land being actively farmed, not necessarily prime and
important farmland.
V. COMMENTS AND COORDINATION
A. Distribution of the Environmental Assessment
Copies of the environmental assessment were made available to the public and to
the following federal, state and local agencies:
US Department of the Army - Corps of Engineers
*US Environmental Protection Agency
*US Fish and Wildlife Service - Raleigh
*NC Department of Administration - State Clearinghouse
*NC Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services
NC Department of Cultural Resources - State Historic Preservation Office
*NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources - DENR
*DENR - NC Division of Water Quality
*DENR - NC Wildlife Resources Commission
Mid-East Rural Planning Organization
Martin County
Town of Williamston
Asterisks (*) indicate agencies from which comments on the environmental
assessment were received. Copies of letters received are included in Appendix A of this
document.
B. Comments on the Environmental Assessment
Substantive comments on the environmental assessment are presented below.
US Environmental Protection Agency
COMMENT: "EPA acknowledges that the impact summary table provided in the EA
was comprehensive. EPA's environmentally preferred alternative at this
time is Alternative 1, which has the least wetland (1.59 acres) and stream
(395 linear feet) impacts, the least residential relocation (9), the fewest
impacted noise receptors (2) and the least cost ($15.1 million). However;
EPA plans to stay involved with the Merger 01 process and will consider
input from other agencies during the Concurrence Point 3, Least
Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative (LEDPA) selection
meeting."
NCDOT RESPONSE: Comment noted. Alternative 1 was selected as the LEDPA at a
NEPA/Section 404 merger team meeting held on February 23, 2010. In
addition, Alternative 1 was modified to avoid and minimize impacts to
farms. The NEPA/Section 404 merger team concurred with these
modifications as part of concurrence point 4A at the February 2010
meeting.
US Fish and Wildlife Service
COMMENT: "There are no federally threatened or endangered species listed for Martin
County. We believe that this FEA adequately addresses the existing fish
and wildlife resources, the waters and wetlands of the United States, and
the potential impacts of this project on these resources."
NCDOT RESPONSE: Comment noted.
NC Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services
COMMENT: "Based on the potential secondary, cumulative and direct impacts,
Alternatives 1 or 2N would minimize the adverse impacts on the
agricultural resources on the study area and should be selected for this
project."
NCDOT RESPONSE: Comment noted. Alternative 1 was selected as the LEDPA at a
NEPA/Section 404 merger team meeting held on February 23, 2010. In
addition, Alternative 1 was modified to avoid and minimize impacts to
farms. The NEPA/Section 404 merger team concurred with these
modifications as part of concurrence point 4A at the February 2010
meeting.
NC Division of Water Quality
COMMENT: "This project is being planned as part of the 404/NEPA Merger Process.
As a participating team member, NCDWQ will continue to work with the
team."
NCDOT RESPONSE: Comment noted.
NC Wildlife Resources Commission
COMMENT: "This project is being review[ed] through the NEPA/404 Merger 01
process. We will continue to assess the impacts associated with the
remaining alternatives in preparation for the selection of the LEDPA and
for further avoidance and minimization measures."
NCDOT RESPONSE: Comment noted.
C. Public Hearing
In accordance with 23 U.S.C. 128, the North Carolina Department of
Transportation certifies that a public hearing for the subject project has been held and the
social, economic, and environmental impacts, consistency with local community planning
goals and objectives, and comments from individuals have been considered in the
selection of the recommended alternative for the project.
A formal public hearing was held for the project on September 19, 2009 in
Williamston at Martin Community College. Approximately 72 citizens attended the
hearing. Overall, 23 comments were received and documented.
Four people spoke at the hearing and 19 written comments were received. The
majority of comments focused on eliminating Alternative 4 (four comments) and
revisiting Alternative 2S, which was dropped from consideration following detailed
environmental surveys (six comments). Those asking for Alternative 2S to be
reconsidered were concerned about the effect of Alternatives 1 and 2N on two farms.
Concerns were also raised regarding pedestrian safety, traffic noise, neighborhood
beautification, well contamination, and drainage issues as a result of the proposed
construction of NC 125 Bypass.
Following the hearing, a subsequent meeting was held on February 9, 2010 with
local property owners regarding impacts to actively farmed land. A modification to
Alternative 1 (Alternative 1 A), which would reduce impact to farms, was shown to
property owners affected. In response to citizen concerns regarding pedestrian safety,
NCDOT will reevaluate the need for a traffic signal at the proposed intersection of
NC 125 Bypass with SR 1420 (McCaskey Road) prior to construction. In regards to
traffic noise, a traffic noise analysis was conducted during detailed environmental studies
(see Section V-J of the environmental assessment) and it was found that no noise
mitigation would be required as a result of the project. Other comments were noted.
D. NEPA/404 Merger Process
As discussed in Section VI-C of the environmental assessment, this project has
followed the NEPA/404 merger process. The merger process is an interagency procedure
integrating the regulatory requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act into the
National Environmental Policy Act decision making process.
A merger team, composed of representatives of the Federal Highway
Administration, NCDOT, the Army Corps of Engineers and other federal and state
resource agencies, formally concurs on project decisions made at key project milestones.
Prior to the environmental assessment, the NEPA/404 merger team met and obtained
concurrence on the purpose and need, alternatives to study in detail, and bridging
decisions. Copies of these concurrence forms are available in Appendix D of the
environmental assessment.
At a meeting held on February 23, 2010, the NEPA/404 merger team concurred
on the selection of Alternative 1 as the least environmentally damaging practicable
alternative (CP3) for the proposed project. A copy of the signed concurrence form for
CP3 is included in Appendix C of this document.
The merger team also discussed avoidance and minimization measures for the
selected alternative, including modifying the alignment for Alternative 1. The merger
team concurred on the avoidance and minimization measures (CP4A) and selected the
modified alignment as Alternative IA. Measures taken to avoid and minimize are
discussed below in Section VI-A. A copy of the signed concurrence form for CNA is
included in the Appendix C of this document.
VI. REVISIONS TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
A. Avoidance and Minimization
The following changes to the typical section of the project have been made in
order to further minimize impacts to wetlands and streams:
Steeper side slopes (3:1) will be used in jurisdictional areas.
Side slopes steeper than 3:1 will be investigated during project design for the
UT 3 stream crossing.
The horizontal alignment will cross wetland WM at its narrowest point.
In addition, the Alternative 1 A modifications to Alternative 1 will avoid wetlands
WL and WG and streams UT 1 and UT 5. The modification will reduce the stream
impacts by 174 feet and increase the wetland impacts by 0.03 acre. It will also avoid
approximately 5.4 acres of actively farmed land and impact fewer homes than the original
alignment for Alternative 1.
The NEPA/404 merger team concurred on these measures at a meeting held on
February 23, 2010. The signed concurrence form is included in Appendix C of this
document. Current anticipated impacts of the project are shown on Table 4 of this
document.
B. Right of Way and Access Control
Following completion of the environmental assessment, the decision was made to
acquire a 200-foot right of way for new location portions of the project, rather than the
175-foot proposed right of way discussed in Sections I-A and IV-B of the environmental
assessment.
C. Relocation of Residences and Businesses
Alternative IA, the modification to the original alignment of the selected
alternative, will require the relocation of three homes and no businesses. This is six
fewer homes and one less business than the original Alternative 1 alignment would have
relocated. A copy of the relocation report for Alternative IA is provided in Appendix B
of this document. The relocation report for Alternative 1 and the other detailed study
alternatives is included in Appendix B of the environmental assessment.
D. Corrections to the Environmental Assessment
Summary
A typographical error exists on Table S 1 of the environmental assessment. This
table presents the total cost of Alternative 1 as one million dollars. This table should
have instead shown the total cost for Alternative 1 as 15.3 million dollars. Table 6 of this
document presents corrections to Table S 1 and Table 5 of the environmental assessment.
Table 7 of this document presents an update to Table 1 of the environmental assessment
which includes the correct cost estimates for the project alternatives at the time the
environmental assessment was completed.
Structures
Section IV-1 of the environmental assessment states that a one barrel, 10-foot by
5-foot reinforced concrete box culvert is proposed to carry Alternative 4 over unnamed
tributary 10.
Following completion of the environmental assessment, an error was discovered
in the drainage area calculation for this crossing. The actual drainage area is smaller than
originally believed. Therefore, a pipe smaller than 72 inches will be sufficient to carry
unnamed tributary 10 under the proposed bypass.
Also, Section IV-I, the environmental assessment states that Alternatives I and
2N do not cross unnamed tributary 10. This statement is incorrect. All three of the
detailed alternatives cross this stream and a pipe smaller than 72 inches is proposed to
convey this stream under all of the alternatives.
Stream Impacts
An error was discovered in the impact calculations for unnamed tributary 10 for
all of the current study alternatives. Table 5 and Table 6 below presents the correct
stream impacts for the alternatives presented in the environmental assessment.
10
TABLE 5
CORRECTION TO TABLE 9 OF EA
PROJECT EFFECTS ON STREAMS
Effects of Alternative
(Feet)
Stream 1 2N 4
UTI 112 83 0
UT3 50 263 0
UT4 0 14 0
UT5 233 192 0
UT6 0 11 0
UT10 201* 628* 257*
Total 596 1,191 257
* - Corrected impacts.
These incorrect impacts were also presented on Table S1 and Table 5 of the
environmental assessment. A corrected version of these tables is presented below.
11
TABLE 6
CORRECTION TO TABLES S1 AND 5 OF EA
ALTERNATIVE COMPARISONS
Alternative
I 2N 4
Residential Relocatees 9 11 ISt=
Business Relocatees 1 Ef-t

Wetlands Affected (Acres)

1.59

3.15 w ,j4
#2')
'3 28=6
m
Streams Affected (Feet) 596 257
Open Water Impacts (Acres) 0 0 0
Protected Species Habitat? No No No
Effect Protected Species? No No No
Effect Historic Properties? No No No
Involve Section 4(F)? No No No
Receptors Impacted By Traffic Noise 2 3 y8%k
Forested Areas Affected (Acres)* 14.3 i'25 4• 9.2
Farmland Affected (Acres) 45.4 43.6 4?7p5
Length New Location (Miles) 2.0 1.8 2.0
Total Length (Miles) 2.7 2.6 3.5
Total Cost
(Millions)
$15.3
$15.6 r s-
$20
4k.
Impacts computed based on approximate width required for future four-
lane typical section for the project.
Shaded cells in table indicate highest impact or most unfavorable response.
*Forested acres based on forested areas shown on aerial photograph.
12
Project Cost Estimates
The incorrect stream impacts discussed above affected the wetland and stream
mitigation cost estimates presented in the environmental assessment.
TABLE 7
CORRECTION TO TABLE 1 OF EA
PROJECT COST ESTIMATES
Alt.1 Alt. 2N Alt 4
Right of Way Acquisition
(Including Utility Relocation) $3,325,695 $3,707,772 $6,471,720
Construction $11,400,000 $10,800,000 $13,300,000
Wetland/Stream Mitigation $582,000 $1,087,000 $484,000
Total $15,307,695 $15,594,772 $20,255,720
Minority/Low-Income Populations
A typographical error exists in the fourth paragraph of this section of the
environmental assessment. The first sentence of this paragraph states, "A citizens
informational workshop was held for the project on December 13, 2001...". The date for
the citizens informational workshop listed in this sentence is incorrect. The citizens
informational workshop for this project was held on January 9, 2003.
E. Update to the Environmental Assessment
Archaeological Resources
In a letter dated May 13, 2005, the State Historic Preservation Office requested an
intensive archaeological study of the selected alternative project area (see Appendix A of
the environmental assessment). A project commitment included in the environmental
assessment was that an intensive archaeological survey would be conducted for the
selected alternative.
An intensive archaeological survey has been conducted for Alternative IA. No
sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places were found. The
State Historic Preservation Office concurred with this finding in a letter dated December
23, 2010 (see the Appendix of this document).
13
The survey report stated a property owner mentioned the possible existence of a
family cemetery on property (Whitley Farm) adjacent to the selected alternative on the
east side of existing NC 125 near the northern terminus of the project. NCDOT will
investigate this area and determine whether or not graves are located within the proposed
right of way prior to right of way acquisition.
VII. BASIS FOR FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Based upon environmental studies and coordination with appropriate federal,
state, and local agencies, it is the finding of the Federal Highway Administration and the
North Carolina Department of Transportation that the proposed action will have no
significant impact upon the quality of the human environment. Therefore, an
environmental impact statement will not be required.
The following persons can be contacted for additional information concerning this
proposal and statement:
John F. Sullivan, III, P.E.
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
310 New Bem Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-1442
[phone]
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Manager,
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
NC Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
[phone]
14

PROPOSED NC 125 BYPASS
APPENDIX A
AGENCY COMMENTS ON
THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
and concurrence meeting notices at uratthews.ka liYQ-Dcna.qv. Thank you for the
opportunity to comment and if you have any questions please call me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Christopher A. Militscher, REM, CHMM
Merger Team Representditive
NEPA Program Office
For: Heinz J. Mueller, Chief
EPA Region 4 NEPA Program Office
Cc: W. Biddiecome, USAGE-Washington Field Office
D. Wainwright, NCDWQ
C. Coleman, Fl-lWA
A-2

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office.Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
May 14, 2009
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Environmental Management Director, PDEA
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
Dear Dr. Thorpe:
MAY i ? Ing
? rJ ii t;= ,
• lrscb
This letter is in response to your May 11, 2009 letter which requested comments from the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service) on the Federal Environmental Assessment (FEA) for the proposed NC 125
Williamston Bypass in Martin County, North Carolina (TIP No. R-3826). These comments are provided
in accordance with provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(c) and
section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543).
According to the FEA, the North Carolina Department.of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to widen
existing NC 125 between. SR 1 182 (East College Road) and US 64 Alternative to three lanes and
construct a NC 125 bypass of Williamston from US 64 Alternate to existing NC 125 northwest of
Williamston. The bypass would consist of a two-lane roadway on multi-lane right of way and would be
built mostly on new location. There are currently three corridors under consideration (Alternatives 1, 2N
and 4). Wetland and stieain impacts for each alternative range from 1.59 to 3.28 acres and -0 to 771 linear
feet, respectively.
The Service has previously provided comments and recommendations through the combined
NEPAISection 404 Merger Process. We do not have any additional comments or concerns at this time.
The Service does not have a preferred alternative at this time and will defer that decision until
Concurrence Point 3.
There are no federally threatened or endangered species Ikted for Martin County. Wo bMil,ve. tbat this
FEA adequately addresses the existing fish and wildlife resources, the waters and wetlands of the United
States, and the potential impacts of this proposed project on these resources. The Service appreciates the
opportunity to review this project. If you have any questions regarding our response, please contact Mr.
Gary Jordan at [phone], ext. 32.
Sincerely,
" f ` ??h
Pete BenJamin
Field Supervisor
cc: Chris Militscher, USEPA, Raleigh, NC
Travis Wilson, NCWRC, Creedmoor, NC
Bill Biddlecome, USACE, Washington, NC
John Sullivan, FHWA, Raleigh, NC
A-3
'wed
Department of Administration
Beverly Eaves Perdue, Governor
June 15, 2009
North Carolina
Mr: Gregory Thorpe
N.C..Dept. of Transportation
Project Development Branch
1548 Mai]:Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
Britt Cobb, Secretary
Re: SCH File # 09-E-4220-0324; EA; NC 125 Williamstou Bypass; Martin County, TIP Project
No. R-3826
Dear Mr. Thorpe:
The above referenced environmental impact information has been submitted to the State Clearinghouse
under the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act. According to G.S. 113A-10, when a
state agency is required to prepare.an environmental document under the provisions of federal law, the
environmental document meets the provisions of the State Environmental Policy Act. Attached to this
letter for your consideration are the comments made by agencies in the course of this review.
If any further environmental review documents are prepared for this, project, they should be forwarded to
this office for intergovernmental review.
Should you have any questions; please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely.
Valerie W. McMillan, Director
State Environmental Review Clearinghouse
Attachments
cc: Region Q
Jay McInnis
Mailin 4ddreu: Telephone: [phone] Location Address:
8' Fax (919)733!1371 1 16 West Jones Street
1301 Mail Service Culler Rvleigh. Nonh Carolina
Raleigh. NC 27699-1301 State Cuuricr y31-01-00
e-nrai( valerie. ry.mtnrilldn(n?,rtoa. nc. yon,
An Fgaol OppornmiylAfrmarive Action F.m1,1oJ'er
A-4
NORTH CAROLINA STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW
COUNTY: MARTIN
MS HOLLY 1GILROY
CLEARINGHOUSE COORDINATOR
DEPT OF AGRICULTURE
1001 MSC - AGRICULTURE BLDG
,RALEIGH NC
REVIEW DISTRIBUTION
F02: HIGHWAYS AND ROADS STATE NUMBER: 09-E-9220-0324
DATE RECEIVED: 05/12/2009
AGENCY RESPONSE: 06/08/2009
REVIEW CLOSED: 06/12/2009
CC&PS - DIV•OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
DENR - COASTAL MGT
DF.NR LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS
DEPT OF AGRICULTURE
DEPT OF CULTURAL RESOURCES
DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION
MID EAST COMMISSION
PROJECT INFORMATION
APPLICANT: N.C. Dept.. of Transportation
TYPE: National. Environmental Policy Act
Environmental Assessment-

DFSC: NC 125 Williamston Bypass, Martin County, TIP Project No. R-3826 - widening
existing NC 125 between SR 1.182 and US 64 Alternate to 3l.anes and constructing a
bypass of Willi.amston from US 64 to existing NC 125 northwest of Williamston
(approx. 2.5 , miles)
'The attached Project has been submitted to the N. C. State Clearinghouse for
intergovernmental. review.. Please review and submit your response by the above
indicated date to 1301 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27.699-1301.
If additional review time is needed, please contact this. office at --[phone]
AS A RESULT OF THIS REVIEW THE FOLLOWING IS SUBMITTED: 1-1 NO COMMENT Z COMMENTS ATTACHED
SIGNED BY: DATE (0-5;/{)47
A-5
o Po.s
North Carolina Department of Agriculture Maximilian Merrill
Steven W. Troxler
Commissioner and Consumer Services Environmental Programs
Agricultural Services
76" 76gr

Ms. Valerie McMillan 1?
State, Clearinghouse
inistration
f Ad
t
t +2 ?
m
o
N.C. Departmen 9
1301 Mail Service Center
r` t4"
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1301 y
u
a

Staten: 09-E4220-0324 t _ fir, ?
1
x;;-,
RE: 125 NCwilliamston Bypass, Martin Couniy
Dear Ms McMillan.
This Environmental Assessment shows that Alternative I br 2N Would be the alternatives which would minimize the loss of
farmland. In order to select between the Alternatives I and 2N, it would be prudent to look at which alternative would
fragment fewer farmland parcels, which probably.is 2N. It also seems that Alternatives Land 2N would also have less
secondary and cumulative impacts on the areas farmland by keeping growth closer to the town's. center.
Based on the potential secondary, cumulative and direct impacts, Alternatives I or2N would minimize -the_adverse,
impacts on. the agricultural resources of the study area•.and should be selected for this project.
Gratefully,
Maximilian Merrill
E-mail; maximilian.merrill@n=ail.net
1001 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina, 27699-1001 [phone] • Fax [phone]
TTY: 1-800-735-2962 Voice: 1-877-735-8200
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
A-6
d SrArf
QWn??
ww
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Peter B. Sandbeck, Administrator
Beverly Eaves Perdue, Governor
Linda A. CarGsla, Secretary
Jeffrey J. Crom, Deputy Secretary
December 23, 2010
MEMORANDUM
Office of Archives and History
Division of Historical Resources
David Brook, Director
TO: Matt Wilkerson
Office of Human Environment
NCDOT Division of Highwavvs(s
Y,,?
FROM: Peter Sandbeck OA4
,Te SUBJECT: Archaeological Survey for the Proposed NC 125 (Williamston) Bypass, R-3826, Martin County,
ER 01-9766
Thank you for your memorandum of November 30, 2010. We have reviewed the report provided by your
office for the above project and offer the following comments.
The report presents the results of an archaeological survey for the proposed NC 125 Bypass in Martin County.
The project corridor was approximately 1.98 miles long and 450 feet in width. The field methods and rates of
coverage employed for this work were appropriate for the variable conditions of the landscape encountered
within the project area.
Four sites and one isolated find were recorded as a result of the fieldwork. These sites include: 31MT188,
31MT189, 31MT190, and 31MT191. The isolated find consisted of a single 1946 one-cent piece and was not
assigned a site number. No further work was recommended for the isolated find. We concur with this
recommendation.
Sites 31MT188, 31MT189, 31MT190, and 31MT191 were recommended as ineligible for inclusion on the
National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). No further work was recommended for these four sites. We
concur with these recommendations.
The landowner of the Whitley Farm (31MT191) indicated the possible existence of a family cemetery located in
an area to the south of the presently-existing domestic structure. Further work was recommended for the
landform containing the possible cemetery in the event that ground disturbance is scheduled for the area. In
this event, it was recommended that either the area first be stripped of plowzone and examined for evidence of
interments, or ground-disturbing activities be monitored by an archaeologist. We concur with these
recommendations.
The report meets our office's guidelines and those of the Secretary of the Interior. There are no corrections
which need to be addressed in terms of the final report. The present version of this document can serve as the
final report.
A-7
Location: 109 East)ones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 Telephone/Fax: [phone]-6599
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR
Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919-807-6579. In all future
communication concerning this project, please cite the above-referenced tracking number.
A-8
NVtI'1'tl I,;AHVLINA ,'I'A1M: C:1.P:AtClNlitiVUJY?
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW
COUNTY: MARTIN
F02- HIGHWAYS AND ROADS.
.MS RENEE GLEDHiLL-EARLEY
CLEARINGHOUSE COORDINATOR
DEPT OF CULTURAL RESOURCES
STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE
MSC 4617 -,ARCHIVES BUILDING
,RALEIGH NC
REVIEW DISTRIBUTION
CCFPS - DIV Or EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
DENR - COASTAL MGT
DENR LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS
DEPT OF AGRICULTURE
-DEPT OF CULTURAL RESOURCES
DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION
MID EAST COMMIE SiON
PROJECT INFORMATION
APPLICANT: N.C. Dept. of Transportation
TYPE: National Environmental Policy Act
TYPE:
;
?. .
C
`7L? ILL?L %t ?? ? ? J .
'> _ VJLr
Environmental Assessment he? ('14(u9
DESC: NC 125 Williamston Bypass, Martin County, TIP Project No. R-3826- widening
existing NC 125 between SR 1182 and US 64 Alternate to 3 lanes and constructing a
:bypass of Williamston from :US 64 to existing NC 125 northwest of Williamston
(approx. 2.5 miles)
The attached project has been. submitted to the N. C. State Clearinghouse for
intergovernmental review. Please. review and submit. your respgnse by the above
indicated date to 1301 Mail Scrvice Cencer., Raleigh NC 27699-1301-.
If. additional review time is needed, please, contact this office at [phone].
AS, A RESULT OF THIS REVIEW THE FOLLOWING. IS SUBMITTED:
G`
SIGNED BY:

A-9
T+ q
a ???s
ARDt4 lvE
STATE NUMBER: 09-E-4220-0324.
DATE RECEIVED: 05/12/2009
AGENCY RESPONSE: 06/08/2009
REVIEW CLOSED: 06/12/2009
to 01
-9 1 1, c.
NO ?COMENT I I COMMENTS ATTACHED
.DATE: t - lq'CDR
MAY 14 2009
NCENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Beverly Eaves Perdue
Governor

r =':1
.Z' "
r =
JUN 2eos =-'
f
MEMORANDUM c
RECEINED

TO: Valerie McMillan
State clearinghouse

FROM: Melba McGee f
EnvironmentaY Review Coordinator
RE: 09-0324 EA- NC 125 Williamston Bypass. in Martin County
DATE: June,10, 2009
Dec Freeman.
Secretary
The Department' of Environment and.Natural Resources has reviewed the
proposed information. The applicant is encouraged to consider the attached
recommendations. Addressing these comments during the review process and/or
during the NEPA Merger Process will avoid delays during the permit phase.
-Thank you for the opportunity to review.
Attachments
1601 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1601 OnrthC1T?1]Ila
Phone: [phone] \ FAX: [phone] Internet: wwvv.enr.state.nc.us orthCaQ!!?
An Epuai opportunity \Afffir7atine Actior: Employer- 50% Recycled I 1G-i. Post Consumer Paper
A-10
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND
NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
Inter-Agency Project Review Response
Project Name: USDOT/Fed Hwy Type of Project
Admin/NCDOT, Div. Of
Hwys
Comments provided by
? Regional Program Person
a Regional Supervisor for Public Water Supply Section
? Central Office program person
Project #
09-0329
Martin
EA - NCI-25 Witliamston
Bypass. Martin County. TIP
Proiect No. R-3826
Name: Joey White Telephone,#: [phone] Date Recd: _05119/09_
t Date Revd: _05/27/09_
Progra m within Division of Environmental Health:
X? Public Water Supply
? Other, Name of Program
Respo nse (check all applicable):
s
d
t
ti
t /51
as propo
e
o projec
on
No objec JVN 2 ,l„
'J9
F]

No comment

RFr=3n =0
4..
Insufficient information to complete review
? Comments attached
x] See comments below
Public Water Supply approval' is required` for the relocation of existing water mains
prior to construction. If DOT specifications are to be used only plan submittal is
required. Please contact the Town.of Willianiston and the Martin County Water
Department to verify utility location and coordinatc`the relocation..
• Plans and specifications for new water distribution lines that are two inches or larger
in diameter must be submitted to the Public Water Supply - Plan Review Section for
approval prior to construction.
Return to':
Public Water Supply Section
Environmental Review Coordinator
for the Division of Environmental Health
A-11
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND Project Number
NATURAL RESOURCES 09-0324
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH County
Martin
Inter-Agency Project Review Response
Project Name USDOT/Fed Hwy Type of Project EA - NC 125 Williamston
Admin/NCDOT, Div: of Bypass, Martin County, TIP
Proiect.No. R-3826.
H{vVs
Comments provided by:
? Regional Program Person
® Regional Supervisor for Public Water Supply Section
? Central Office program person
Name Harry Bailey-Washington RO
Telephone number:
Program within Division of Environmental Health:
? Public Water Supply
? Other, Name of Program:
Response (check all applicable):
? No objection to project as proposed
? No comment
? Insufficient information to complete review
? Comments attached
? See comments below
e?°n'gog
s? ` i:
ilcrllycls
Mhy 1970
nc11: -:<?
W?n v^,w a.?..N.
Attu z?liat
Public Water Supply Section
Environmental Review Coordinator for the
Division of Environmental Health
Date 05/14/2009
A-12
DE
NA
DIVISION C

Project Name
Hwys
NT- AND Project Number
09-0324
HEALTH County
Martin
Type of'Project - EA - NC 125 wiuiamstoa
Bvoass. Martin County. TIP
Project No. R-3926.
The applicant should be advised that plans and specifications for all water system
improvements must be approved by the Division of Environmental Health prior to the
award of a contract or the initiation of construction (as required by 15A NCAC 18C
.0300et. seq.). For information, contact the Public Water Supply Section, (919)
733-2321.
? This project will be classified as a non-community publio.water supply and must comply
with state and federal drinking water monitoring requirements. For more information the
applicant should contact the Public Water Supply Section, [phone].
? if this project is constructed as proposed, we will recommend closure of feet of
adjacent waters to the harvest of shellfish. For information regarding the shellfish
sanitation program, the applicant should. contact the Shellfish Sanitation Section at (252)
726-6827.
? The soil disposal area(s) proposed for this project may produce a mosquito breeding
problem. For information concerning appropriate mosquito control measures, the
applicant should contact the Public Health Pest Management Section at [phone].
? The applicant should be advised that prior to the removal or demolition of dilapidated
structures, a extensive rodent control program may be necessary in order to prevent the
migration of the rodents to adjacent areas: For information conceming rodent control,
contact the local health department or the Public Health Pest Management Section at
[phone],
? The applicant should be advised-to contact.the local health department regarding their
requirements for septic tank installations (as required under 15A NCAC-18A. 1900 et.
sep,). For information concerning septic tank and other on-site waste disposal methods,
contact the Onr Site Wastewater Section at [phone].
? The applicant should be advised to contact the local health `department regarding the
sanitary facilities required for this project.
? If existing water lines will be relocated during the construction, plans for the water line
relocation must be submitted to the Division of Environmental Health, Public Water
Supply Section, Technical Services Branch, 1634 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North
Carolina 27699-1634, [phone].
® For Regional and Central office comments, see the reverse side of this form.
Jim McRight PWSS 0 511 412 00 9
Reviewer Section/Branch Date
A-13
THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY
A-14
Statc of -North Carolina ;
Department of•Environmenl and,NA to mF Resources a4,:..ing nttkc itit?r ?'.'r
ItiTERCiO\'F.RNN1E-NT4LRtVlk}V PROJECT COMMENTS hja ctr:•;I:,nc;,y?
.'. R:; rc: t:-,•-nitu I r.ha•e.";n:J-khItrrVR lvrr;:itl>JX'4"'I..,..:a4_"v.,; rrcet?t.M.a'c::fr:lne.Ja re,i ?5r ,nttr:.. iuh h, C\n::
Cs,d:.,.t. a.+..tln vin +..4<-r:;; L4.,, ,curt .:,^at±.-=.L:>v: cq .n _ az1 CiPf . ca,) :-.'.. o?;lr fe:.-r•?.r'.r :,r,^. All
i
:
-lsph ally I?t h o in f 1v on-:l ?.a4, v i,plkNio?
(hrD Pcnn't t< Ix MY nt f nvrta.t tt ; :+ ,i+: t n .1 a;l l dl ar t- a`? tt •xr- su crtN ti. Sst iv a, I - '.k::,:.
M =n ,n.yynmt xrJ <.vnn ^u >t NLC1 :a_tlr. trs s ^rt. z Ilrtj ata. d APD S F^•n uqx :.xp _.... Lc Iri r 4 j
; 'dtxnlr.,'_:rt.+t tc. .,: :.ni •.h... pI•Kr.u.__Gf\PDSSrt•n.-. n?.,k:w .n!_rf.
-..1 Pr _.,'LSUSt.:c*.ra.o:mraa:rv tuft rv'?
- ------------
-------
?07 11
ry z am! w-.., tc +r••tu tl (..1 i. ,' i
I .,-,. I'll. i. ?:. P xrr a !I.It rf n,C .k;alt.r._ttl,Avt`.Lf•uaIIC+'an?ltd: d :`> ter. a.
' (Plr to r, d t rl 1•n: t t
f ly^pf ,n tis'[s uF, a ,....:sj n^i 1 rc "c7 F /
P
i IPa -m. tt._vv raj rs Aiz? n,i ?v-:t Icn marf rr+cma na c>n ta{tu?, 1r1 n r ci •n:.
f
t
t I r vr> arul'nt [ m..ssonSSa: e r I i.t \C iC ,.-.rv,,.t : rnmr w..n .b;* c.r a3r:ti vsl rrq.t _.::: Is cnd s
?4["CI d![U cluir r)0.A >I _ j;inull 60.t 1. 11 1
Rk r s to rstnrla vrma Irn' or1:{tiaii Fail y:u {pl.,.lxatwr nw: 1 s?tl r.IrJ=:lrsa v'1: -Jjs pr,otroc ??, I? I rrl r,,.it
I t f ._ 1
f.. a, -I:mnn atc .c '•h4 hlv i?:4k' h :.' _
I o x r - a, a n ?: ' "f
4
/t m: 1 el:
t I
i t l_i wrf r e i u IC t.?.,"{L { 9 .?
_ j-'1 dtn n 1 Pvf..snn l.tn t l,t t.i.: mu tv f nl •i ?xy ? t,.ra+ n' du rlnnk a t ?1, Nle h xf h._,?`??„.•. i
_ f :n,na:p..cm'+1c20 ails ^e aJ rr x rci , rr f ad Rxn av ",.h Gnir Q rw 01u lzro,C?nAa,
i j
?Crc tl i. ICrtz+3n wer fiS:,l, M1gn..l 1, xu; t.i,r.u.S6J la.rch'.Ix<a nr ar>,:1laiaa..e.. ..,: t..raer c4r•+ul+tiknrs S..
it U>aeC0.fm 11_cs. ? ._ _?
j y ? *P^ru or, rd arts crsnp- N n~ 'a. r^ f i•iatr n t \t'tXff s ; rou! '<* r t. 1-araas tt x U, Yh1 ,t n o-> ,; ar>•
:^` ._.. anU ir.4a1' 'r f.,; i c -'+ ..: .. +r_u.. ?;ytae S., ..._ +cra i is ?ui. :v -r cnm _is?:,?s f. r.. I
. i V 1 r ml ual + , h rn tr 9 t 1 S \ U( xi '::
• ,c JY .LT.YYJd fJ. u.Y :. >._^i O. F:]?A:_ , ).: C3'gv' ?t :. ?: .:
,11.s.:-InSx:arm N, CC T.>ssn £ac:t A¢tnv.cs .. ,•\na.\. Gsi _- da,
ii) t' t -? non tt. RCSnIr tr J nr J I.?,f
x--,, : en 7,,! dmmq? 30...91 s •e Irt r -ed o iv chra - i7
7 ' °' t n in \ ( ssi-r ur>, a, s. rs I: q rsicd ..1 ..a91 n davx [+rk is aRn314tras'(arn ' I
+ w
"!A
;
'r'-n nr; Fair. a, i'
:, I1: 1 C qu..lhn'a:r.T tl ,mp3m Liam, u.,I,twn
i. n l:,r-onlsyt.-; 1AN a11'I'uoc , i rl me
a,
i ,f r s+4 : + d c+ n rr r 1av: i:ff tc : a ,. 1.,,
V ?'?Vll xl,t?? t.:.fi••-.. 1,. ,t i lr..-..,.? TiYA-15

t7'^f ' C` a i:i
rr_x Pa -. I Inw
rr ?; Ln-c.nx Irnm 1
f i11Eri.`•:I7 >PITIAL AM 'CA rinN Pii()('BPL'd P.j nl Rl iUl:<cAIEN
v
-. _.
i SF'I a? - Tcuf r .hl?R cn ??,?S -nt '+C"ar z:I t.a
II.t: I
Pcnmi:tn:!4:1 n,I.mare o•". at p•+ea n.- p-Wb!. CN:.?or.hull. vrnn ulv.4.nmm, D: lu„y,' N; ?
,AT
.
r
t..aJtoinE ICI ?K Iulc, snS ¢cuta[ionY

F I p,?I- C'Sn:Pn'M Pf 14. 'ICU Odr`'S p.qor ln KS's: nl!t`491i, ITT{
IA]UI C V' n h) I] S :AYIJII Op(CK3ltUn UI R 1 5
rsb ??nl, v6asd ?n gln tlri iv is chv 3. i t10c11>,i cv-y.-t .:5 ?s h.
1 ?s
+. Iak.SCm...ua:ec Prcai:
..- nlsir,1 culle h pruo t o f oo, 1h;p of I p,ll I r I
t 'oalni
\'A
-
1

+r„
t 1 7\I;:c \n 2. I L.i. .. I
is a (
1t N ?: rql -.. mzrt'illC"0.3UCn"

vm,t l"cr..:w'.:Iki'"R?rlq••cil
]. ii.
------------ --
IV
E
NC C. ,.,.cal. M Id:r._7s:i"R]I ,NC.27r, I
'.....by'Iq,.e4lr.....5.t,S

••r a:IJG Of II IVOPV; iq mJ7 5mf & 1 r'IwpWr'U 1- XN.t aff .pl.ti il:S r5)].d.Sf-? is-14111(!ai\RC%wtllak'.nµf141(tll _--- -l^-.
I I
T
'
` j l°oall. lianfn a.315i..NC_4C Ei 1If/+1.hrm.v-vtaK I v. Srnq h-Gd
..•
1 f51 J. :ifU 1 4fi Qlra::A.. n If' K:. ?1 - .CJ ... _...._ -...._I. ___
Oh--t I
i
..7a
x101'! i, '?;9
`
au?009 m
?
?
i
t
sy
i'SL?•:tJ ?42

A
n-,
---------- - - ----
RE(AONAL OFFICES
Questions reglirdirtc dies permits should be addres&ed to the Regional Offiwc marked helow,
.1 Asheville Reggional Office
2090 US Highway 70
1'%kannan Oa. NC2S"4
{828) 2964500
'ay-ettcvillc Rc?ion:0 Office
?''? North Green Stmut.'Suile'14
F vcm-Alc. NC: 23301 50-3
( 41.01 433-33,00
i Mooresville Regional Office Wilmington Regional Office
6110 East Center Avenue. Suite 301 12? Cardirtal Drive Fstensior:
Mooresville. NC 28115 \1 ihninaton. \C 28405
(-04) 663-1699 (9.10) ?-6-7'15
Raleigh Regional Office
3800 Barrett Drive. Suite 101
Ralci0i, NC 2.7609
1919)791-4200
Washington Regional Office
94 i Washington Square Niall
Washington. NC 2;389
[phone]
Winston-salcm Regional 0MCv
585 W;Wa "la+,tvn Slrec•t
Winsron-Salem. NIC 2710'.'
(336-) 771-50011
A-16
Beverly Eaves Perdue
Governor
MEMORANDUM
June 1. 2009
41-1
R"Ma
F„+ f
yS:t.?'t:jtJ
Dee freeman
Secretary
To: Melba McGee, Environmental Coordinator, Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental
Affairs
From: David Wainwright, Division of Water Quality 010
Subject: Comments on the Environmental Assessment related to proposed NC 125 (Williamston
Bypass) from existing SR 1 182 (East College Road) to existing NC 125 (northwest of
Williamston), Martin County, Federal Aid Project No. STP-125(1); State Project No.
8.109656 1, TIP R-3826.
SHC No. 09-0324
This office has reviewed the referenced document dated April 2609. The NC Division of Water Quality
(NCDWQ)"is responsible for the issuance of the Section 401 Water Quality. Certification' for activities that
impact waters ofthe.U.S., including wetlands. It is our understanding that the project_as presented will
result in impacts to jurisdictional wetlands. streams; and other surface waters. The NCDWQ offers the
following comments.based on review of the aforementioned.document:
Project Specific Comments:
1. This project is being planned as.part of the 404/NEPA,Merger Process. As a participating team
member, NCDWQ will continue to work with the team.
General Comments:
2. Future environmental documents should provide a detailed and itemized presentation of the
proposed impacts to wetlands and stream's with corresponding mapping. If mitigation is necessary
as required by. 15A NCAC 2H.0506(h), it is preferable to present a conceptual (if not finalized)
mitigation plan with the environmental documentation. Appropriate mitigation plans will be
required prior to issuance of a 401 Water Quality` Certification.
3. Environmental assessment alternatives should consider: design criteria that reduce the impacts to
streams and wetlands from storm water runoff. These alternatives should.include road designs that
allow for treatment of the storm water runoff through best management practices as detailed in the
most recent version of NCDWQ's Stornnvater Best Management Practices, such as.grassed swales,
buffer areas, preformed scour holes, retention basins; etc.
4. After the selection. of the preferred alternative and prior to an issuance of the 401 Water Quality
Certification, the NCDOT is respectfully reminded that they will need to demonstrate the avoidance
and minimization of impacts to wetlands (and streams) to the maximum extent practical. In
accordance with the Environmental Management Commission's Rules (I 5A NCAC 2H.0506(h)),
mitigation will be required for impacts of greater than 1 acre to wetlands. In the. event that
mitigation is required, the mitigation plan should be designed to replace appropriate lost functions
Transportation Permitting Unit
1650 flag Service Center, Ralegh, NO'C? Carolina 27699-1650
Location: 2321 Crabtree Blvd., Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone; 919-733.17861 FAX: 919-733a93
Internet httpPh2o.enrstate.nd.us%ncvetlandsl
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and
Division of Water Duality
Coleer, H. Sullins
Director
NorthiCarolina
Naturally
an Equa OUCMuM) AKr,.uure?ckl EmycYa A-17
and values. The NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program may be available for use-as wetland
mitigation.
5. Inaccordance with the Environmental Management Commission's Rules (15A NCAC.-2H.0506[h)),
mitigation will be required for impacts of greater than 150 linear feet to any single perennial stream.
In the event that mitigation is required, themitigation plan should be designed to replace
appropriate lost functions and values. The NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program maybe available
for use as stream mitigation.
6. Future documentation, including the 401 Water Quality Certification Application, should continue
to include an itemized listing of the proposed wetland and stream impacts with corresponding
mapping.
NCDWQ is very concerned with sediment and erosion impacts that could result from this project.
NCDOT should address these concerns by describing the, potential impacts that may occur to the
aquatic environments and any mitigating factors that would reduce the impacts.
8. NCDOT is respectfully reminded that all impacts, including but not limited to, bridging, fill,
excavation and clearing, and rip rap to jurisdictional wetlands, streams, and riparian buffers need to
be includedIn the final impact calculations. These impacts, in addition to any construction impacts,
temporary or otherwise, also need to be included as part of the 401 Water Quality Certification
Application.
Where streams must be crossed, NCDWQ prefers bridges be used in lieu of culverts. However, we
realize that economic considerations often require the use of culverts. Please be advised that
culverts should be countersunk to allow unimpeded passage by fish and other aquatic organisms.
10. Sediment and erosion control measures should not be placed in wetlands or streams.
11. Borrow/waste areas should avoid wetlands to the maximum extent practical. Impacts to wetlands in
borrow/waste areas.will need to be presented in the 401 Water Quality Certification and could
precipitate. compensatory mitigation.
12. The 401 Water Quality Certification application' will need to specifically address the proposed
methods for stormwater management. More, specifically, stormwater shoul d not be permitted to
discharge directly into streams or surface waters.
13. Based on the information presented in the document, the magnitude of impacts to wetlands and
streams may require an Individual Permit (IP) application to the Corps of Engineers and
corresponding 401 Water Quality. Certification. Please be advised that a 401 Water Quality
Certification requires satisfactory protection of water quality to ensure that water quality standards
are met and no wetland or stream uses are lost. Final permit authorization will require the submittal
of a formal application by the NCDOT and written concurrence from NCDWQ. Please be aware
that any approval will be contingent on appropriate avoidance and minimization of wetland and
stream impacts to the maximum extent practical, the development of an acceptable stormwater
management plan, and the inclusion of appropriate mitigation plans where appropriate.
14. If concrete is used during construction, a dry work area should be maintained to prevent direct
contact between curing concrete and stream water. Water that inadvertently contacts uncured
concrete should not be discharged to surface waters due to the potential for elevated pH and
possible aquatic life and fish kills.
15. If temporary access roads or detours are constructed, the site should be:graded to its preconstruction
contours and elevations. Disturbed areas should be seeded or mulched to stabilize the soil and
A-18
appropriate native woody species should be planted. When using temporary structures the area
should be cleared but not grubbed. Clearing the. area with chain saws, mowers, bush-hogs, or other
mechanized equipment.and leaving the stumps and root mat intact allows the area to re-vegetate
naturally and minimizes soil disturbance.
16. Placement of culverts and other structures in waters, streams, and wetlands should be placed below
the elevation of the streambed by one foot for all culverts with a diameter greater than 48 inches,
and 20 percent of the culvert diameter for culverts having a diameter less than 48 inches, to allow
low flow passage of water and aquatic life. Design andplaccment of culverts and other structures
including temporary erosion control measures should not be conducted in a manner that may result
in dis-equilibrium of wetlands or streambeds or banks, adjacent to or upstream and down stream of
the above structures. The applicant is required to provide evidence that the equilibrium is being
maintained if requested in writing by.NCDWQ. If this condition is-unable to, be.met due to bedrock
or other limiting features encountered during construction,.please contact the NCDWQ for guidance
on how to proceed and to determine whether or nota permit modification will be required.
17. If multiple,pipes or barrels are required, they should be designed to mimic natural stream cross
section as closely as possible including pipes or barrels at flood plain elevation, floodplain benches,
and/or sills may be required where appropriate. 'Widening the stream channel should be avoided.
Stream channel widening at the inlet or outletend of structures typically decreases water velocity
causing sediment deposition that requires increased maintenance.and disrupts aquatic life passage.
18. Sediment and erosion control measures sufficient to protect Water resources must be implemented
and maintained in accordance with the most recent version of North Carolina Sediment and Erosion
Control Planning and Design Manual and the most recent version of NCS000250.
19. All work in or adjacent to stream waters shouldbe conducted in a drywork.area. Approved BMP
measure's from the most current version of NCDOT Construction and Maintenance Activities
manual such as sandbags, rock berms; cofferdams and other diversion structures should be used to
prevent excavation in flowing water.
20. Heavy' equipment. should be operated from thebank =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.
21. Riprap should not be placed in the active thalweg channel or placed in the streambed in a manner
that precludes aquatic life passage. Bioengineering boulders or structures should be properly
designed, sized and installed.
22. Riparian vegetation (native trees and shrubs) should be-preserved to the maximum extent possible.
Riparian vegetation must be reestablished within the,construction limits of the project by the end of
the growing season following completion of construction.
NCDWQ appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on your project. Should you have any questions
or require any additional information, please contact David' Wainwright at [phone].
cc: Bill Biddlecome, US Army Corps of Engineers, Washington Field Office
Clarence Coleman, Federal Highway Administration
Chris Militscher, Environmental Protection Agency (electronic copy only)
Travis Wilson, NC Wildlife Resources Commission (electronic copy only)
Garcy Ward, NCDWQ Washington Regional Office
File Copy
A-19
THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY
A-20
" North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Gordan Myers, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee
Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs, DENR
FROM: Travis Wilson, Highway Project Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: June 8;2009
SUBJECT: North Carolina Department of Transportation (XCDOT) Environmental
Assessment (EA) for the proposed NC 125 Williamston Bypass; Martin County,
North Carolina. TIP No. R-3826; SCH Project No_ 09-0324
Staff biologists with the N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission have reviewed the subject
EA and are familiar with habitat values in the project area. The purpose of this review was to
assess project.impdets to fish and wildlife resources. Our comments are provided in accordance
with certain provisions of the National EnvironmenW.Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(c)) and the
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d).
NCDOT is currently proposing to widening portions of existing',NC 125 in combination
with constructing a new location section of roadway in order to complete a NC 125 bypass of
Williamston. The project would widen the existing facility to three lanes, with the new location
portion having two.lanes constructed on a four lane right of way, There are three alternatives
being considered, however NCNNrRC has not selected a preferred alternative at this tirne:
This project is being review through the NEPA/404 Merger 01 process. We will continue to
assess the impacts associated with the remaining alternatives in preparation for the selection of
the LEDPA and for further avoidance and minimization measures. Thank you for the
opportunity to comment on this EA. If we can be of any further assistance please call me at
(919):528-9886,
cc: Gary Jordan, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Raleigh
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries • 1721 Mail Service Center - Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]
A-21
60 39Vd 6£868ZG616 04:51 600Z/80/90
THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY
APPENDIX B
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS RELOCATION PROGRAM/
RELOCATION REPORT FOR SELECTED ALTERNATIVE
THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS RELOCATION PROGRAMS
It is the policy of NCDOT to ensure 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
• Relocation Replacement Housing Payments or Rent Supplement
As part of 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 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 case of
ownership), the Relocation Replacement Housing Payments or Rent Supplement Program
will compensate up to $22,500 to owners who are eligible and qualify and up to $5,250 to
tenants who are eligible and qualify.
The relocation program for the proposed action will be conducted in accordance with
the Federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of
1970 (Public Law 91-646), and/or the North Carolina Relocation Assistance Act (GS-133-5
through 133-18). The program is designed to provide assistance to displaced persons in
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 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 and federal programs offering assistance to displaced
B-1
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.
A displaced tenant may be eligible to receive a payment, not to exceed $5,250, to rent
a replacement dwelling or to make a down payment, including incidental expenses, on the
purchase of a replacement dwelling. The down payment is based upon what the state
determines is required when the rent supplement exceeds $5,250.
It is a policy of the State that no person will be displaced by 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 latitude in methods of implementation by the state so that decent, safe and
sanitary replacement housing can be provided. It is not believed this program will be
necessary on the project, since there appear to be adequate opportunities for relocation within
the area.
B-2
EIS RELOCATION REPORT 11
® E.I.S. ? CORRIDOR ? DESIGN
North Carolina Department of Transportation
RELOCATION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
WBS: 34533.1.1 COUNTY Martin Alternate 1A of 1 Alternate
I.D. NO.: R-3826 F.A. PROJECT STP-125 1
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: NC 125 Williamston Bypass - SR 1182 (East College Road) to NC 125
Northwest ofWilliamston
ESTIMATED DISPLACEES INCOME LEVEL
Type of
Displacees
Owners
Tenants
Total
Minorities
0-15M
15-25M
25-35M
35-50M
50 UP
Residential 3 0 3 1 0 0 3 0 0
Businesses 0 0 0 0 VALUE OF DWELLING DSS DWELLING AVAILABLE
Farms 0 0 0 0 Owners Tenants For Sale For Rent
Non-Profit 0 0 0 0 0-20m 0 $0-150 0 0.20m 0 $ 0-150 0
ANSWER ALL QUESTIONS 20-40m 1 150-250 0 20-40m 0 150-250 0
Yes No Explain all "YES" answers. 40-70m 1 250-400 0 40-70m 3 250.400 0
X 1. Will special relocation services be necessary? 70-100m 1 400-600 0 70-100m 4 400-600 0
X 2. Will schools or churches be affected by 100 up 0 600 up 0 100 up 12+ 600 up 0
displacement? TOTAL 3 0 - 19 0
X 3. Will business services still be available REMARKS (Respond by Number)
after project?
3 - Businesses will not be affected
X 4. Will any business be displaced? If so, 6, 12, 14 - Multiple Listing Services, Newspaper, Local Realtor
11 - Martin County Public Housing
indicate size, type, estimated number of
employees, minorities, etc. ,
8 - As mandated by law.
X 5. Will relocation cause a housing shortage?
6. Source for available housing (list).
X 7. Will additional housing programs be needed?
X 8. Should Last Resort Housing be considered?
X 9. Are there large, disabled, elderly, etc.
families?
X 10. Will public housing be needed for project?
X 11. Is public housing available?
X 12. Is it felt there will be adequate DSS housing
housing available during relocation period?
X 13. Will there be a problem of housing within
financial means?
X 14. Are suitable business sites available (list
source).
15. Number months estimated to complete
RELOCATION? 14 months 4

05-11-10
V..
5V, I
;

5112/10
Michelle A. Pittman Date
SeniorRi ht of W a A ent
- Relocation Coordinator Date
FRM15-E Remsed 0402
Original a i Copy Remcatim Coommamr
2 Copy Dimsion Relocation File
B-3
THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY
APPENDIX C
NEPA/SECTION 404 MERGER PROCESS
CONCURRENCE FORMS
THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY
Section 404/NEPA Interagency Agreement
Concurrence Point3
Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative
Project Title: NC 125 Williamston Bypass, Martin County, TIP Project R-3826,
Federal-Aid Project STP-125(1), State Project 8.81090501, WBS Element 34533.1.1
Proiect Description: The project will construct a NC 125 bypass of Williamston, mostly on new
location. The proposed two-lane roadway will be constructed on multi-lane right of way. For all
bypass alternatives, existing NC 125 will be widened between SR 1182 and US 64A.
Least Environmentally Damaejne Practicable Alternative: The alternative marked with a
check below has been selected by the merger team as the least environmentally damaging
practicable alternative (LEDPA) for the proposed NC 125 Williamston Bypass. Alternatives with
a line drawn through the alternative name have been dropped from further consideration.
E9/Altemative 1
The merger team has unconditionally concurred on this date of February 23, 2010 on the.
LEDPA for the NC 125 Williamston Bypass, as shown on the attached figure and
described above.
?Na?mee?
h
Aeency
AV cw\k c.
U s Fws
vSEPr? - GZ?'???
N?7?GtlG 11.s3/,o
US DoT

NCboT - PDEA

-1
THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY
C-2
Page 1 of 2
Section 404/NEPA Interagency Agreement
Concurrence Point 4A
Avoidance and Minimization Measures
Proiect Title: NC 125 Williamston Bypass, Martin County, TIP Project R-3826,
Federal-Aid Project STP-125(1); State Project 8.81090501, WBS Element 34533.1.1
Project Description: The project will construct a NC 125 bypass of Williamston, mostly on new
location. The proposed two-lane roadway will be constructed on multi-lane right of way. For all
bypass alternatives, existing NC 125 will be widened between SR 1182 and US 64A.
404 Avoidance and Minimization Measures
in an effort to avoid and minimize impacts to jurisdictional,wetland'arld streatnS'
associated with the LEDPA (Alternative 1), NCDOT has proposed to implement one or
more of the following measures: (P? bitinn 3:1)
:1 side slopes in jurisdictional areas. 00001 WWII 6kplrort 446?tr sidt slo?tsvoc3 VT 3 Gt^aSSt?n?,
orizontal alignment crosses wetland WM at its narrowest point:
Horizontal alignment shift (Alternative IA) to avoid of minimize jurisdictional. areas:
Alternative 1A will have slightly more wetland impacts (0.02 acre), but will
completely avoid the following wetland sites affected by Alternative 1:
WL (0.02 acre)
WG (0.39 acre)
Alternative IA will have overall less stream impacts (174 feet less) and will avoid
the following streams affected by Alternative 1:
UT 1 (112 feet)
UT 5 (233 feet)
Other Measures to Avoid and Minimize Impacts to the Human and Natural
Environment
NCDOT has also documented the following measures to avoid and minimize impacts to
the human and natural environment associated with the LEDPA, as appropriate:
[(measures to, avoid or minimize residential or business relocations: Revised alignment
for Alternative 1 (Alternative 1 A) only involves changes in the alignment on two
farms. The revised alignment will not affect any other properties and will not require
the relocation of any more homes or businesses than Alternative 1.
[Measures to avoid or minimize other human resource impacts: Revised alignment for
Alternative 1 (Alternative 1 A) will reduce impacts of the proposed bypass on two
farms. Alternative IA will affect approximately five acres less land being actively
farmed than Alternative 1.
C-3
Page 2 of 2
The merger team has unconditionally concurred on this date of February 23, 2010 on the
above listed avoidance and minimization measures for the NC 125 Williamston Bypass.
Meney
Name
K)C?
US Fws
/1/?GJb ?/z?tm
()SDnT- ?N
. Nc- oo -POiE-A `
6108)
C-4

?S.c a^ h 7 ?'
03
- ]c a • ,Y ^-i. a ,_. T ?r r.1'_ - a i
MATCHLINE SEE SHEET 1 yy? r?r?!ti r?'?;?y??s `S3y r e?>^ ° _
V4.j ?Y.r .[<a•'T ;,f?,y ?_z ?
^/ ??._ S?? y?li. ? y?7 Y J,l? ?`?•?? 1 ?r ? ?} ?-.. may.
y v aF+ r f r_ r 1 «
_;,•.!, t - 7? '? III ,!.- ? ..p `,? •t. - ?P4 -`•r•,. # 4 ?.
Cp rF ?~ `w
OKI IN:.
L f'r ! ?'t.?,r '?.djy.. ;i;'d 1', • 17 , N - ` /{// s _''t- ,' - a' -c" ,? fi •Q o Iw
T; 3'i.°MT' J ??? .j R"-+ "?` ?' - ? y 'f,4'.r t 4•;?r
JCL-?.J K?Y? ,/ Y K .!? ?. W?l t Y*1 :r ?
fir, ,??`• ti#'?y- "" m
Olp
P?j
aj Y. !P ' • rx 1.s ii y y° (/)
.,. j?j,(+T?j" •. •ti 1 rte/ ?'(jy.•../1:-. R4 r -. ?''1 I+ . CL
41ti C--
IPL
cn
Iy r Est 4. `.
ILI
?. ? . 'y??? ? Q • ?? 11tt?? 1 _ ? f i?
4r *0
- ` r •
!p Vol
.. ?..% ..? ,L .( •f - T tom.-,f''k.
AL,
4
- Ya `-? a `?_ ??? ?•? f :«
r 17
1 ? +
m
v'
'ti
775
iA
F
1
7
f:
i,U =