20110661_Environmental Assessment_20100106

Rocky Mount
SR 1613 (N. Winstead Ave.)
From SR 1770 (Sunset Ave.) to SR 1604 (Hunter Hill Road)
Nash County
Federal Aid Project STP-1613(3)
State Project 8.2322701
WBS Element 35014.1.1
TIP PROJECT U-4019
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
APPROVED:
Vat-e Irg ?G J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch, NCDOT
,
Date 444ederal ohn F. Sullivan III, P.E., Division
Highway Administration
Rocky Mount
SR 1613 (N. Winstead Ave.)
From SR 1770 (Sunset Ave.) to SR 1604 (Hunter Hill Road)
Nash County
Federal Aid Project STP-1613(3)
State Project 8.2322701
WBS Element 35014.1.1
TIP PROJECT U-4019
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Documentation prepared in the Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
by:
.-?-? ,
Olivia J. Fa
Project Planning Engineer
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
A. Mclnnis, Jr.fP.E.
Project Engineer
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
i?? F K '' ,P`€ o
???k,4 ' . ' y} 9 x,?
k<, 4., s?? '?` 3? ??_
!) ??;., ?S f n?
d?&e,s?qnz+
" f •3 iY?e ?5??? ?i???'
21111107
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PROJECT COMMITMENTS ........................................................................................... i
1. TYPE OF ACTION .......................................................................................................1
II. DESCRIPTION OF ACTION ....................................................................................1
III. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS .................................................. 2
IV. COMMENTS AND COORDINATION ................................................................... 3
A. DISTRIBUTION OF T'HE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ............................................... 3
B. COMMENTS ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ................................................... 3
C. PUBLIC HEARING ......................................................................................................... 4
V. REVISIONS TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ................................. 5
A. HAZARDOUS MATERIAL AND GEOT'ECHNICAL IMPACTS .............................................. S
B. RARE AND PROTEC'I`ED SPECIES .................................................................................. S
C. HYDRAULIC CONCERNS/FLOODPLAINS ....................................................................... C)
D. CORRECT'IONS TO ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ...................................................... 7
VI. BASIS FOR FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ..................................... 8
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1- Project Vicinity Map
Figure 2- 100 Year Floodplain Map
Figure 3- Location of UST's and Other Potentially Contaminated Sites
Figure 4- Proposed Typical Cross Sections
Appendix - Agency Comments on the Environmental Assessment
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1- Summary of Environmental Impacts
Table 2- UST's, Landfills & Other Potentially Contaminated Sites
Table 3- Federal Protected Species Within Nash County
Table 4- Federal Species of Concern Within Nash County
Table 5- Correction to Table 4 of Environmental Assessment
PROJECT COMMITMENTS
WIDENING OF SR 1613 (N. WINSTEAD AVE.)
FROM SR 1770 (SUNSET AVE.) TO
SR 1604 (HUNTER HII.L ROAD) IN
ROCKY MOUNT
NASH COUNTY
WBS Element 35014.1.1
Federal-Aid Project STP-1613(3)
TIP Project U-4019
Program Development Branch/NCDOT Division 4 Design ConstructlProgramming
and TIP Branch
The City of Rocky Mount has requested new sidewalks along both sides of SR 1613
(Winstead Ave.) A written agreement will be executed prior to construction of the
proposed project regarding cost sharing, maintenance and liability responsibilities for the
proposed sidewalks. Sidewalks are proposed on both sides of North Winstead Avenue for
the entire project length.
NCDOT Division 4 Design Construct
Fourteen-foot outside lanes are proposed in order to accommodate bicycles.
A median crossover for use by emergency vehicles will be provided at Executive Drive.
Traffic Engineering Branch
The traffic signal at Nash General Hospital (Curtis Ellis Drive intersection) will be
upgraded to allow emergency vehicle preemption.
Hvdraulics Unit
The Crossing of Stony Creek is included in the FEMA detailed flood insurance study for
Nash County. It is possible that the proposed widening of the bridge over Stony Creek
could require a floodway revision. NCDOT will coordinate with FEMA and local
authorities in the final design stage to ensure compliance with applicable floodplain
management ordinances.
Roadside Environmental Unit
Sedimentation and erosion control plans for the project shall adhere to the Design
Standards in Sensitive Watersheds because Stony Creek is in the Tar-Pamlico River Basin.
Finding of No Significant Impact - U-4019 Page 1 of 1
February 2007
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
PREPARED BY THE
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
BRANCH
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
NORTH CAROLINA DEDPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
IN CONSULTATION WITH THE
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
1. TYPE OF ACTION
This is a Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Administrative Action, Finding of
No Significant Impact (FONSI).
The FHWA has determined this project will have no significant impact on the human
environment. This Finding of No Significant Impact is based on the February 2, 2006
Environmental Assessment (EA), which was evaluated by FHWA and determined to
adequately and accurately discuss the need, environmental issues and impacts of the
proposed project.
II. DESCRIPTION OF ACTION
The proposed project involves widening SR 1613 (Winstead Avenue) from a three-
lane (one lane each direction plus center turn lane) to a six lane median-divided facility
with curb and gutter, from SR 1770 (Sunset Avenue) to US 64, and a four-lane median-
divided facility with curb and gutter from US 64 to SR 1604 (Hunter Hill Road). The total
length of this project is 1.7 miles.
The purpose of this project is to improve the level of service (traffic flow) for SR 1613
(North Winstead Avenue).
TIP Project U-4019 is included in the approved 2006-2012 North Carolina
Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). Right of way acquisition and construction
are scheduled in the draft 2007-2013 TIP for federal fiscal years 2007 and 2009,
respectively.
The cost estimate included in the draft 2007-2013 TIP for this project is $15,394,000.
Of this total, $1,621,000 is estimated for right of way acquisition, $13,700,000 for
construction and $73,000 for wetland and stream mitigation. Current cost estimates for
the project are as follows:
Construction $15,300,000
Right-of-Way Acquisition$ 1,621,000
TOTAL $16,921,000
III. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
Anticipated effects of the proposed project are shown on Table 1 below.
TABLE 1
Summary of Environmental Impacts
Resource Total Impact
Wetlands 0.02 acre
Streams 121 linear feet
Riparian Buffers Zone 1(30 feet) = 9,137 sf
Zone 2(20 feet) = 12,131 sf
Home Relocates 0
Business Relocates 0
Hazardous Material Sites 5
Impacted Noise Receptors 1
Prime Farmland 0
Forested 0
Endangered Species 4 Listed - None Adversely
Affected
National Register Eligible Property 0
Section 4(f) Impacts 0
Schools 0
Churches 0
There are no National Register eligible or Section 4(f) properties located in the project
area.
Based on anticipated impacts to jurisdictional surface waters and wetlands, it is
anticipated a Section 404 Nationwide Permit will be required for this project. A North
Carolina Division of Water Quality General Certification is required prior to the issuance
of the Section 404 Nationwide Permit
IV. 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:
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
*U. S. Department of Interior - Fish and Wildlife Service - Raleigh
*N. C. State Clearinghouse, Department of Administration
*N. C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources-
*N. C. Division of Water Quality
*N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission
*N. C. Department of Cultural Resources
Region L Planning Agency (MPO)
City of Rocky Mount
Nash County
Asterisks (*) indicate agencies from which comments on the environmental
assessment were received. Copies of letters received are included in the appendix of this
document.
B. Comments on the Environmental Assessment
Substantive comments on the environmental assessment are discussed below:
NC Division of Water Quality
COMMENT: "Stony Creek and UT's to Stony Creek are on the 303(d) list for impaired
use for aquatic life due to impaired biological integrity. DWQ is very concerned with
sediment and erosion impact that could result from this project. DWQ recommends that
the most protective sediment and erosion control BMP's be implemented to reduce the
risk of nutrient runoff to Stony Creek and UT's to Stony Creek."
NCDOT RESPONSE: More stringent sedimentation and erosion control standards are
not required for this project due to Stony Creek being included on the 303(d) list of
impaired waters, because the source of the impairment is unknown. However, more
stringent sedimentation and erosion control standards are proposed because Stony Creek is
in the Tar-Pamlico River Basin. Sedimentation and erosion control plans for the project
shall adhere to the Design Standards in Sensitive Watersheds.
NCDOT's Best Management Practices for Protection of Surface Waters (March 1997)
will be followed pursuant to state statute 15A NCAC 02B.0104 (m) governing NCDOT
operations relative to implementation of water supply classifications.
COMMENT: "DWQ requests that road design plans provide treatment of the storm
water runoff through best management practices as detailed in the most recent version of
NC DWQ Stormwater Best Management Practices."
NCDOT RESPONSE: Design plans for the project will be prepared in compliance with
state and local stormwater regulations and ordinances.
COMMENT: "This project is within the Tar-Pamlico River Basin. Riparian
buffer impacts should be avoided and minimized to the greatest extent possible
pursuant to 15A NCAC 2B .0259...A buffer mitigation plan, including use of the
NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program, must be provided to DWQ prior to
approval of the Water Quality Certification."
NCDOT RESPONSE: A plan for any required buffer mitigation will be provided
to the Division of Water Quality with the application for the Water Quality
Certification.
COMMENT: "It is unclear based on the information presented in the document,
if the magnitude of impacts to wetlands and streams will require an Individual
Permit (IP) or Nationwide (NW) permit application to the Corps of Engineer and
corresponding 401 Water Quality Certification."
NCDOT RESPONSE: It is anticipated a Section 404 Nationwide Permit will be
required for this project. (see Section III of this document).
NC Wildlife Resources Commission
COMMENT: "Prior to determination of the final environmental impacts, NCDOT will
need to demonstrate an appropriate level of avoidance and minimization measures,
including a mitigation plan for unavoidable impact to streams and wetlands."
NCDOT RESPONSE: The proposed project involves widening an existing road,
which crosses several streams. Complete avoidance of these streams is not
possible. Efforts have been made and will continue to be made to minimize
impacts to wetlands and streams as the project design progresses. A mitigation
plan will be provided for any required mitigation during the permit process.
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 preferred alternative for the project.
The public hearing for the project was held on April 11, 2006 at Trinity
Lutheran Church in Rocky Mount. Since the public hearing was informal, an
official transcript was not prepared. Approximately 35 citizens attended this
meeting.
No opposition to the project was expressed at the hearing. Several comments
were made in opposition to the median design. Concerns were expressed
regarding the number and location of the median openings and the use of
directional crossovers. The U-turn movement at SR 1770 (Sunset Avenue) was
also mentioned as a concern. Changes are proposed in the number and location of
the median openings in order to address concerns raised at the hearing.
V. REVISIONS TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
A. Hazardous Material and Geotechnical Imnacts
Four sites presently or formerly containing petroleum underground storage
tanks (UST's), were identified within the project limits. Three of these are active
gas stations and one is a former oil company/gas station. In addition to these sites,
a dry cleaning facility is located within the project limits. These sites are described
in Table 2 below and shown on Figure 3.
TABLE 2
UST's, Landfills & Other Potentiall Contaminated Sites
Site Type Location UST Facility Comments
No. ID #
Four UST's currently in use
1 Active Gas Station 3601 Sunset Ave. 0-022651
at site.
Five UST's currently in use
2 Active Gas Station 3537 Sunset Ave. 0-022650
at site.
Active Dry Cleaning 117 North Winstead N/A Facility has been in
3 Facilit Ave. o eration at site for 21 ears
960 North Winstead Seven UST's removed from
4 Former Gas Station Ave. -020360
0 site in 1996
Three UST's currently in use
5 Active Gas Station 2570 Hunter Hill Rd. 0-022385
at site.
Additional right of way will be required from at least one of the potentially
contaminated sites identified along the project. Soil and groundwater assessments
on the above properties will be performed prior to right of way acquisition.
B. Rare and Protected Species
The bald eagle has been added to the list of federally protected species within Nash
County, since completion of the environmental assessment.
As of December 11, 2006, four federally-protected species were listed for Nash
County. These species are presented on Table 3 below.
TABLE 3
Federall Protected S ecies Within Nash Count
Scientiric Name Common Name Federal giological Conclusion
Status
Haliaeetus bald eagle T No Effect
leucoce halus
Picoides borealis red-cockaded E No Effect
wood ecker
Alasmidonta May affect, but not likely to
heterodon dwarf
wedge mussel E adversel affect.
Elliptio May affect, but not likely to
steinstansana Tar spinymussel E adversel affect.
As of December 11, 2006, 12 federal species of concern were listed for Nash
County. These species are shown on Table 4 below.
TABLE 4
Federal Species of Concern Within Nash County
Scientific Name Common Name Federal
Status Habitat Present
Anguilla rostrata American eel FSC No
Noturus furiosus Carolina madtom FSC Yes
Lythrurus »iatutinus Pinewoods shiner FSC Yes
Ambloplites cavifrons Roanoke bass FSC No
Fusconaia masoni Atlantic pigtoe FSC Yes
Speyeria diana Diana fritillary (butterfly) FSC No
Lasmigona subviridis Green floater FSC Yes
Lampsilis cariosa Yellow lampmussel FSC Yes
Elliptio lanceolata Yellow lance FSC Yes
Lilium pyrophilum Sandhills bog lily FSC No
Thalictrum macrostylum Small-leaved meadow-rue FSC No
Trillium pusillum var.
virginianum Virginia least trillium FSC No
C. Hvdraulic Concerns/Floodulains
Nash County is a participant in the National Flood Insurance Regular Program. The
crossing of Stony Creek is included in the FEMA detailed flood insurance study for Nash
County. It is possible that the proposed widening of the bridge over Stony Creek could
require a floodway revision. NCDOT will coordinate with FEMA and local authorities in
the final design stage to ensure compliance with applicable floodplain management
ordinances
D. Corrections to Environmental Assessment
Table 4"Project Levels of Service in the Project Area"
Table 4 of the environmental assessment presented levels of service for Winstead
Avenue with the proposed project for the years 2009 and 2025. The 2025 levels of service
for signalized intersections along the project presented on Table 4 were incorrect. The
correct levels of service are presented on Table 5 below.
TABLE 5
Correction to Table 4 of Environmental Assessment
Intersection 2025 (Design Year, Multi-lane
Median Divided)
SR 1770 (Sunset Ave.) & SR 1613 F*
(Winstead Ave.)
SR 1634 (Curtis Ellis Dr.) & SR 1613
E*
(Winstead Ave.)
US 64 Eastbound Ramps & SR 1613 D
(Winstead Ave.)
US 64 Westbound Ramps & SR 1613 *
E
(Winstead Ave.)
SR 1614 (English Rd.) & SR 1613
E*
(Winstead Ave.)
SR 1604 (Hunter Hill Rd.) & SR 1613
D
(Winstead Ave.)
*Additional improvements may be needed for the intersection to operate at a proper LOS.
Section IV-D-2 "Architectural Historic Resources"
The following sentence is included in Section IV-D-2 of the environmental
assessment: "During the site visit, four historic properties that are more than fifty years of
age were found in the project area, none eligible for inclusion in the National Register of
Historic Places." These four properties are not "historic." This sentence should have read
as follows: "During the site visit, four properties more than fifty years of age were found
in the project area, none of these properties were determined to be eligible for inclusion in
the National Register of Historic Places."
Figure 3 of Environmental Assessment
Figure 3 of the environmental assessment presents the proposed typical section for the
project. This figure states that 15-foot berms will be provided for the project in areas
requiring guardrail. This is incorrect. Fourteen-foot wide berms will be provided in areas
requiring guardrail. Figure 4 of this document shows the correct typical section for this
project.
VI. 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:
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
Telephone [phone]
John F. Sullivan, III, P.E.
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
310 New Bern Avenue, Suite 410
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601
Telephone [phone]

U
Y= END PROJECT ;
? ' ? j ; .... ?(:.._.._...._..........
/ .?Paart e?
Rq
5604
? Brendywna Spring
:' .

.
( Gf88n
I:a

?
rclt ,
1614 Chu
. ; ?r /•,
;
,
R ?
\... : '
1613

`_/ II
3
Ii ; E
Z
?
.
.
, i
?......._..
/ , .. .
COa51sl ,... __.........._ '?. -..../ ?: P s ? y? .
Plam
Nospital
, ? ?' •
,
.
.
,._...._ . : :, :... , O

. ?
e
Parkwood .
1
?•
_..., ,
,
1613 Church a
?`.
i
?
..
. ,
..- ? . _ ?t
; • .._
? .
_

.
, -......
p ? f
/ Nash
% General

..
i Flospital
.
_
`q
..
_. . / ? ? .. .?.
,
, : ... . - -
;.; \\\ 0yq.
. :
?
`
? . .
?...........
--1
., ? ..
, . ? ... _... .
.?
.
I •
i . ? •
?d ? ._. ..
Or ?
f?e
.
?
64
i . ? .. . .... ..
?

I
' Oresn ?. ?:? ?nv w
_._
EEK
5701EY CR
Darrah Ln

' ..
.....
^.
,•
een BUS
_._.?
...
• ; ' ?;. /_.. - / ? 64
.. , ?? ,,.......
Zebu
on
?.
..._.__ : , . ? .._

Ra
?'
...___...._. . ?
at
y I : WestvieW
We .CI111fCh?
t
'"
?

a ,
' m t ?.. ?
\
Gl m'
p-
?
:
? __ ?
• ^ ? :
? ?
?
t
?r:.
? k
¦
1770 3-

Englewood
? ! -------
,lana Engl?wood -
`
- -
,` .Unked Church !
•,. / Church o
' --
--.- ----_--__._
-? F , .---' ---. 1 , <
BEGIN PROJECT

? ?

? ?
? ?

Av.rkton NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT
8 t ; OF TRANSPORTATION
9 ?
4
' S = DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
43 ?
k
caid
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND
Aeaaak 30 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH
S'o'
j Of? f ? TR?N
N A S,
MY Momere' ROCKY MOUNT
o°` SR 1613 (N. wirvSTEAD RD.)

97 FROM SR 1770 (SUNSET AVE.) TO
3
SR 1604 (HUNTER HILL RD.)
s??,?h°? , NASH COUNTY
TIP PROJECT U-4019
?
J a? e
l
FIGURE I
? 1 .? i i .?_.... .' _ -- ??_J^?,` _?-?,?% i \`. - "• ? o
? i l ?? ? ???_, \Jcp •',`` .??? ??
<? ?l+
??
END PROJECT
° \ ? 1 ? ( ! i\o ?L. .,i - : ?? =? ?? ., •?. - - ?:gR1 ? ??so \?.. .. ?- , -???\ l3r _ _.3
? ? , l ?? ? ..i ?i i : ., ?? ? __?? % - '\ . v ` ? ?.ty'? /?' •.`? ? . % ?
u?
? .: _ " -' . ? ; ; ( ? `;{; ' ? ,, , •ii ` ii \ ;>h
r' - ` ? ? ?. J ?` , ?'»? ? ?? _: _ ??? ?' iC ,_ ?.J ` • ?? '??? ;-. `'• ?r, ?! t
'? i -•? J?. s? ?? ? `} ; ? , 4 ? ? ?'?" ? ? ? ?' .:? ? , ? ; ± L?? `? - I i ! r"
1"- ? ????G.. . . ?! ? . ?. J"? ? - " ? • - p _ . ?` ??? ll` V `3, a-" ' `?i l, r "i .` % -.. ? '_ ,,' 1, ,?1 ? 1?
dt
? - ? r' •` ? _ --' ,i o ' ,?i ;; n _ '
i;A 411?>?C??? • iS ?? ???. ? \. •l% _\ilv . /?_• /1 I/
/ ? ? ?_-'' // ? ?•._ ? - ? L ??` L - , 4 ? _`? ?F V ? _ ? . .? 1 ? J
? ? ?i/ ?' ?V •/ ?' > ` , ? Gr?' J / l ; ! . \ '?
?_. ?i 1 ? - . ? i . _ -. ? 1' '/ ? ?? ? .? - ? ,%? ° ? ??-., u CRf51 ? ? %' .? i' ? ? `.• \ .
?i
1 ; i 1 / ? -1,? ?i/ " i ). ? ., '? . ,.??,r/ . `?l- ?
I' ± ?/i?/ '?r _ I?F6/ _ ' I •/G ',??(5-01? J; .. /i4' ?. ?
Gr en --?--c4
f ? : ? •.t ? ;*?- ir• ;" ? 'ro ?
?- US 64 ? '=- _ ?_- ? j%??-??-,`--?; • ?0•• f n. ? ?: _. \Nd
t50 ? J? •s ? ?l618?? ?'- -•
? ? j? _ _ ? ? , ?? ?? ? ba5 •..
? ? / - / . /. ? ? ,... \. ? . ?/?' / ? } ?. ? ' - _,' -?. ¦ l .
';,C6U %?.? \t\ ?=?.\?.? ? r ?,` i?i'»?? _ ?l ?i? .?.`? '. /'{, (? _._.?' , ??•• • ??r 1? , \"
?"? -- ` y ? ? \ i `?r. \ - .1 ;? ? ohn /? ?i v ? ? `??_ i \ \ • ? ? ,•
.?_ -? m? . ?\ ?? .., 4 ? , Q; ` ?, '???• .? • • /
? I' 1 ?; ?? ? ? i ? ? I '?' r S i ? ' ' ??? , u ? ? \ f • ? ?
.. /,t' _~ ?" _ ?? ? ? ? i ?Q '. ' / \ ? ,'i ,. ?, '? ` ?`i ? \ ?. l • ? ? " ?
; ? - '" ? ?\Y. ' f ! ? \ ? ? ?' l Y •' _i ? ` \\ ???7"IciV? i
f ?.
o?, ? ? ` '?,' , r L ? r y ?? ?\\?1+,?? r _ 'ai' . ?' .,i? ? ??t/ j'?? I ? ? ?,-. ??? ? +?..-•..:
pnes ? w. ??_.., \ ??:...1.. ---'?-, ? i,, q? \ '? j fl i / r?,,?,/ {6 ? i ? . / ?'• ? ???.,\ I.Q . \ 'l ? ?? ;'
50 -'rr. 151 SR 1613
n .i'? ? `? ., ? ? / r ' ? ` • "? ?.; ??? ' ? . •'??
+}t ! . :
.,.l
01, 1 ? ` ' I• ,?? . 5 .t ?'/: _ ?`?r ° ? ? /
7 ???
? / ?? ?'? /f ? ??_. ?-•-?'? Y i ? ; ? ` ?•?',.`' ? ?
~' ?' • •,??•• A? , .,???E i I )I;= ? = " ? /?` / i e Y ? ? ,? !` ? ?- ."_._` "_"",= ;--?""?''? ` r I6 1 ?\
„• ?•?. • ? : ., - _ , r" _ ; ? q ? ;, `
' _• ".?'+-?,? _ . `??; .?? ? 0: ? (? ,,i i ?i ?i-: ?^? ?`. ? • - tv??'' ..., + ' ? .._" • I
? . • ? ? ? • 171D? a ?? • • ti _ ? ? . ?h ? ` ? •? ? ? ? E .
. .. ., . /, ; r . ',k • , . ?: ? ?, •
? $ethfeh m :?=?I • ? ?' ? ? pEn?I?Wa? AVE ?.?U
-_?,._• y?••h ?\ I? ? v s e F" o ?? ?, ?<r; ?? .('?i?` `? r` ? b brl
? / \ I S•.4.:. ?\ `?A 1
//// \\ I ?\ i ?' ?a,i ? I ' R 'j?. ti ? • ?
// ?} ? r- -; ?, ' \ \ I ?'? s+j ? ? ? ,s? ' ? .; ? ?? Y :? i?
? • ? ?.,7 {?S A I ? P, L 1 $ 1 ? • ! } ? ?
?•? ? % p? 11 ` ??? t ? r, -} 7 ,: II ? ?: t J` ?i r,
Apple
`y (46 . ?; ?? ? • A?110?11\1g' ??, ? ° ? ?jj } ,? ..+? ? ?.
1l haker
/44
BEGIN PR`OJECT
.i? `` °?` ?- ? . o . ?. ..._ ?.._.,-> ti.:•?,'' ? F `..,? ?._ ::
?? ? \ ' °?.??r?`;? '? {i ?,,?\? „ j`'••y NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
.--"?==?r' ?, ? ?7f •, .? , ?-
\ TRANSPORTATION (r
1 il, C? PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ?--
\ .? ,- {l 1 j ?!\ ' . ? 1?? II 4 -??;'_.-- _ i?.•\?? a jiW_ ? i ?.
'?? ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH ?
;1\,ftl ? d -' < ?`\? ? ? i? a ° j ,-• ? ' FEET -?•
? - ? ? ,?•\?'? ? ii ?? ?? ? 0 1000 2000
? i' TIP PROJECT U-4019
? , ? `;?.? \ `? 4 ?. `•._ ? ` `?b " /!\_- 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN
IN PROJECT AREA ?
i1 f 1' 1-y i
'' ' ' ?io$kv?rt? ?40, FIGURE 2
._ ? - , ,
. I
I1&14
SITE 4
Y°r?
o.]END PROJECT
.
: Pealtre9?
Rdl?
sran;lywine ; .
7613
.. _.. ,
,/P? ? . Fn9i?8h
?
i
/
SITE 5
1664
-'?Spring
Green
.Church? ,'
:
?
?
?
, ..___...._......._ ..
i ?l 1 .. ?.. _ . .
,.......? ?_.,_
? __..... _?...
.__.
? .., ..._._?
i ?.
.,
,
. ..._.. o?
ia ............
_. _
, _.._..
m
,..-
:o
i Gfeen T,o
?,__ •: ; _3 ..
im-
? ...?-- ?R ' w: .; °m `• ;?
EEK
Dareh
. . u.nokvieW , .._.._. . ..__...
:mna , Englewood ? i -----_?? Eng?o?
SITE i cnurcr, _Un' _ Church
Y
0 c o
BEGIN PROJECT ? Northwood ka' ;?l'?me? ?9i? ,y-t??'°
. ,o : ....._ ._. { l co?ony \lcha
p , .........___.
_.._.i 6
WaY St V
-_.. ? ; •;
?/
.W ...C;PIOn181 . $kHfldfBV?S V ,
?h?UfCh
, ' ...... ' f1 : . \ X j
.?
Parkwood
,Church 2
m ?
/ ? 4\06
O
., r.$
.\
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT
; OF TRANSPORTATION
? DIVISION OF HtGHWAYS
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH
TIP PROJECT U-4019
LOCATION OF UST's AND OTHER
POTENTIALLY CONTAMINATED SITES
FIGURE 3
GXI J
10' 38'
(14' WiGR)
, 2' 14' 12' 12'
?q
R 4'? TO 2' 5' ? 3' I
?•?
?•1
O
?
? P? ? 1 6
FROM SR 1770
EXIS
10' 26'
' (14' WiGR)
14' 12'
4.7 TO 2, 3,
?'I
?•1
O
b1? 4 U
FROM US 64 TO
Proposed T)
APPENDIX
Agency Comments on the Environmental Assessment
7 d ? ?ATE
?
a
. ; ? ?} rvaYe -dP
e' r ?
.,. ?. .
; APR - 3 20
;
North Carolina
Department of Administration
Michael F. Easley, Governor Britt Cobb, Secretary
March 30, 2006
Mr. Majed Al-Ghandour
N.C. Department of Transportation
Project Dev. & Env. Analysis Branch
1534 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1534
Dear Mr. Al-Ghandour:
Re: SCH File # 06-E-4220-0258; EA; Proposal to widen SR 1613 (N. Winstead Ave.) from SR 1770
(Sunset Ave.) to SR 1604 (Hunter Hill Rd.) in Rocky Mount, North Carolina. TIP #U-4019
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, f
j J lC
r?1 `? t ?
J
Ms. Chiys Baggett
Environmental Policy Act Coordinator
Attachments ? „?,?,.,.? s????`??,,,: 4?: ? ?•,...,.?? ?,.?KH? ???
cc: Region L c,?="C
s Y"?.ii_?Li4?..?i?....F?',.r£
? r yS g .. t
j , i `?.,1?° (3 ?t'? (:_;-./._ .fi: t •r--- ?
F . ?k
.. .. ?t,V??-! f }• s? t'
, _.._
__ .. _.. ?
.. ?,,,-• .. ?.?` _ ... .? ,?.?
Alnilittg Arlt(ress: Telephone: [phone] Locntion Artdress:
1301 Mail Service Center Fax [phone] West Jones Street
Raleigh, NC 27699-1301 State Courier #S 1 -01 -00 Raleigh, North Carolina
eanai! Chrys. Baggettc?"r i7cmail. net
An Equal Oyporlunity/Affirnrative r1c/ion Employer
LP:
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Michael F. Easley, Governor
MEMORANDUM
T0:
FROM:
RE:
DATE:
Chrys Baggett
State Clearinghouse
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
2008
? `?4:.??,.IE•f".':? ?TiT
4-n,
?
i? U')
??r;? ' ?•??
(? ? \` •
I ?
Melba McGee
Environmental Review Coordinator
06-0258 Widening of SR 1613 from Sunset Ave. to Hunter Hill
Road in Nash County
March 29, 2006
The department asks that careful consideration be given to tne
attached comments. The applicant is encouraged to work directly with
the department's review agencies prior to finalizing project plans.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond.
Attachments
1601 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, Nnd Caroliria 27699-1601
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: www.enr,state.nc.us/ENR/
An Equal Opportunily / Affirmative Action Employer - 50 % Recycleci ? 10 °1o Post Consumer Paper
NorthCarolina
Naturally
o?o? w A T F9pG
co ?
> .?
o c
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
f`?g'A 41
J
March 17, 2006
MEMORAivnuM
_To: Me1ba McGee - :°--?`-
?
From: Nicole Thomson, Division of Water Quality, Transportation Pernutting Uni
Subject: Comments on the Environmental Assessment related to proposed widening of SR 1613
(N. Winstead Ave.) from existing SR 1770 (Sunset Ave.) to existing SR 1604 (Hunter
Hill Rd.), Nash County, Federal Aid Project No. STP-1613(3), State Project No.
35014.1.1 TIP U-4019.
This office has reviewed the referenced document dated received March 6, 2006. The Division of Water
Quality (DWQ) is responsible for the issuance of the Section 401 Water Quality Certification for
activities that impact Waters of the U.S., including wetlands. It is our understanding that the project as
presented will result in impacts to jurisdictional wetlands, streams, and other surface waters. The DWQ
offers the following comments based on review of the aforementioned document:
Project Specific Comments:
Stony Creek and UT's to Stony Creek are class C; NSW; 303(d) waters of the State. Stony
Creek and UT's to Stony Creek are on the 303(d) list for impaired use for aquatic life due to
impaired biological integrity. DWQ is very concerned with sediment and erosion impacts
that could result from this project. DWQ recommends that the most protective sediment and
erosion control BMPs be implemented to reduce the risk of nutrient runoff to Stony Creek
and UT's to Stony Or6eYc: DWQ requests that road design plans provide treatment of the
storm water runoff through best management practices as detailed in the most recent
version of NC DWQ Stonnwater Best Mai2agenaent Practices.
2. This project is within the Tar-Pamlico River Basin. Riparian buffer impacts should be avoided and
minimized to the greatest extent possible pursuant to 15A NCAC 2B .0259. New development
activities located in the protected 50-foot wide riparian areas within the basin shall be limited to
"uses" identified within and constructed in accordance with 15A NCAC 2B .0259. Buffer
mitigation may be required for buffer impacts resulting from activities classified as "allowable with
mitigation" within the "Table of Uses" section of the Buffer Rules or require a variance under the
Buffer Rules. A buffer mitigation plan, including use of the NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program,
must be provided to DWQ prior to approval of the Water Quality Certification.
Nor[hCarolina
Transportation Permitting Unit Nataridll
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, Norih Carolina 27699-1650
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, Norih Carolina 27604
Phone: 919•733-1786 / FAX [phone]/ Internet: httq://h2o enr state.nc.us/ncwetlands
An Equal Opporlunity/Aftirmative Aclion Employer- 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper
3. It is unclear based on the information presented in the document, if the magnitude of impacts to
wetlands and streams will require an Individual Pernut (IP) or Nationwide (NW) pernut application
to the Corps of Engineers and corresponding 401 Water Quality Certification. In general, greater
than'/z ac. of wetland impact or greater than 3001inear ft. of stream impact will require an IP.
Please be advised that a 401 Water Quality Certification requires satisfactory protection of water
quality to ensure that water quality standards are met and no wetland or stream uses are lost. Final
permit authorization will require the submittal of a formal application by the NCDOT and written
concurrence from the NCDWQ. Please be aware that any approval will be contingent 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.
Gene?al Comments:
4. The environmental document should provide a detailed and itemized presentation of the proposed
impacts to wetlands and streams with conesponding mapping. If mitigation is necessary a? required
by 15A NCAC 21-1.0506(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.
5. 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 Stormwater Best Management Practices, such as grassed swales, buffer
areas, preformed scour holes, retention basins, etc.
6. After the selection of the preferred alternative and prior to an issuance of the 401 Water Quality
Certification, the NCDQT:i§ 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 { 15A 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
and values. The NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program may be available for use as wetland
mitigation.
7. In accordance with the Environmental Management Commission's Rules { 15A NCAC
2H.0506(h)}, mitigation will be required for impacts of greater than 1501inear feet to any single
perennial stream. In the event that mitigation is required, the mitigation plan should be designed to
replace appropriate lost functions and values. The NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program may be
available for use as stream mitigation.
Future documentation, including the 401 Water Quality Certification Application, should continue
to include an itemized listing of the proposed wetland and stream impacts with conesponding
mapping.
9. DWQ is very concerned with sediment and erosion impacts that could result from this project. NC
DOT should address these concerns by describing the potentia] impacts that may occur to the
aquatic environments and any mitigating factors that would reduce the impacts. `t
10. An analysis of cumulative and secondary impacts anticipated as a result of this project is required.
The type and detail of analysis should conform to the NC Division of Water Quality Policy on the
assessment of secondary and cumulative impacts dated April 10, 2004.
11. NC DOT is respectfully reminded that all impacts, including but not limited to, bridging, fill,
excavation and clearing, to jurisdictional wetlands, streams, and riparian buffers need to be included
in the final impact calculations. These impacts, in addition to any construction impacts, temporary
or otherwise, also need to be included as part of the 401 Water Quality Certification Application.
12. Where streams muat be crossed, the DWQ 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 orga'nisms.
Moreover, in areas where high quality wetlands or streams are impacted, a bridge may prove
preferable. When applicable, DOT should not install the bridge bents in the creek, to the maximum
extent practicable.
13. Sediment and erosion control measures should not be placed in wetlands or streams.
14. Borrow/waste areas should avoid wetlands to the maximuin 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.
15. The 401 Water Quality Certification application will need to specifically address the proposed
methods for stormwatei management. More specifically, stormwater should not be pemutted to
discharge directly into:s'treams or surface waters.
16. Bridge supports (bents) should not be placed in the stream when possible.
17. Whenever possible, the DWQ prefers spanning structures. Spanning structures usually do not
require work within the stream or grubbing of the streambanks and do not require stream channel
realignment. The horizontal and vertical clearances provided by bridges allow for human and
wildlife passage beneath the structure, do not block fish passage and do not block navigation by
canoeists and boaters.
18. Bridge deck drains should not discharge directly into the stream. Stormwater should be directed
across the bridge and pre-treated through site-appropriate means (grassed swales, pre-formed scour
holes, vegetated buffers, etc.) before entering the stream. Please refer to the most current version of
NC DWQ Stormwater Best Managemerzt Practices.
19. 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.
20. If temporary access roads or detours are constructed, the site shall be graded to its preconstruction
contours and elevations. Disturbed areas should be seeded or mulched to stabilize the soil and
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.
21. Placement of culverts and other structures in waters, streams, and wetlands shall 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 and placement of culverts and other structures
including temporary erosion control measures shall 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 DWQ. If this condition is unable to be met due to bedrock or
other limiting features encountered during construction, please contact the NC DWQ for guidance
on how to proceed and to determine whether or not a pernut modification will be require&
22. 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 and/or sills where
appropriate. Widening the stream channel should be avoided. Stream channel widening at the inlet
or outlet end of structures typically decreases water velocity causing sediment deposition that
requires increased maintenance and disrupts aquatic life passage.
23. If foundation test borings are necessary; it should be noted in the document. Geotechnical work is
approved under General 401 Certification Number 3494/Nationwide Permit No. 6 for Survey
Activities.
24. Sediment and erosion c6itXOl 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. .
25. All work in or adjacent to stream waters should be conducted in a dry work area. Approved BMP
measures 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.
26. While the use of National Wetland Inventory (NWI) maps, NC Coastal Region Evaluation of
Wetland Significance (NC-CREWS) maps and soil survey maps are useful tools, their inherent
inaccuracies require that qualified personnel perform onsite wetland delineations prior to permit
approval.
27. Heavy equipment should be operated from the bank rather than in stream channels in order to
minimize sedimentation and reduce the likelihood of introducing other pollutants into streams. This
equipment should be inspected daily and maintained to prevent contamination of surface waters
from leaking fuels, lubricants, hydraulic fluids, or other toxic materials.
28. 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.
29. Riparian vegetation (native trees and shrubs) should be preserved to the maximum ex[ent possible.
Riparian vegetation must be reestablished within the construction limits of the project by the end of
the growing season following completion of construction.
The NCDWQ appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on your project. Should you have any
questions or require any additional information, please contact Nicole Thomson at [phone].
cc: William Wescott, US Army Corps of Engineers, Washington Field Office
Clarence Coleman, Federal Highway Administration, 310 New Bern Ave., Raleigh, NG 27601
Richard E. Greene, Jr., PE, Division 4 Engineer, PO Box 3165, Wilson, NC 27895
7amie Guerrero, Division 4, PO Box 3165, Wilson, NC 27895
Chris Militscher, Environmental Protection Agency
Travis Wilson, NC Wildlife Resources Commission
Gary Jordan, US Fish and Wildlife Service
William Gilmore, Ecosystem Enhancement Program
Garcy Ward, DWQ Washington Regional Office
File Copy
,
,;_..
Office:
State of North Carolina Reviewing
NCDENR Department of Environment and Natural Resources
???? `?
Pro, 'ect Number: al, - v ue Date: _ J
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW - PROJECT COMMENTS
After review of this project it has been determined that the DENR permit(s) and/or approvals indicated may need to be obtained in order for this project
to comply with North Carolina Law. Questions regarding these permits should be addressed to the Regional Office indicated on the reverse of this form.
All applications, information and guidelines relative to these plans and permits are available from the same Regional Office.
• PERMITS SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REQUIREMENTS Normal Process lime
(Staturory rme LimiU
Permit to construct & operote wastewater treatment Application 90 days before begin construction or award of construction 30 days
facilities, sewer system extensions & sewer systems contracts. On-site inspection. Post-application technical conference usual. (90 days)
not discharging into state surface waters.
? NPDES-permit to discharge into surface water and/or Application 180 days before begin activity. On-site inspection preapplication
permit to operate and construct wastewater facil'ities conference usuai. Additionally,obtain permit to construct wastewater treatment 90 -120 days
discharging into state surface waters. facility-granted aker NPDES. Repiy time, 30 days aher receipt of plans or issue (N/A)
of NPDES permit-whichever is later.
? Water Use Permit Preappiication technicat conference usually necessary , 30 days
(N/A)
? Well Construction Permit Complete appiication must be received and permit issued prior to the 7 days
Installation of a well. (15 days)
? Dredge and Fill Permit Application copy must be served on each adjacent riparian property owner. 55 days
On-site inspection. Preapplication conference usual. Filling may require Easement (90 days)
_ - ' to Fill from N.C. Department of Administration and Federa) Oredge and Fill Permit
? Permit to construct & operate Air Poliution Abatement
N/
60 days
facilities and/or Emission Sources as per 15 A NCAC A
(2Q.0100, 20.0300, 2H.0600)
? Any open burnin9 associated with subject proposal
must be in compliance with 15 A NCAC 2D.1900
? Demolition or renovations of structures containing
asbestos material must 6e in compliance with 60 days
15 A NCAC 2D.1110 (a) (1) which requires notification N?A
(90 days)
and removal prior to demolition. Contect'"Asbestos
Control Group 919-733-0820.
L] Complex Source Permit required under 15 A NCAC
2D.0800
? The Sedimentation Pollution Control Act o(1973 must be properly addressed for any land disturbing activiry. An erosion & sedimentation 20 days
)
30 d
control plan will be required if one or more acres to be disturbed. Plan filed with proper Regional Office (Land Quality Section) at least 30 ays
(
dayz 6efore beginning activity. A Fee of $50 for the (irst acre or any part of an acre.
Lj The Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 must be addressed with respect to the referenced Local Ordinance. 30 days _
Cl Sedimentation and erosion control must be addressed in accordance with NCDOTs approved program. Particular attention should be
given to design and installation of appropriate perimeter sediment trapping devices as well as stable stormwater conveyances and outlets.
? Mining Permit On-site inspection usual. Surety bond filed with DENR. Bond amount varies with
type mine and number of acres of affected land. Any are m(ned greater than 30 days
one acre must be permitted. The appropriate bond must be received before (60 days)
the permit can be issued.
? North Carolina Burning permit On-site inspection by N.C. Division of Forest Resources if permit exceeds 4 days 1 day
(N/A)

Ll Special Ground Clearance Burning Permit-22 counties On-site inspection by N.C.Divlston of Forest Resources required "if more than five
d 1 day
(N/A)
in coastai N.C. with organic soils. acres of ground clearing activities are involved. Inspections should be requeste
at least ten days before actual burn is planned.'
N/A days
90 -
N?
? Oil Refining Facilities (
A

PERMITS
SPECIAL APpLICATION PROCEDURES or REQUIREMENTS
Dam Safety Permit Normal Process T

If permit required, application, 60 days before beg(n conrtruction. Applica
must hire N.C. qualified enginee rr
(Statutory Time Lim
nt
r to: prepare plan; (nspect constructfon, certify
construction ts according to DENR approved plans. May also re
mosquito control
ui
q
re permit
progrom, and a 404 permit from Corps of Engineem under
An inspection of site is necessary to verify Haz
d

30 da
ar
Classification. A minimum
fee of $200.00 must accompany the a '
based on a percenta
e or
h
A
' ?s,
(60 da
g
t
e total pr Ject cost w
?
Permit to
l be re
drill exploratory oil or gas We??
qu red upon completion
.
File surety bond of $5,000 with DENR running to State of N.C, conditional that any
well opened by drill operator shall
upon ab
d

?
,
an
onment, be plugged according
to DENR rules and regulations.
Geophysical Exploration Pe
i
' 10days
rm
t
Application filed with DENR at least 10 days
ri (N/A)

? p
or to issue of permit. Application
by lettec No standard application form.
State Lakes Construction Permit

10 days

? Application fees based on structure size is charged. Must include descriptions
& drawings of structure & proof of ownership of riparian pro
401 Water Quality Certifi
er
i 15 (20 da s
Y
p
ry,
cat
on •- (N/A)
? CAMA Permit for M,?VOR development N/A 55 days

? $250.00 fee must accomPanY aPPlication
CAMA P (130 days)
60

ermit for MINOR development days
?
$50.00 fee must accom an a
P Y pplication
(130 days)
? Several geodetic monuments are located in or near the project area
If a ?? ?aYs
(15 days)
? .
ny monument needs to be moved or destroyed, please noti .
N.C. Geodetic Survey, Box 27687 Raleigh, N.C. 27611
Ab
?
andonment of any wells, if required must be in accordance with Title 15A, Subchapter 2C.0100
[3 ,
Notification of the proper regional office is requested if "orphan' unde

? rground storage tanks (USTS) are discovered d'
unng any excavation operation.
Compliance with 15A NCAC 2H 1000 (Coastal Stormwater R
l
u
es) Is required.
?F Other comments (attach additional pages as necessary, being certain to cite 45 days
(N/A)
comment authority)
Miu t0_,
;?a
.,
? -. , .
l ,? h';'i? ! ?'^?.i/•
,?.,, . . C, )
;
s
',????????? I.F:•?"?'?,.????
?
Questions regarding these permits sh uGd e add e?seES
d to the Regional Office marked below.
? Asheville Regional Office ? Moo 'I
59 Woodfin Place
Asheville, N.C.28801
[phone]
? Fayetteville Reg(onel Offlce
225 Green Street, Suite 714
Fayetteville, N.C. 28301
[phone]
resvi le Regional Office
919 North Main Street
Mooresville, N.C. 28115
[phone]
O Raleigh Regional Of fice
3800 Barrett Drive, P.O. Box 27687
Raleigh, N.C.27611
[phone]
? Wilmington Regional Office
127 Cardinai Drive Extension
Wilmington, N.C.28405
[phone]
? Winston-Salem Regfonal Office
585 Waughtown Street
Winston-Salem, N.C. 27107
[phone]
? Washington Regional Office
943 Washington Square Mall
Washington, N.C. 27889
[phone]
1, •:'
??
NCDENR
North Carolina
Department of Environment and
Natural Resources
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretaty
MEMORANDUM
' ' North Carolina
FOREST Division of Forest Resources
SERVICE
Stanford M. Adams, Director
N C

_}, . ' .a..

i _ ?I *?<??? f,? •``,, r .
?kR QV
1R

? t

March 23, 2006
TO: Melba McGee, Office of Legislative Affairs
FROM: Michael Mann, NC Division of Forest Resources ,
SUBJECT: Environmental Assessment for the Widening of SR 1613 (N. Winstead Ave.)
PROJECT #: 06-0258
The North Carolina Division of Forest Resources has reviewed the referenced document and
offers the following comments concerning impacts to woodlands.
The contractor should plan to utilize the merchantable timber removed during construction.
Emphasis should be on selling all wood products. However, if the wood products cannot be
sold then efforts should be made to haul off the material or turn it into mulch with a tub
grinder. This practic?Vvill minimize the need for debris btuning, and the risk of escaped fires
and smoke management problems to residences, highways, schools, and towns.
2. If woodland burning is needed, the contractor must comply with the laws and regulations of
open burning as covered under G.S. 113-60.21 through G.S. 113-60.31. Nash County is
classified as a non-high hazard counties, and G.S. 113-60.24 requiring a regular burning
permit applies.
3. The provisions that the contractor will take to prevent erosion and damage to forestland.
Trees, particularly the root system, can be permanently damaged by heavy equipment.
Efforts should be to avoid skinning of the tree trunk, compacting the soil, adding layers of
fill, exposing the i•oot system, or spilling petroleum or other substances.
We appreciate the opportunity to comment on the proposed project.
cc: Barry New
1616 Mail Service Center, Raleigli, North Carolina 27699-1601
Phone: 919 - 733-2162 ext. 255\ FAX: 919 - 715-5247 \ Internet: www.dfi•.state.nc.us
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY \ APFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - 50°/a RGCYCLED / 10% POST
CONSUML'R PAPER
'- L
.. ?. North Carolina Wi1d1xfe Resources Commission: ._9
Richard B. I-lantilton, Eaecutive 1.)irectur
MEMORANI7UM
TO: Melba McGee .
Oftice of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs, DENR
FRQNI: Travis Wilson, Highway Frbject Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Progi-am
DATE: March 21, 2006
SUBJECT: North Carolina Department of Transportatipn (NCDOT) Envirozunental
Assessrnent (EA),for the Wideniug of SR 1613 (N. Winstead Avc;,) from SR 1770
to SR 1604 in Rocky Mount, Nash Caunty, North Ca,rolina. TIP No. U-4019,
SCH Froject No. 06-025$
Staff biologists with'tYte?N. C. Wiidlife ftesources Conunission have reviewed the subject
EA and are familiar with habitat values in the project area. The purpose of this review was to
assess prpject impacts tp fish and wildlife resources. pur comments are provided in accordance
with certain provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(c)) and the
Fish azid Wildlife Coordination Act (4$ Sta,t. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d),
NCpOT proposes to widen Winstead Avenue; the total prajeet length is approxiznately 1.7
miles. Two alignment alternatives were presented for this project; however NCDOT removed the
S lane alternative from further cvnsideration due to safety issues. Therefore NCDOT's
rema,ining and recomrraended alteniative consist of a multilane median divided facility. 806
linear feet pf stream and 0.41 acres of wetlands are 1ocated within the project study area. Final
impacts have not been calculated for ihis project. Priax to determination qf the finial
environmental impacts, NCDOT will need to demonstrate an appropriate levet of avoidance and
minimication measures, including a mitigdtion plan t4r unavoidable impacts to streams mld
wetlands,
60 39dd 6E868Z56T6 Z0:9T 9eBZ/Z6/E0
Memo
2 March 21, 2006
V4re have reviewed the data contained in the EA. bue to the urban nature of this prqject we
do not have any specific concerns at this time. If we can be of any further assistance please call
me at (919) 528-98$6.
cc: Gary Jordan, U.S. Fish and'Wiidlife Service, Raleigh
John Hennessy, I)WQ, Raleigh
William Westcott, U.S. Arnly Corps of Engineers, Raleigh
b0 39dd 66868Z56T6 Z0:9T 90aZ/TZ/E0
'- V
NORTH CAROLINA STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
DEPARTMENT OF P,rMIN-L:?TRATION
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW
I,S RENEE GLEDHILL-EARLEY
CLEARINGHOOSE COORD
DEPT OF CpL RESOURCES
ARCHIVES-HISTORY BLDG - NSC 9617
RALEIGH NC
REVIEW DISTRIBUTION
CC&PS - DEM, NFIP
DENR LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS
DEPT OF AGRICULTliRE
DEPT OF CUL RESOURCES
DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION
REGION L COG
STATE NCJMBER: Oi5?T;E-,4220-0258 F021
'
DATE RECEIVED: 02/28/'2V06.._:
AGENCY RESPONSE: 03/23/2006 `
REVIEW CLOSED: 03/28/2006
?.'1 , " .K L \ \ ,(. ?' ?•?_ I

PROJECT INFORMATION
eN .
APPLICANT: N.C. Department of Transportation
. ? lkZ1...
TypE; National Environmental Policy Act ERD: Lnvironmental Assessment
DESC: Proposal to widen SR 1613 (N. Wir.stead Ave.) from SR 1770 (Sunset Ave.) to SR 1604
(Hunter Hill Rd.) in Rocky iHount, North Carolir.a. TIP #-`0-4019
The attached project has been submitted to the N. C. State Clearinghcuse for
intergovernmental review. Please review and submit your response by the above
indicated date to 1301 Mail Service Center, 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:
?
NO COMMENT
.?;
-?;-
t
i-
?`? 1 ` ?
• "_
? COMMFNTS ATT ACHED ?

SIGNED BY: A

DATE :
?? . r ?i ?' f?> \;?s•'•
pd ,
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND W1LDL1FE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
PoSt Office I3ox 33726
Ralei2h, North Carolina 27636-3726
February 28, 2006
Grebory J. Tlloi-pe, Ph.D.
Project Developnlent and Enviromnental Analysis
North Carolina Department of Trailsportation
1545 Mail Sei-vice Center
Raleigh, Nortli Caroli?la 27699-1548
Dear Dr. Thorpe:
i
'MQR ? ?uor
,?*%, ^IVISt?!? ?
VELO`P?4 ?.?,.
_"',? r ;r A N R,?.r
This letter is in response to your Februaly 22, 2006 letter which requested coiilments from t11e U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (Service) oii the Federal Environmental Assessn7ent (FEA) foi- the widening of SR
] 613 (N. Winstead Avenue) from SR 1770 (Sunset Avenue) to SR 1604 (Huuter Hill Road) in Rocky
,Mou11t, Nash County, Noi-dl Garolina (TIP No. U-4019). These cojnments are provided in accordance
with provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16 U.S.C. 661-667d) and section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as anlended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543).
Due to the subw-ban nature of the project area, the Service does not liave any specific concerns for this
project Impacts to fish and wildlife resources will lil<ely be rniniinal. There a?-e three federally
endangered species listed for Nash County: ced-cockaded woodpecker (Picoicles borealis), dwarf
Wed?remussel (Alnsnziclonta /ietei-odorl) and Tar spinymLissel (Elliptio steiiist(aizsana). The Serviee
previously concurred (via letter dated April 7, 2005) that the project will have no effect on the red-
cockaded woodpecker, and may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the dwarf wedgemussel ancl
Tar spinymussel. We believe that the requirements of section 7(a)(2) of the ESA have been satisfied. Wc
remind you that obligations under section 7 consultation must be reconsidered if: (1) neNN, information
reveals impacts of this identified action that inay affect listed species or critical habitat in a manner iiot
previously considered in this review; (2) tliis action is subsequently modified in a nlanner that was not
considered in tliis review; (3) a ne?v species is listed or critical habitat deterillined that may be affected by
the identified action.
7he 5,,rvice uelieves that tliis FEA adeqLiately addresses the existing fish and wildlife resources, the
waters and xvetlands of the United States, aild the potential impacts of tliis proposed project on these
resources. The Service appreciates the opportlinity to review this project. If you have a»y questions
regardin- our response, please contact Mr. Gaiy Jordan at [phone], ext. 32.
Siiicerel}? ?
---
Pete Ben 'aipiu Ecologidal'Services Supervisor
cc: Chris Militscher, USEPA, Raleigh, NC
Travis Wilson, NCWRC, Creedmoor, NC
Nicolc Thomson, NCDWQ, Raleigh, NC
William Wescott, USACE, Washiugton, NC
John Sullivan, FHwA, Raleigll, NC
WIDENING OF SR 1613 (N. WINSTEAD AVE.)
FROM SR 1770 (SUNSET AVE.) TO
SR 1604 (HUNTER HILL ROAD) IN
ROCKY MOUNT
NASH COUNTY
WBS Element 35014.1.1
Federal Project No. STP-1613(3)
TIP PROJECT U-4019
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
U. S. DF.NAR'I'MENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HI(UHWAY ADMINIS"CRATIOIY
AND
N. C. DEPAR'CMENT OF TRAVSPDRTATION
submitted pursuanY to 42 U.S.C. 4332(2) (c)
APPROVFD:
l &0 (p
at f
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch, NCDOT
a1a ?? &61L?-
? WI(ke--
Date 410-Federal John F. Sullivan III, P.E., Divis
Highway Administration
Administrator
WIDENING OF SR 1613 (N. WINSTEAD AVE.)
FROM SR 1770 (SL]NSET AVE.) TO
SR 1604 (HUNTER HILL ROAD) IN
ROCKY MOUNT
NASH COUNTY
WBS Element 35014.1.1
Federal Project No. STP-1613(3)
T.I.P. No. U-4019
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
January 2006
Documentation prepared in the Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
by:
JLI
?r M!„Fuller, P. E.
Development Engineer
*``????t? u h?????
1% I
H CARO
.
• ?.
:
. :
SEAI ;
26985 :
? ??.t;? •.??, ?.?E?.,, ???r?
??''?.j'?FR t?A •'???``?
'????????????`'
S. Eric Midkiff, P.E., CPM IL
Central Project Development Unit Head
PROJECT COMMITMENTS
WIDENING OF SR 1613 (N. WINSTEAD AVE.)
FROM SR 1770 (SUNSET AVE.) TO
SR 1604 (HUNTER HILL ROAD) IN
ROCKY MOUNT
NASH COUNTY
WBS Element 35014.1.1
Federal Project No. STP-1613(3)
T.I.P. No. U-4019
Program Development Branch, Roadway Design Unit
NCDOT will coordinate with the City of Rocky Mount concerning a municipal
agreement on sidewalks along the both sides of SR 1613 (Winstead Ave.) in
accordance with the NCDOT sidewalk policy. Sidewalks are proposed on both
sides of N. Winstead Ave. for the entire project length.
The outside lanes will have an extra two feet of pavement for bicyclists and 2'-6"
curb and gutter.
Page 1 of 1
Bnvironmental Assessment (EA)
January 2006
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SUMMARY ....................................................................................... .............................................. i
1. Type of Action ......................................................................... .............................................. i
2. Description of Action ............................................................... .............................................. i
3. Alternatives Considered ........................................................... .............................................. i
4. Summary of Environmental Impacts ........................................ ............................................. ii
5. Anticipated Design Exceptions ................................................ ............................................. ii
6. Special Permits Required
.........................................................
............................................ iii
7. Coordination ............................................................................. ............................................iii

8.
A itional In ormation ............................................................. ...
............................................iii
1. BASIS FOR PROPOSED ACTION ........................................ .............................................1
A . Purpose of Project .................................................................... ............................................. 1
B. Characteristics of Existing Facilities ........................................ ............................................. 1
1. Cross Sections ....................................................................... ............................................. 1
2. Right of Way ......................................................................... ............................................. 1
3. Alignment ............................................................................. ............................................. 1
4. Access Control ...................................................................... ............................................. 2
5. Structures .............................................................................. ............................................. 2
6. Speed Limits ......................................................................... ............................................. 2
7. Intersections and Type of Control ......................................... ............................................. 3
8. Utilities .................................................................................. .............................................3
9. Greenway, Pedestrian, and Bicycle Considerations ............. ............................................. 3
10. Geodetic Markers .................................................................. ............................................. 3
11. School Buses ......................................................................... ............................................. 3
12. Airport ................................................................................... .............................................3
C. Thoroughfare Plan and System Linkage .................................. ............................................. 3
D . Independent Utility ................................................................... .............................................4
E. Traffic Volumes and Capacity Analysis .................................. .............................................4
1. Existing and Predicted Traffic Volumes ............................... ............................................. 4
2. Capacity Analysis ................................................................. ............................................. 4
F. Accident Data and Analysis ..................................................... ............................................. 6
II. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION ........................... ............................................. 7
A . General Description .................................................................. .............................................7
B. Project Status ............................................................................ .............................................7
C. Recommended Improvements .................................................. ............................................. 7
1. Length of Project ................................................................... ............................................. 7
2. Typical Section ..................................................................... ............................................. 7
3. Structures .............................................................................. ............................................. 8
4. Traffic Control during Construction ..................................... ............................................. 8
5. Right of Way and Relocations .............................................. ............................................. 8
6. Projected Level of Service .................................................... ............................................. 9
7. Intersection Treatment and Type of Control ......................... ........................................... 10
8. SidewalksBicycle Accommodations .................................... ........................................... 10
9. Access Control ............................................................................................... .................. 11
10. Design Speed and Proposed Posted Speed Limit .......................................... .................. 11
11 . Degree of Utility Conflicts ............................................................................. .................. 11
12. Cost Estimates ................................................................................................ .................. 11
III. A LTERNATIVES CONSIDERED ................................................................... ..................12
A. Alignment Alternatives ..................................................................................... ..................12
B. Mass Transit Alternative ................................................................................... .................. 13
C. Transportation System Management (TSM) Alternative .................................. ..................14
D. No -Build Alternative ........................................................................................ ..................15
IV. SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ................... ..................15
A. Community Impacts Analysis ........................................................................... ..................15
l. Project Area Background ............................................................................... .................. 15
2. Community Profile ......................................................................................... .................. 16
B. Qualitative Indirect and Cumulative Effects (ICE) Assessment ...................... .................. 32
1. ICE Methodology .......................................................................................... ................... 32
2. ICE Study Area Boundaries .......................................................................... ................... 33
3. Study Area Direction and Goals ................................................................... ................... 34
4. Environmental Regulations ........................................................................... ................... 38
5. Activities That May Cause Effects ............................................................... ................... 40
6. Potential Indirect and Cumulative Effects For Analysis ............................... ................... 40
7. Indirect and Cumulative Effects ................................................................... ................... 42
8. Evaluation of Analysis Results ..................................................................... ................... 44
9. ICE Conclusions ........................................................................................... ................... 44
C. CIA and ICE Mitigation, Enhancement, and Recommendatioris .................... ................... 45
D. Cultural Resources ........................................................................................... ................... 45
1. Archaeological Resources ............................................................................. ...................45
2. Architectural Historic Resources .................................................................. ................... 46
3. Section 4(f) and Section 6(fl Resources ....................................................... ...................46
E. Natural Resources Technical Report ................................................................ ...................46
1. Regional Characteristics ............................................................................... ................... 46
2. Soils .............................................................................................................. ...................47
3. Water Resources ........................................................................................... ................... 48
4. Biotic Resources ........................................................................................... ................... 51
5. Jurisdictional Topics ..................................................................................... ................... 55
F. Air Quality Analysis ......................................................................................... ................... 64
G. Highway Traffic Noise/Construction Noise Analysis ...................................... ................... 64
H. Hazardous Material and Geotechnical Impacts ................................................ ................... 65
1. Hydraulic Concerns .......................................................................................... ................... 66
V. COMMENTS AND COORDINATION .......................................................... ................... 66
A. Comments Received from Federal, State, and Local Agencies ....................... ................... 66
B. Citizens' Informational Workshop ................................................................... ................... 67
C. Public Hearing .................................................................................................. ................... 67
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
TABLES PAGE
Table 1 Major Stream Crossing and Existing Structures ...... ................. .......2
Table 2 Existing and Future Level of Service, No-Bui1d ...................... ........5
Table 3 Inters. Crash Rt. compared to Statewide Crash Rt ... .... .. ..... .. .... .. ......6
Table 4 Level of Service in Project Area 2009 and 2025, Build .................. ........ .9
Table 5 Preliminary Cost Estimate ...................................
............................
........ .11
Table 6 1990-2000 Population Growth ........................................................ ........ 17
Table 7 2000 Population by Race/Ethnicity ................................................. ........ .18
Table 8 2000 Population by Age and Median Age ...................................... ........ .19
Table 9 1989-1999 Median Household Income ........................................... .........19
Table 10 1989-1999 Percentage below Poverty Level ................................... ........ .20
Table 11 2000 Educational Status .................................................................. ........ .20
Table 12 1990-2000 Household Growth ....................................................... ........ .21
Table 13 1990-2000 Homeownership Rates .................................................. ........ .21
Table 14 2000 Median Home Value ............................................................. ........ .22
Table 15 2000 Rental Rates ........................................................................... ........ .22
Table 16 2000 Occupancy Status .................................................................. ........ 22
Table 17 Employment by Sector .................................................................... ........ .23
Table 18 Unemployment Rate 1990-2003 ..................................................... ........ .24
Table 19 Population Growth Trends and Projections 1980-2020 .................. ........ .35
Table 20 Potential for Land Use Change ....................................................... ........ .43
Table 21 Soils List for Project Study Area ..................................................... ........ .47
Table 22 Terrestrial Communities within Project Study Area ....................... ........ .54
Table 23 Surface Waters and Buffer Areas within Project Study Area ......... ........ .59
Table 24 Jurisdictional Wetlands within Project Study Area ......................... ........ .59
Table 25 Federal Protected Species within Nash County .............................. ........ .62
Table 26 Federal Protected Species of Concern within Nash County ........... ........ .64
FIGURES
Figure 1 Vicinity Map
Figure 2 Project Aerial Map and Project Corridor
Figure 3 Proposed Cross Sections
Figure 4 Traffic Forecast for 2002/2025
Figure 5 Wetland and Stream Locations
Figure 6 Nash County Thoroughfare Plan
Appendix A Comments Received from Federal, State and Local Agencies
Appendix B Relocation Report and Relocation Assistance Programs
Appendix C Air Quality Analysis
Appendix D Highway Traffic Noise Analysis
WIDENING OF SR 1613 (N. WINSTEAD AVE.)
FROM SR 1770 (SUNSET AVE.) TO
SR 1604 (HUNTER HILL ROAD) IN
ROCKY MOUNT
NASH COUNTY
WBS Element 35014.1.1
Federal Project No. STP-1613(3)
T.I.P. No. U-4019
SUMMARY
Type of Action
This is a Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Administrative Action,
Environmental Assessment (EA).
2. Description of Action
The North Carolina Department of Transportation, Division of Highways,
proposes to widen SR 1613 (Winstead Ave.) from a three-lane (one lane each direction
plus center turn lane) to a six lane median-divided facility with curb and gutter, from SR
1770 (Sunset Ave.) to US 64, and a four-lane median-divided facility with curb and
gutter from US 64 to SR 1604 (Hunter Hill Road). The total length of this project is 1.7
miles.
The proposed project is included in NCDOT's approved 2006-2012
Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). The 2006-2012 TIP has allocated
$1,621,000 for right of way acquisition and $10,000,000 for construction. Project costs
are currently estimated at $1,528,750 for right of way acquisition and $15,000,000 for
construction.
3. Alternatives Considered
The following alternatives were evaluated:
A. Build Alternatives
1. Recommended: four to six lane median-divided facility.
2. Alternative solutions: five-lane curb and gutter facility.
B. Mass Transit
1. Bus Transit
2. Light Rail
C. Transportation System Management (TSM) Alternative: low-cost
transportation improvements to an existing facility in lieu of large-scale
changes.
4. Summary of Environmental Impacts
The environmental impacts associated with the proposed project are detailed in
Section IV of this document.
Estimated Impacts to the Natural and Human Environment
U-4019 Study Area
Environmental Impacts Total impact
Len th 1.7 miles
Wetlands 0.41
Streams 8061inear feet
Tar-Pamlico Buffer Zone 1(30 feet): 1.13 acres
Zone 2(20 feet): 0.86 acres
Relocations 0
Hazardous Material Sites Stud in ro ress
Noise Rece tors 1
Prime Farmland 0
Forested (total terrestrial
communit ) 46.2 acres
Endangered Species No Effect: 1 species
May affect but not likely to adversely
affect: 2 s ecies
National Register Eligible
Pro ert 0
Section 4( fl Im acts 0
Schools 0
Churches 0
EJ communities 0
Air Qualit No
Critical Water Su lies No
Outstandin Water Resources 0
Total Cost $16,528,750
5. Anticipated Design Exceptions
There are no anticipated design exceptions anticipated for this project.
Special Permits Required
A section 404 Nationwide Permit is anticipated for this project. A North Carolina
Division of Water Quality General Certification is required prior to the issuance of the
Section 404 General Permit.
7. Coordination
Comments were received from the following federal, state, and local agencies.
Copies of the comments received are included in Appendix A. These comments have
been taken into consideration in the planning of this project and the preparation of this
document.
*U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
*U. S. Department of Interior - Fish and Wildlife Service - Raleigh
*N. C. State Clearinghouse, Department of Administration
*N. C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources-
Division of Water Quality
*N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission
*N. C. Department of Cultural Resources
Region L Planning Agency (MPO)
City of Rocky Mount
Nash County
*Nash-Rocky Mount Schools
Written comments were received from agencies noted with an asterisk (*).
Copies of the comments received are included in Appendix A.
8. AdditionalInformation
The following persons can be contacted for additional information concerning the
proposal and assessment:
John F. Sullivan, III, P.E.
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
310 New Bern Avenue, Suite 410
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601
Telephone [phone]
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
iii
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
Telephone [phone]
IV
WIDENING OF SR 1613 (N. WINSTEAD AVE.)
FROM SR 1770 (SUNSET AVE.) TO
SR 1604 (HUNTER HILL ROAD) IN
ROCKY MOUNT
NASH COUNTY
WBS Element 35014.1.1
Federal Project No. STP-1613(3)
T.I.P. No. U-4019
1. BASIS FOR PROPOSED ACTION
A. Purpose of Project
The purpose of this project is to improve the level of service (traffic flow) for SR
1613 (N. Winstead Ave.). The improvements outlined in this Environmental Assessment
will meet the purpose and need by enabling more efficient traffic operations. See
Figure 1 for the location of this project.
B. Characteristies of Existing Facilities
Cross Sections
SR 1613 (Winstead Ave.) is currently a three-lane, 36-foot wide facility including
a center turn lane and shoulders varying in width from 6 feet to 10 feet. The proposed
southern terminal of the project is at SR 1770 (Sunset Avenue), a five-lane facility with
concrete curb and gutter. The proposed northern terminal of the project is at SR 1604
(Hunter Hill Road), a two-lane facility with 20-feet of pavement with 8-foot shoulders.
2. Right of Way
Right of way widths are widely variable along SR 1613, ranging from 145 feet to
160 feet, widening to 230 feet at the Stoney Creek bridge. The existing right of way is
approximately 280 feet at the US 64 interchange.
3. Alignment
The current vertical and horizontal alignment of existing Winstead Avenue is
compliant with AASHTO standards.
4. Access Control
A grade separation exists at the US 64 interchange. The only control of access in
the project conidor is at this interchange.
5. Structures
Bridge No. 285 carries Winstead Avenue over Stoney Creek. This structure was
built in 1974 and has a sufficiency rating of 97.3 with an estimated remaining life of 28
years. This bridge consists of three spans with a concrete deck on prestressed concrete
girders supported by reinforced concrete caps and piles. The total length of the bridge is
160'-10". The stream has a normal flow depth and the banks are stable with natural
vegetation. Bridge scour information indicates that the bridge is considered to be low
risk as the footings are in rock.
Bridge No. 179 cazries Winstead Avenue over US 64. This structure was built in
1974 and has a sufficiency rating of 83.0 with an estimate remaining life of 23 years. This
bridge consists of four spans with a concrete deck on prestressed concrete girders
supported by reinforced concrete caps and piles. The total length of the bridge is 233 feet.
The following table lists existing structural information at the major stream
crossings along the project.
Table 1 Maior Stream Crossing and Existing Structures
Stream Location Existing Structure and Flood Zone Status
Channel Geometr
Three span bridge: 1 @
53'9", 1@ 53'4",
Bridge No. 285, 2000 '
"
Stoney Creek feet North of SR 1770 1@ 53
9 Flood Hazard Zone
17' above creek bed
Unnamed 48" RCP
Tributary to 820 feet North of SR Base width of 3 ft
Stoney Creek 1613/US 64 Interchange Channel depth of _5" None
UT-1
Unnamed 48" RCP
Tributary to 1,820 feet South of Base width of 5 ft. None
Stoney Creek SR 1613/ SR 1604 Channel depth 6"
Intersection
UT-12
6. Speed Limits
The posted speed limit along Winstead Avenue is 45 mph.
2
7. Intersections and Type of Control
Existing traffic signals occur at the SR 1770 (Sunset Ave.), Curtis Ellis Drive
(Exit ramps from US 64), SR 1614 (English Road), and SR 1604 (Hunter Hill Road)
intersections with Winstead Avenue.
8. Utilities
Existing utilities include fiber optic, street lighting, power, telephone, water,
sewer, and possibly gas and cable.
9. Greenway, Pedestrian, and Bicycle Considerations
There are presently no greenways, pedestrian facilities, or bicycle
accommodations along the existing facility.
10. Geodetic Markers
There are no known geodetic markers located within the project area.
11. School Buses
This project does not affect any existing or proposed school sites or bus
routes.
12. Airport
The Rocky Mount - Wilson Regional Airport is located approximately 6 zniles to
the southwest of the project's southern terminal.
C. Thoroughfare Plan and System Linkage
The project development and design processes for improvements to SR 1613
(Winstead Ave.) began in 1999 when feasibility studies were completed. SR 1613 is
classified as a major thoroughfare in the Rocky Mount Thoroughfare Plan (Figure 6) and
is classified as a minor urban arterial in the North Carolina Statewide Functional
Classification System. The project corridor is the western portion of the Rocky Mount
northern connector system.
Winstead Avenue is intended to adjoin the proposed Rocky Mount Northern
Connector, (R-2823). The Connector will serve as a major thoroughfare, providing
commuters from both the southwestern and northwestern portions of Rocky Mount with
access to commercial and industrial areas located in northern Rocky Mount.
3
D. Independent Utility
According to 23 CFR 771.111(f), "...in order to ensure meaningful evaluation of
alternatives and to avoid commitments to transportation improvements before they are
fully evaluated, the action evaluated shall...:
(1) Connect logical termini and be of sufficient length to address
environmental matters on a broad scope,
(2) Have an independent utility or independent significance, i.e., be
usable and be a reasonable expenditure even if no additional
transportation improvernents in the area are made; and,
(3) Not restrict consideration of alternatives for other reasonably
foreseeable transportation improvements."
The purpose of this project is to improve the level of service (traffic flow) of SR
1613 (N. Winstead Ave.) The project adequately encompasses the area to address the
project scope and environmental matters. This project can stand alone as a functioning
project. FHWA and NCDOT have determined this project meets the criteria set forth in
23 CFR 771.111( fl.
E. Traffic Volumes and Capacity Analysis
Existing and Predicted Traffic Volumes
Estimated 2002 traffic volumes on Winstead Avenue in the project area range
from 28,600 vehicles per day (vpd) near US 64 to 8,400 vpd near Hunter Hill Road.
Predicted 2025 traffic volumes on Winstead Avenue range from 56,600 to 21,400 vpd for
the same locations as noted above.
Figure 4 shows detailed traffic data, including turning movements, directional
distribution, truck percentages, and directional flow percentages for the years 2002 and
2025.
2. Capacity Analysis
Level of service, abbreviated as LOS, describes operational conditions within a
traffic stream, and how motorists perceive these conditions. A LOS definition generally
describes these conditions in terms of speed, travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic
interruptions, comfort, convenience, and safety. Six levels of service are possible, with
letter designations from level A(best) to level F(worst).
The Highway Capacity Manual (Special Report 209, Transportation Research
Board, 1985, updated in 2000.) was used to determine the LOS for the current year
(2002) and for the design year (2025). Table 2 summarizes level of service for existing
and the 2025 no-build.
The following analysis was provided by the NC DOT Traffic Engineering and
Safety Systems Branch, using 2002 and 2025 traffic projections for Average Daily
Traffic (ADT) with the Highway Capacity Manual 2000. Please refer to Figure 4 for a
diagram of the ADTs used in this analysis.
TABLE 2
EXISTING LEVELS OF SERVICE IN THE PROJECT AREA

SR 1613 - Winstead Avenue Mainline F F
SR 1770 (Sunset Ave.) & SR 1613 (Winstead Ave.) E ? F
SR 1634 (Curtis Ellis Dr.) & SR 1613 (Winstead Ave.) I F ( F
US 64 East Bound Ramps & SR 1613 (Winstead Ave.) I D I F
US 64 West Bound Ramps & SR 1613 (Winstead I C I F
Ave.)
SR 1614 (English Rd.) & SR 1613 (Winstead Ave.) I C I F
---
SR 1604 (Hunter Hill Rd.) & SR 1613 (Winstead C F
Ave.)
SR 1660 (N. Woodruff Rd.) & SR 1613 (Winstead ? A ? C
Ave.) South-Bound Left-turn approach
SR 1660 (N. Woodruff Rd.) & SR 1613 (Winstead ? C ? F
Ave.) West-Bound Right-turn approach
5
F. Accident Data and Analysis
The overall crash rate indicates how safe it is to drive on a particular roadway.
The lower the crash rate, which has the units accidents per 100 million vehicle-miles
traveled (acc/100mvm), the safer the facility. Data can be gathered for a particular road
that can then be compared to other similar roads in the state.
A total of 130 crashes were reported along this location between September 1,
2001 and August 31, 2004. For crash rate purposes, this location can be classified as a 2-
lane urban secondary route with a continuous left turn lane. The following table shows
the comparison of the crash rates for the analyzed section SR 1613 (Winstead Avenue)
versus the 2000-2002 statewide crash rates and the calculated critical rate with a 95%
confidence for a comparable route type and configuration. All of the crash rates are
below the average for similar type facilities.
TABLE 3
Intersection crash rates compared to Statewide crash rates
2000-2002 Three Year Crash Rates
Crash Rate er 100 Million Vehicle Miles Travelcd
?__
Rate E Crashes Crashes per 100 ? Statewide RateS? .?

MVNl
?
Alanf,- Wiaistead ?
Ave. E;
ie' E 3

Total 3
` 130 346.82 672.61
Fatal 0 0.00 0.58
Non-fatal 46 122.72 219.76
Night 19 50.69 136.84
conditions
Wet 20 53.36 118.87
conditions
1 2000-2002 Statewide Crash rate for 2-lane urban secondary route with continuous left turn
lane.
The proposed four-lane median-divided cross section will reduce the potential for
the majority of accidents that are occurring on Winstead Avenue by providing multi-lanes
for through traffic and will enhance the overall safety and convenience of Winstead
Avenue in the project area.
IL DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION
A. General Description
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to widen
SR 1613 (Winstead Ave.) from a three-lane (one lane each direction plus center turn
lane) to a six lane median-divided facility with curb and gutter, from SR 1770 (Sunset
Ave.) to US 64, and a four-lane median-divided facility with curb and gutter from US 64
to SR 1604 (Hunter Hill Road).
The project proposes 12-foot lanes with a 30-foot grass median with curb and
gutter and sidewalks on both sides. Refer to Section M.A. for a description of the
alternatives.
B. Project Status
This project is included in NCDOT's latest approved Transportation Improvement
Program (TIP). Right of way acquisition and construction are scheduled in the 2006-2012
TIP for federal fiscal years 2007 and 2009, respectively. Figure 1 illustrates a vicinity
map of the project area. Figures 2A-2C show an aerial view of the project area with an
overlaid schematic of the project study corridor.
C. Recommended Improvements
Length of Project
The total length for the proposed project is approximately 1.7 miles.
2. Typical Section
The four-lane section from US 64 to SR 1604 (Hunter Hill Road), will have two
12-foot travel lanes in each direction. The proposed raised, grassy median will be 28-feet
in width with 1'-6" curb and gutter. The outside lanes will have an extra two feet of
pavement for bicyclists and 2'-6" curb and gutter. The six-lane section from SR 1770
(Sunset Avenue)to US 64, will have three 12-foot travel lanes in each direction. The
proposed raised, grassy median will be 30-feet in width with 1'-6" curb and gutter The
outside lanes will have an extra two feet of pavement for bicyclists and 2'-6" curb and
gutter. Refer to Figure 3 for a description of the proposed typical section.
7
3. Structures
Bridge No. 285 over Stoney Creek and Bridge No. 179 over US 64 will be
retained and widened.
No bridge removal is proposed for project U-4019.
4. Traffic Control during Construction
Traffic will be maintained on site during the construction. Bridge No. 285, over
Stoney Creek and Bridge No. 179 over US 64 will be retained and widened. The existing
bridges will be used to service traffic during construction.
5. Right of Way and Relocations
Existing right of way varies from 145 feet to 230 feet and should be sufficient in
most areas to accommodate the proposed improvements, therefore the purchase of new
right of way will be minimal. Where additional right of way is needed for grading and
drainage, a temporary construction easement will be purchased by NCDOT.
For some roadway projects, some private property must be acquired to provide
North Carolinians with safer and more modern highways. The North Carolina
Department of Transportation must:
? Treat all property owners and tenants impartially without regard to race,
color, religion, sex or national origin.
? Fully explain an owner's legal rights.
? Pay just compensation in exchange for property rights.
? Furnish relocation advisory assistance, in accordance with federal and
state regulations.
? Initiate legal action should a settlement not be reached.
Preliminary designs indicate no relocations of residences and the relocation of one
business will be necessary for this project. The official relocation report can be found in
Appendix B of this document. When the highway design is complete, all affected
property owners are contacted by a right-of-way agent. In most cases, the NCDOT will
have an appraisal or evaluation made on each property affected by a highway project.
The appraiser makes an independent and impartial appraisal based on an inspection of the
property. In making the appraisal, the appraiser investigates and analyzes recent sales of
similar properties in the area. The appraiser also compiles and obtains information
concerning building costs, rental values and all other necessary information to provide an
accurate estimate of the fair market value of the property. It is the NCDOT's policy to
make every reasonable effort to acquire property by negotiations. In the event the
department is unable to reach an agreement with a property owner, a settlement will then
be reached by the courts under Article 9 of Chapter 136 of the General Statutes of the
State of North Carolina.
The typical section will require approximately 150 feet of right of way.
Temporary construction easements on both sides of the project may be required.
Permanent drainage easements may be required in some areas along the proposed project.
Additional right of way may be required along sections of the existing roadways
within the project area.
The Relocation Report for U-4019 is located in Appendix B of this document.
6. Projected Level of Service
The following analysis, shown in Table 4, was provided by the NC DOT Traffic
Engineering and Safety Systems Branch, using 2009 and 2025 traffic projectiont for
Average Daily Traffic (ADT). Please refer to Figures 4A and 4B for diagrams of the
ADTs used in this analysis.
TABLE 4
PROJECTED LEVELS OF SERVICE IN THE PROJECT AREA
(Build, multi-lane median-divided)
? ,? .. ... . ... ...... . .
_ .. .-. ? ..
= - -
,? . . ....; .....

- - ??
Intersection ; 2009 2025 i
? (MliLTI- ? (llESIGN ?
j ! LA1VE, Yk:Alt, ?
' 14aFDlAN ' MliLTI
DIVII)I??I}} ; L,A.NE
? N1F,I?IAN
=
. PIVIDED) ;-
SR 1613 - Winstead Avenue Mainliue ? C E
SR 1770 (Sunset Ave.) & SR 1613 (Winstead Ave.) C E
(si nalized)
SR 1634 (Curtis Ellis Dr.) & SR 1613 (Winstead C D
Ave.)
(si nalized)
US 64 East Bound Ramps & SR 1613 (Winstead B C
Ave. )
(si nalized)
US 64 West Bound Ramps & SR 1613 (Winstead B D
Ave.)
(signalized) ??? ? ........ ..: .... i
SR 1614 (English Rd.) & SR 1613 (Winstead Ave.) B I C
SR 1604 (Hunter Hill Rd.) & SR 1613 (Winstead ? C ? D
Ave.)
SR 1660 (N. Woodruff Rd.) & SR 1613 (Winstead
Ave.) South-Bound Left-turn approach removed N/A N/A
SR 1660 (N. Woodruff Rd.) & SR 1613 (Winstead ? B I C
Ave.) West-Bound Right-turn approach ,
Note: Levels af Service are for a.m. and p.m. unless otherwise noted.
7. Intersection Treatment and Type of Control
Surface street (at-grade) intersections along Winstead Avenue will be enhanced
by this project.
The following intersections are currently signalized and will remain so:
SR 1770 (Sunset Ave.) & SR 1613 (Winstead Ave.), SR 1634 (Curtis Ellis Dr.) & SR
1613 (Winstead Ave.), US 64 East Bound Ramps & SR 1613, US 64 West Bound Ramps
& SR 1613, SR 1614 (English Rd.) & SR 1613, and SR 1604 (Hunter Hill Rd.) & SR
1613.
The intersection of SR 1660 (N. Woodruff Rd.) & SR 1613 (Winstead Ave.) is
currently unsignalized will remained unsignalized.
8. SidewalksBicycle Accommodations
Sidewalks are proposed along both sides of Winstead Avenue for the entire
project length. Local officials of Rocky Mount have requested sidewalk be included
with U-4019, therefore five-foot concrete sidewalks will be constructed in accordance
with the NCDOT Pedestrian Policy. More information about this policy is available at
the following website: http://www.ncdot.org/transit/bicycle/laws/laws-pedpolicy.html
Wheel chair ramps will be provided at all street and driveway crossings.
This section of Winstead Avenue does not correspond to a bicycle TIP project,
however, 14-foot outside lanes are being provided to accommodate bicyclists. There is
also an existing multi-use trail that parallels the Tar River east of the project area. This
trail, known as the Tar River Trail, runs along the Tar River from City Lake along Sunset
Avenue to its termination point at the Martin Luther King Jr. Park. According to local
planners, a possible greenway could be constructed along Stoney Creek underneath
Winstead Avenue and connect to the Tar River Trail at the mouth of Stoney Creek.
Wider outside travel lanes for bicycles would enhance the greenway access.
10
9. Access Control
Currently, with the exception of the US 64 interchange area, there is no control of
access on Winstead Avenue, meaning access to Winstead Avenue is allowed from any
property or intersecting street. With the exception of slight adjustments of the current
full control of access at the US 64 interchange, there will be no change in access control
on Winstead Avenue with the proposed improvements.
10. Design Speed and Proposed Posted Speed Limit
The proposed project will have a minimum design speed of 50 miles per hour
(mph). The anticipated posted speed limit is 45 mph.
11. Degree of Utility Conflicts
Utility conflicts will be high and include gas, cable, water/sewer lines, telephone,
electric, and street lighting. Most relocation of utilities will be contained within the
existing right of way.
12. Cost Estimates
The proposed project is included in NCDOT's approved 2006-2012
Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). The 2006-2012 (TIP) has allocated
$12,029,000 for the proposed project including $1,621,000 for right of way acquisition,
$10,000,000 for construction and $400,000 for prior years spending and $5,000 for
potential mitigation costs.
Updated estimated construction and right of way cost estimates for the build
alternative are as shown in Table 3.
TABLE 5
PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATES
Widening of Winstead Avenue
to a four-lane median-divided COST
facility
RIGHT-OF-WAY & UTIL 1 $1,528,750
CONSTRUCTION 1 $15,000,000
TOTAL $16,528,750
it
III. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
A. Alignment Alternatives
Recommended Alternative
From SR 1770 (Sunset Avenue) to SR 1544 (Hunter Hill Road), NCDOT
proposes to widen Winstead Avenue from a 3-lane to a multi-lane median-divided
facility. The proposed typical cross-section consists of two, 12-foot wide inside travel
lanes in each direction and a 30-foot raised median and one 14-foot outside travel lane in
each direction. This will provide a six-lane facility between SR 1770 and US 64. From
US 64 to SR 1604, the proposed roadway is a four-lane facility, the outside lanes still
proposed at 14 feet. There will be 2-foot 6-inch curb and gutter along both sides of the
roadway with a 10-foot berm (14-foot with guardrail) and five-foot sidewalk along both
sides of Winstead Avenue. The raised median will have 1-foot 6-inch curb and gutter.
Figure 3 is a sketch of this cross-section. There is no control of access proposed,
meaning that Winstead Avenue can be accessed by any driveway or intersecting street.
Full control of access will remain at the US 64 interchange area.
Six signalized intersections will be upgraded and a closed-loop system will be
installed. The traffic signal at Nash General Hospital (Winstead and Curtis Ellis Dr.) will
be upgraded to include an emergency vehicle pre-emptive device.
2. Alternative Solutions
Afive-lane curb and gutter facility was considered but eliminated based on safety issues.
NCDOT supports construction of a median-divided roadway over a roadway with a center turn
lane whenever prudent.
In comparison to a 5-lane facility with a central two-way left-turn lane, a median divided
facility separates opposing traffic and significantly reduces a wide range of common accidents,
including rear-end, right angle, head-on, and left-turn. The median also reduces property
damage, injuries and fatalities related to these accidents. As average daily traffic increases, the
benefits of a divided median also increase in comparison to the 5-lane facility-especially at a
volume of 24,000 or higher. When through traffic nears 28,000 vehicles a day, motorists
desiring to turn left from a 5-lane section have difficulty finding a safe gap in oncoming traffic.
It is anticipated that up to 56,600 vehicles per day will be using this facility in the year 2025.
A median-divided roadway also supparts NCDOT's commitment to incorporate Access
Management principles into road projects. Access Management is, according to the Federal
Highway Administration, "the process that provides access to land development while
simultaneously preserving the flow of traffic on the surrounding road system in terms of safety,
capacity, and speed." A median will reduce the number of left turns allowed along Winstead
Avenue, thereby reducing the number of conflict points. As a result, accidents will be reduced
12
and efficient movement will be maintained. The median will also enhance the environment,
providing an attractive and inviting roadway corridor. Businesses will benefit from increased
business vitality along a well-managed corridor.
No additional alternatives were suggested by citizens, property or business
owners located on the project, local representatives, or consulting agencies.
B. Mass Transit Alternative
The Mass Transit Alternative includes providing bus andlor rail service to
decrease congestion. A major advantage of mass transit is it can provide high-capacity,
energy-efficient movement for densely traveled conidors. It also serves high and
medium density areas by offering 1) a low-cost altemative for auto owners who do not
wish to drive, and 2) an essential service to those without access to an automobile, such
as school children, senior citizens, single auto families, and others who may be
economically or physically disadvantaged.
Bus Transit Service
The Tar River Transit System (TRT), run by the City of Rocky Mount, provides
regular fixed-route bus service as an altemative method of transportation for the public.
There are many bus routes included in the Tar River Transit System that provide an
excellent alternative to driving a personal vehicle for residents of Rocky Mount. The
Sunset Route, or Route Number 7 runs from downtown Rocky Mount along Sunset
Avenue to Winstead Avenue with service to Nash General Hospital. However,
businesses like Nash General Hospital and its large campus of inedical offices draw much
of their vehicular traffic from I-95 and US 64. Traffic volumes show that the highest
number of vehicles are traveling Winstead Avenue between US 64 and Curtis Ellis Drive,
where Nash General Hospital is located. This traffic is generally non-local, consisting of
interstate and intrastate traffic and visitors from surrounding towns and counties. The
altemative of bus transit will not improve traffic flow since it does not accommodate
regional travelers, only local travelers.
As the project is anticipated to enhance vehicular movement and reduce
congestion within the project area, effects on transit routes should be either neutral or
positive. Transit facilities will not be impacted by this project.
2. Light Rail
Currently there are eight Amtrak passenger trains stopping at the train depot in
downtown Rocky Mount. The routes that include a stop at the Rocky Mount Amtrak
Station are the Carolinian and the Palmetto/Silver Service, both of which are commuter
rail services. The Carolinian provides service between Charlotte and New York City
while the Palmetto/Silver Service travels daily between Miami and New York City.
Commuter rail services alone will provide no congestion relief within the project area so
13
the alternative of rail transit does not satisfy the transportation needs of the area.
Regional rail would be needed to help provide congestion relief in the project area,
however there are no regional services to the project area and no plans to implement such
a system.
C. Transportation System Management (TSM) Alternative
The Transportation System Management (TSM) Alternative consists of adding
low-cost transportation improvements to an existing facility in lieu of large-scale
changes. TSM measures are designed to maximize the use and energy efficiency of a
facility and to enhance the operations, while minimizing capital outlay. Often, TSM
measures cause little inconvenience to users of the facility. There are three categories of
TSM: operational and physical improvements, ridesharing, and high occupancy vehicle
lanes.
Operational and Physical Improvements
There are two main types of TSM roadway improvements: operational and
physical changes. Physical changes are usually capital intensive while operational
changes are largely administrative in nature. Examples of these changes are as follows:
Physical Improvements
. turn lanes
. striping
. medians
. warning devices
* new lanes
. new segments paralleling or bypassing congested components
. intersection realignment
. improved warning and information signs
. geometric and signalization improvements on access roads
. new signals or stop signs
0perational Improvements
. traffic law enforcement
. turn prohibition
• speed restrictions
. flexible work hours to stagger peak traffic
. access control
. signal coordination
. signal phasing or timing changes
14
The proposed improvements to the Winstead Avenue area incorporate some of the
TSM improvements listed above, specifically, new lanes, turning lanes and signal
phasing and timing changes. These improvements will greatly increase mobility along
Winstead Avenue. However, due to the anticipated volume of vehicles expected to use
this facility, TSM measures alone will not adequately reduce congestion.
Ridesharing
Ridesharing in the form of carpools and vanpools is generally viewed as more
convenient than bus transit with regard to access, door-to-door times, and comfort. At
this time, there is no carpooling program set up within the City of Rocky Mount or Nash
County. Ridesharing is a viable option to reduce the vehicle travel demand on the
roadway network. However, if a program were to be initiated at this time, the effect
would not eliminate the need for additional roadway improvements to Winstead Avenue
High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lanes
A high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane, usually requiring two or more passengers
per vehicle occupying a separate lane of the roadway, is not feasible as a low cost
alternative for Winstead Avenue because it is not a freeway-type facility.
D. No -Build Alternative
The No-Build Alternative gives an indication of traffic conditions that would
likely be expected in the design year (2025) if the proposed project is not constructed. In
addition, the No-Build Alternative serves as a base for comparing alternatives and
determining whether the benefits of the recommended alternative outweigh the impacts.
By not providing the highway improvements outlined for this project, congestion and
delays will occur on Winstead Avenue due to a"bottleneck" situation when the roadway
narrows in width. Numerous motorists would seek alternative routes to reach their
destinations. Traffic volumes would increase on residential streets and other roads that
are not designed to accommodate through traffic.
IV. SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
A. Community Impacts Analysis
Project Area Background
a. Geographical Location
This portion of Winstead Avenue is located within the City of Rocky Mount,
which is located in the eastern part of Nash County, North Carolina. Portions of Rocky
Mount also lie within Edgecombe County to the east. Nash County is located in the
northeast section of North Carolina, often times referred to as the northern coastal plain.
15
Nash County shares borders with five other North Carolina Counties. Edgecombe
County borders Nash County to the east, Wilson and Johnston Counties to the south,
Franklin County to the west, and Halifax County to the north. Nash and Edgecombe
Counties are part of the Rocky Mount Metropolitan Statistical Area. They are also
included in the Upper Coastal Plain Rural Planning Organization, along with Johnston
and Wilson Counties. Rocky Mount is included in the Rocky Mount Urban Area
Metropolitan Planning Organization.
b. Project Study Area
A Direct Community Impact Area (DCIA) was defined for the purpose of
evaluating impacts on the surrounding community as a result of TIP U-4019. The DCIA
is generally bounded by Halifax Road to the west and Country Club Road and Wesleyan
Boulevard to the east. It is bounded by Goose Branch to the north and the Nash County
Railroad to the south. It includes the retail/commercial establishments along Sunset
Avenue and Winstead Avenue. The DCIA also includes the residential neighborhoods of
Ridgecrest and LC Bowen on the south side of Sunset Avenue. These are the areas most
likely to be directly impacted by TIP U-4019.
The DCIA for this TIP project is somewhat larger than our typical DCIAs,
primarily because of access-related issues. Most people living in neighborhoods along
Winstead Avenue, Hunter Hill Road and Sunset Avenue would use Winstead Avenue to
gain access to US 64, the primary east-west route through this part of town. Because of
this, the boundaries of the DCIA were extended more than usual to include these
neighborhoods.
2. Community Profile
The community impact assessment process begins with defining the project and
the study area. This helps to identify the areas of potential impact. Secondly, a
Community Profile is developed. A Community Profile is a summary of the history,
present conditions, and anticipated future conditions in the area. It determines the
characteristics of the study area, such as: demographic information; location of
residences and businesses; economic data, social history of the community, and existing
and future land use. The development of the profile is supported by information
collected from a variety of sources including extensive fieldwork, local agencies, census
data, tax records, real estate brokers, local citizens and employers, historical societies,
and local land use plans. A Community Profile can be used as a basis for identifying
potential impacts of a proposed transportation project. It is part of the "affected
environment" in a NEPA evaluation.
a. Population and Demographic Characteristics
Race, Ethnicity and Age
16
The population of the Demographic Area increased by 14.7% between 1990 and
2000 (see Table 6). This is comparable to the population growth experienced in Rocky
Mount (14.1%) and Nash County (14.0%) during the same time period. The Town of
Dortches' population rate decreased by 3.7°Io in the same time period. North Carolina's
rate (21.4%) was higher than all four of the other areas. According to the NC Department
of Commerce, Nash County's population ranks in the top one-third of total population of
the counties in North Carolina. Over'h of the counties in North Carolina have a higher
population growth rate than Nash County's. Some of the population growth in the
Demographic Area, Rocky Mount, and Nash County could be attributed to the movement
of residents from Edgecombe County to Nash County, due to the damage by Hurricane
Floyd in Nash County. Local planners indicated that this area of Rocky Mount is a highly
desirable area.
Table 6. Population Growth, 1990-2000
1'oopp(td ation (.t•oriA h 90-00
Arca 1990 ' 2000 17it'$'erenc,e %'("hange
D?:inogra hic Arca 5. 142 9.568 1,226 14.7';"i:
Dortches 840 809 -31 -3.7%
Rock Mount 48,997 55,893 6,896 14.1%
Nash Count 76,677 87,420 10,743 14.0%
North Carolina 6,628,637 8,049,313 1,420,676 21.4%
Source: US Census Bureau
Table 7 indicates that the Demographic Area had a similar race distribution in
2000 as Dortches and North Carolina; however, the percentage of Hispanics in the
County (3.4%) and State (4.7%) are double that of the Demographic Area (1.4%). The
Demographic Area (75.4°Io) has a higher percentage of Whites than the other geographic
areas studied. The City of Rocky Mount and Nash County have lower percentages of
Whites and higher or comparable percentages of Blacks or African Americans and other
racial groups (see Table 7). Larger percentages of minorities live outside of the
Demographic Area, generally south and east of Winstead Avenue, closer to downtown
Rocky Mount.
17
Source: US Census Bureau
When analyzing results for all considered geographies, the percentage of the
population categorized as "19 years and under" was highest in Rocky Mount (30.4%),
while the population categorized as "65 or more years" was by far the highest in the
Demographic Area (21.8%) (see Table 8). The Demographic Area has a slightly lower
percentage of persons 19 years and under than any of the other geographical areas
studied. A closer look at the distributions of each individual block group reveals that
Census Tract 105.02Block Group 4 accounts for over one-third of the 65+ age group in
the Demographic Area. The median age of a person living in the Demographic Area
(42.9) is over six years older than the median age of someone in Nash County (36.5). A
retirement center is located at the northern and southern ends of the corridor.
18
Table 8. Population bv Age and Median Age, 2000
19 years
andunder 2,164 22.6% 200 24.7% 17,011 30.4% 24,465 28.0% 2,193,360 27.2%
20-64 ears 5,316 55.6% 502 62.1% 31,608 56.6% 52,073 59.6% 4,886,905 60.7%
65 or more
42.9 I I 42.5 I I 35.2 I I 36.5
ii. Income, Poverty Status and Unemployment, and Education
Status
In 1989, the median household income for the Demographic Area was $36,557
(see Table 9). This was higher than the median household income for all the other areas
studied. In 1999, the median household income in the Demographic Area ($44,751) was
still higher than all the other areas studied, although it experienced less growth than
Rocky Mount, Nash County, and North Carolina over the same period of time.
Table 9. Median Household Income. 1989-1999
Ht)C15ehUld J11CpmP. {ii'fiT4`C?1 89-99
Area
Dcmo-
ga hic Area 1989

$36,557 1999 Difference

$44,751 $8,194 % ("han e

22.4%
Dortches $30,652 $35,417 $4,765 155%
Rock Mount $24,055 $32,661 $8,606 35.8%
Nash Count $25,834 $37,147 $11,313 43.8%
North Carolina $26,647 $39,184 $12,537 47.0%
Source: US Census Bureau
In 1989, the percentage of the Demographic Area population that lived below the
poverty level was 3.9%, the lowest of any of the other areas studied. Between 1989 and
1999, the poverty rate for the Demographic Area increased to 6.3%, representing a 61.5%
increase, the highest percentage increase of all geographic areas studied.
The US Census Bureau employs a set of income thresholds that vary by the size
and composition of a family to determine poverty status. These thresholds are not based
on geographic boundaries and are adjusted for inflation. The thresholds are also based on
income before taxes, and do not include any capital gains or non-cash benefits such as
19
public assistance. In addition, those people living in military barracks or institutional
group homes are not included in the poverty statistics.
Table 10. Percentame Below Poverty Level, 1989-1999
Demo ra hic Area 3.9% 6.3% 2.4% 61.5%
Dortches 5.5% 4.4% -l.l% -20.0%
Rock Mount 181°l0 20.1% 2.0% 11.0%
Nash Count 13.6% 13.4% -02% -1.5%
North Carolina 13.0% 123% -0.7% -5.4%
Source: US Census Bureau
The educational status attained by persons in the Demographic Area is higher than
that of Dortches, Rocky Mount, Nash County, and North Carolina. This area has the
highest number of bachelors degrees and graduate degrees, and the lowest number of
high school and non-high school graduates. Based on this data in Table 11, it appears
that residents in the Demographic Area is generally higher educated than those in the
other geographies.
TaIh1e 11. F;ciucational Status
2000
,
I)etno,rriphic' k<x(:y Nash North
area Dartehes ` 'Mount E;outifi° ' Carolina
Educational rc of I/c of ?'!"o of ?%'c 't3r % of
Statius Poptalation ! I"o xilation ' 1'o ulation Yo ittation l'o ttEgttion iii
< Hi h School 12.9°l0 25.9% 25.9% 24.4°l0 21.9°Io
High School
Graduate 25.6% 34.4% 30.4% 33.9% 28.4°Io
Some Colle e 20.9% 20.6% 17.8% 182% 20.5%
Associates
De ree 6.4% 7.8% 5.7% 6.3% 6.8%
B achelors
De ree 23.4% 8.8% 14.1% 12.4% 15.3%
Graduate or
Professional
Deeree 10.8% 2.5% 6.1% 4.8°l? 72%
20
iii. Housing Characteristics
According to the US Census Bureau, the number of households in the
Demogxaphic Area grew by 21.4% between 1990 and 2000, which was slightly less than
the household growth in North Carolina (24.4°Io), but much greater than that of Dortches
(6.5%), Rocky Mount (13.6%), and Nash County (15.9%). Local planners indicate that
this area of is one of the most attractive areas for residential development in the County,
especially the areas west of Winstead Avenue.
Homeownership rates in the Demographic Area remained stagnant between 1990
and 2000 (see Table 13), while those in all other geographies analyzed increased. Based
on discussions with local planners, it is not apparent why the Demographic Area
experienced this slight reduction in homeownership rates.
The median home value within the Demographic Area was valued at
approximately $110,053, almost 30% more than that of Rocky Mount and Nash County.
The median year structure built in the Demographic Area is approximately the same as
that of Nash County and North Carolina., but newer than those of Dortches and Rocky
Mount.
21
Source: US Census Bureau
Source: US Census Sureau
Table 14. Median Home Value
& Median Year Structure Built, 2000
Demo a hic Area $110,053 1976
Dortches $88,500 1973
Rock Mount $85,400 1972
Nash Count $85,600 1977
North Carolina $95,800 1978
Source: US Ccnsus Burcau
According to the Census data, the median contract rent within the Demographic
Area is $430 a month (see Table 15). In comparison, the median rent in Dortches, Rocky
Mount and Nash County are approximately $100 less. According to local planners, this
data, along with the median home value, indicates that the Demographic Area appears to
be a more affluent area of town.
7'able 1-5. Rental Rates, 2000
T I47edian f'onYr
Arca Rent
Demo ra hic Area $430
Dortches $325
Rock Mount $334
Nash Count $335
North Carolina $431
Source: US Census Bareau
Table 16 displays the occupancy status of housing units in 2000. In the
Demographic Area, 93.6% of housing units were occupied, which was higher than the
percentage of occupied housing units in Rocky Mount (88.7%), Nash County (90.8%),
and North Carolina (88.9%).
Table 16.
2000
Demogra hic Area 93.6%
Dortches 93.7%
Nash Count 90.8%
North Carolina 88.9%
Source: US Census Bureau
22
iv. Business Activity and Employment Centers
Table 17 shows employment growth by industry sector for Nash County between
1990 and 2003. The government (federal, state, and local) added the most jobs in Nash
County during this time period, with a total of 1,806 more jobs in 2003 than in 1990 (an
increlse of 42.1%). Health care and social assistance added a total of 1,796 jobs between
1990 and 2003, resulting in an increase of 101.6°Io. Nash General Hospital recently
completed a new surgical wing and constructed a two-story parking deck. However, a
total of 5,986 jobs (42.9%) were lost in the manufacturing sector during the same time
frame. Other sectors that experienced ernployment decreases were retail trade,
transportation & warehousing, and professional & technical services.
Table 17. Employment by Sector
23
* - Indicates disclosure suppression
N/A - Not Applicable
"* - 1990 & 2000 totals do not include data for * sectors
Nash County experienced an overall decrease in employment (-1.7%) between
1990 and 2003, primarily due to the decrease in the number of manufacturing jobs. The
manufacturing sector in Nash County suffered a nearly 43% reduction in the number of
jobs, but remained the sector with the most employees.
In 2000, Abbott Laboratories (manufacturing) was the largest private employer in the
county. RBC Centura, Inc. (financial activities, professional services) and Cummins
Business Services (manufacturing) also employed over 1,000 employees in Nash County.
According to Employment Security Commission of North Carolina, the
unemployment rate in 2003 was 7.7% for Nash County, while the unemployment rate for
North Carolina in 2003 was 6.5%. The increase in the unemployment rate from 1990 to
2003 for Nash County may be explained by the numerous closings and layoffs that have
occurred during the past 13 years. The largest closing was at Universal Leaf North
America (Tobacco stemmery plant), which cut 720 employees. Texfi-Blends, Inc.
(fabric) laid off a total of 650 employees during this time period.
Table 18.
Nash Count 4.2% 7.7% 3.5% 833%
North Carolina 4.2% 6.5% 2.3% 54.8%
Source: North Carolina Employment Security Commission
Census data indicates that in 1990, the Demographic Area had an unemployment
rate of 2.3%, which was lower than that of Rocky Mount, Nash County (4.4%), and
North Carolina. In 2000, the unemployment rate for the Demographic Area increased to
3.6% while the rate in Nash County increased to 5.5%.
Unemployment rate data for these two geographies was retrieved from the US
Census Bureau, while State and County unemployment rates were retrieved from the
North Carolina Employment Security Commission. The Census data is sample data,
while the Employment Security Commission's percentages are 100°Io counts and more
recent.
v. Community Resources - Facilities
There are numerous businesses along Winstead Avenue including doctor's offices,
restaurants, gas stations, banks, and hotels. Other commercial or retail facilities within
the DCIA include:
West End Plaza - located south of Sunset Avenue on Winstead Avenue;
Westridge Shopping Center - located at the intersection of Winstead Avenue and
Sunset Avenue;
24
Englewood Square Shopping Center - located along Sunset Avenue east of
Englewood Drive;
Golden East Mall - located outside of DCIA but inside Demographic Area along N.
Wesleyan Boulevard;
Terrytown Mall - located just outside of DCIA. but inside Demographic Area at the
intersection of Sunset Avenue and Wesleyan Boulevard.
Nash General Hospital is located within the DCIA along the project. It opened in
1971 as the first all-private room hospital in North Carolina. Nash General Hospital is an
acute care facility with 280 beds. Nash Health Care Systems primarily services a six-
county area including Nash, Edgecombe, Franklin, Wilson, Warren and Halifax counties,
but draws patients from other areas as well. The hospital recently added a new surgical
wing and a two-story parking deck. The Breckenridge and Guardian Care Nursing
Homes are located at each end of the Winstead Avenue project corridor.
According to site visit observations and the Nash-Rocky Mount Public School
System website (www.nrms.kl2.nc.us), three public schools are located within the
Demographic Area: Benvenue Elementary School, which is located east of English Road;
Englewood Elementary School, located on Sunset Avenue; and Winstead Avenue
Elementary School along South Winstead Avenue. Tar River Learning Center is also
located within the Demographic Area. Nash-Rocky Mount School System officials do
not expect the widening of Winstead Avenue to impact existing or proposed school bus
routes.
In addition to public schools, there are two private schools located within the
Demographic Area. Rocky Mount Academy is located at the southern end of Avondale
Avenue, and Faith Christian Academy is located just north of the railroad tracks, within
the DCIA. The main campus for Nash Community College is located just to the west of
the Demographic Area. The Brame Institute of Education, which serves as a tutoring and
test prep center, is located along Winstead Avenue south of Stoney Creek.
There are no parks located along the corridor; however, several parks were
observed in the DCIA. Grover Lucas Park is located along South Halifax Road between
Sunset Avenue and the Nash County Railroad. Englewood Park is located in the
neighborhoods south of Sunset Avenue, east of Winstead Avenue. Benvenue Country
Club is located in the northern end of the DCIA.
St. Paul Baptist Church is located near the intersection of Winstead Avenue and
Hunter Hill Road. No other churches are located along Winstead Avenue between Sunset
Avenue and Hunter Hill Road.
25
vi. Crime, Safety and Emergency Services
Law enforcement services are provided by the City of Rocky Mount Police
Department which, according to the City's website, has over 150 full-time sworn officers.
The Rocky Mount Police Department headquarters are located in downtown Rocky
Mount, outside the DCIA. The Nash County Sheriff's Office provides service to the
areas outside the limits of the municipalities in the County. The headquarters for this
department are located outside of the DCIA in Downtown Nashville, located west of
Rocky Mount along US 64. Most of the DCIA is protected by the Rocky Mount Police
Department. According to local planners, crime is not an issue along Winstead Avenue.
Rocky Mount fire fighting services are provided by the City of Rocky Mount Fire
Department and operated out of seven different stations throughout the City. Station
number three is located on S. Winstead Avenue south of Amherst Road, just south of the
DCIA. Fire Station number six is located east of the DCIA near the US 64/Wesleyan
Boulevard interchange.
Nash County's Office of Emergency Medical Services provides advance life
support care, pre-hospital emergency care, and convalescent transport in a quick and
efficient manner to the citizens of Nash County. Nash EMS consists of 27 full-time staff
along with 30 part-time staff to provide care to all areas of rural Nash County. The EMS
headquarters are located in downtown Nashville. Discussions with EMS officials
indicate that a median divided facility is anticipated to have minimal impacts because
most of the facilities they frequent are located at the major signalized intersections.
vii. Physical, Social and Psychological Aspects
Based on site visit observations and conversations with local planners, there
currently does not exist much cohesion between the retail and office centers along
Winstead Avenue, and the neighborhoods just beyond these facilities. Pedestrian activity
originating from these neighborhoods is uncommon. TIP U-4019 is not likely to cause
more instability in the community or further disrupt neighborhood cohesion.
b. Land Use Patterns and Compatibility
Rocky Mount includes a wide range of development patterns. Outside of the
downtown area, strip commercial development is prevalent along major arterial roads
with smaller neighborhoods in between. The Rocky Mount Comprehensive Plan seeks to
encourage a balanced development pattern in the future. It goes on to emphasize "inward
growth that targets the Downtown area and Central Business District and promotes
outward growth that focuses on areas on the periphery of the City."
Based on site visit observations, retail and office uses are concentrated at both
ends of Winstead Avenue. Most of the corridor is built out with the exception of an
26
undeveloped, low-lying, wooded area near Stoney Creek, west of Winstead Avenue.
There is also a large piece of undeveloped land along Winstead Avenue just north of US
64. Development south of the project limits between Sunset Avenue and the railroad
tracks consists of single-family residential uses and some multi-family residential uses.
Land uses along the project corridor and within the DCIA include mostly commercial,
office, and residential.
According to Rocky Mount planners, the proposed addition of lanes to the current
Winstead Avenue alignment is not expected to alter the overall land use pattern or cause
inconsistencies with future land use plans along the project corridor
c. Economic Conditions
The economy of the City of Rocky Mount and its surrounding areas is based on a
foundation of numerous industries. Manufacturing is the major employment sector,
followed by the government, trade and healthcare industries. According to Rocky
Mount's Comprehensive Plan, there is a general downward economic trend of the
manufacturing industry throughout the County and State. While the City and County
have experienced their share of job losses in manufacturing and wholesale trade, the local
economy has survived by diversifying and has benefited from the increases in other
sectors such as health care & social services, as well as the area's close proximity to I-95,
which plays a vital role in the distribution of goods and services along the eastern
seaboard.
Long-term impacts for businesses along Winstead Avenue as a result of TIP U-
4019 could be positive since the roadway carrying capacity will increase, meaning more
people will have access to them. However, with a proposed median-divided facility as
opposed to a center turn-lane facility, full turning movements in and out of businesses
will no longer be permitted. This could impact the sales volume of some businesses, like
gas stations, that rely on drive-by traffic and easy access. However, most of the drive-by
businesses are located at the signalized intersections along the corridor. No maintenance
of traffic (MOT) plans have been developed at the time of this assessment.
d. Transportation Access
i. Neighborhood Access
When analyzing the potential impact of a transportation improvement project, it is
important to analyze whether the project will impede or enhance the ability of
surrounding residents to make full use of community facilities and services. There is
currently no control of access along the entire Winstead Avenue corridor, except around
the US 64 interchange area. The proposed typical sections of TIP U-4019 include a four-
lane or six-lane facility with a median down the center of the roadway. Therefore,
27
drivers would have to utilize U-turns and median cut-throughs to access some of the
businesses and neighborhoods, and some movements may be limited to right-in/right-out.
This project has the opportunity to enhance neighborhood pedestrian connectivity
if pedestrian facilities are included. If the greenway along Stoney Creek is completed,
the sidewalks could help facilitate connectivity between the greenway and residential
neighborhoods near Winstead Avenue. The close proximity of transit stops along
Winstead Avenue also enhances the mobility of pedestrians along the corridor.
ii. Commercial Access, Parking and Economic Impacts
Access along this portion of Winstead Avenue could change if a four-lane or six-
lane divided facility with median is implemented. Left turns would not be allowed out of
most driveways. Restricted right-in/right-outs would be allowed along Winstead Avenue.
There are a few locations where the widening of Winstead Avenue could reduce parking
availability for some businesses along the corridor, however, most of the businesses are
set back far enough from Winstead Avenue so that impacts to parking should be minimal.
In addition, there is currently no on-street parking along this segment of the roadway, and
TIP U-4019 will not be designed to accommodate this feature.
iii. Pedestrian and Bicycle Access
Even though there are pedestrian destinations along the carridor, Winstead Avenue is
currently not very pedestrian-friendly. According to Rocky Mount City Planners, the
City will be working to create a bicycle plan within the next few months.
There is an existing multi-use trail that parallels the Tar River east of the DCIA. This
trail, known as the Tar River Trail, runs along the Tar River from City Lake along Sunset
Avenue to its termination point at the Martin Luther King Jr. Park. According to local
planners, a possible greenway could be constructed along Stoney Creek underneath
Winstead Avenue and connect to the Tar River Trail at the mouth of Stoney Creek.
These facilities could enhance connectivity between the neighborhoods on the south end
of Winstead Avenue, as well as the businesses along both sides of the roadway.
Sidewalks will be built on both sides of the road in conjunction with TIP U-4019 at the
request of the local MPO. Sidewalks will be constructed in accordance with the NCDOT
Pedestrian Policy.
iv. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
This project should have a positive effect on the American with Disabilities Act,
since sidewalks will follow ADA standards.
28
e. Public Transit
Tar River Transit operates fixed-route bus service within the City of Rocky
Mount. According to a Tar River Transit official, there are two designated stops along
Winstead Avenue - one southbound in front of the Hampton Inn and the other
northbound near the intersection of Professional Drive. Other stops serving the Winstead
Avenue area include Curtis Ellis Drive, Gateway Center, Boice-Willis Medical Center,
and Nash General Hospital. In addition to the fixed-route bus service in Rocky Mount,
Dial-a-Ride transportation services (DARTS), operates paratransit service for certain
authorized residents of the City of Rocky Mount who begin and end their trips within 3/4
mile of Rocky Mount Transit's fixed routes. The locations of these services are such that
they should not be impacted as a result of the construction of TIP U-4019.
There are no current plans to use the Nash County Railroad right-of-way for a future high
speed rail line, nor are there plans for a future commuter rail line.
Other modes of public transit available include:
• Greyhound Lines, Inc. provides intercity scheduled bus service - located at the bus
station in the downtown area outside of the DCIA. The bus station is located
adjacent to the Amtrak train station and the Tar River Transit Downtown Transfer
Center.
• Amtrak's Carolinian and Piedmont and Silver Service/Palmetto has scheduled daily
service to the Rocky Mount train station located east of the DCIA.
• Nash-Edgecombe Transportation Service (NETS) provides subscription and dial-a-
ride transit service for rural residents of Nash County.
f. Transportation Network
Change in Commuting Patterns
The proposed widening project should not cause major shifts in commuting
patterns along Winstead Avenue. According to City planners, Winstead Avenue serves
as one of the major north-south routes in the City of Rocky Mount. Interstate 95, which
parallels Winstead Avenue to the west, provides the main route for north-south through
traffic in the area.
ii. Travel Time
The nature of most trips made on Winstead Avenue will remain the same after the
construction of TIP U-4019. However, travel times along the corridor will improve with
the widening of Winstead Avenue since the roadway will have more carrying capacity
and less congestion, and access will be somewhat controlled by the proposed median.
29
iii. Consistency with Thoroughfare Plans
In the 2003 Rocky Mount Thoroughfare Plan, (Figure 6), North/South Winstead
Avenue is designated as a five-lane facility from Sunset Avenue in the south to Hunter
Hill Road in the north. Afive-lane curb and gutter facility was considered but eliminated
based on safety issues. NCDOT supports construction of a median-divided roadway over
a roadway with a center turn lane whenever prudent. This section of Winstead Avenue
will serve as part of a loop facility for Rocky Mount in conjunction with the Narthern
Connector. The purpose and need for U-4019 is consistent with the 2003 Rocky Mount
Thoroughfure Plan. The Thoroughfare Plan recommends Winstead Avenue be widened
between Sunset Avenue and Hunter Hill Road to accommodate additional amounts of
traffic. Winstead Avenue is classified as a Major Thoroughfare in this plan. It is
classified as a Minor Arterial in the NCDOT Statewide Functional Classification System,
and as an existing major arterial in the Rocky Mount Collector Street Plan.
g. Community Safety
i. Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety
As stated previously, sidewalks along both sides of Winstead Avenue are included
in the current alternatives for TIP U-4019 at the request of the local MPO. TIP U-4019
will improve the safety of pedestrians. The project will improve the safety of bicyclists
who use the 14' wide outer lanes proposed for Winstead Avenue.
ii. Crime
Local planners have indicated that crime is not a problem along the corridor.
With the proposed widening of Winstead Avenue, no design features included in the
project are expected to increase or decrease crime in the general area. If street lighting
were proposed for the corridor, pedestrians along the corridor may feel safer. However,
no new lighting is proposed since streetlights are already in place along Winstead Avenue
from Sunset Avenue to Hunter Hill Road.
iii. Emergency Response
After conducting field observations and speaking with local officials, it has been
determined that TIP U-4019 should actually increase the efficiency of emergency
response units such as fire departments, police, or EMS on the four or six-lane divided
typical section. In fact, with the addition of extra lanes in the each direction, these
services should be able to move through traffic with greater ease. Efficiency should also
increase with the modification of the traffic signal at Nash General Hospital (Winstead
Ave. and Curtis Ellis Dr.) to include an emergency vehicle pre-emptive device.
However, there may be some temporary impacts to these services during construction. If
one of the two current through-lanes is required to be closed during construction, fire,
30
EMS and police vehicles will have to contend with heavier congestion. Discussions with
EMS officials indicate that a median divided facility is anticipated to have minimal
impacts because most of the facilities they frequent are located at the major signalized
intersections.
iv. Vehicular Safety
The proposed project will provide safety benefits for both DCIA drivers and for
users of the facility from the entire region. TIP U-4019 will also provide lane continuity
and decrease traffic delays along Winstead Avenue. The construction of TIP U-4019 will
help reduce the accident rate along the corridor.
h. Farmland Impacts
North Carolina Executive Order Number 96, Preservation of Prime Agricultural
and Forest Lands, requires all state agencies to consider the impact of land acquisition
and construction projects on prime farmland soils, as designated by the U.S. Natural
Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). These soils are determined by the SCS-based
on criteria such as crop yield and level of input of economic resources.
The Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA) is designed to minimize the degree to
which federally sponsored programs contribute to the "unnecessary and irreversible
conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses," and ensure that these programs are
consistent with state, local, and private programs to protect farmland.
Land uses along the project corridor are almost entirely urban in nature with the
exception of the undeveloped area along the east side of Winstead Avenue at English
Road. There are currently minimal zoning districts or future land uses designated to be
agricultural in the DCIA, as indicated in the information received from Nash County and
the City of Rocky Mount. Most of these agricultural districts are north and east of
Winstead Avenue. No farms or active farming operations along the corridor were
observed during the site visit.
i. Environmental Justice
According to Census data, the minority population of the Demographic Area
neither exceeds 50 percent, nor is meaningfully greater than the minority populations of
Nash County. When the demographic data is analyzed on the Census block level, the
blocks immediately north of the project corridor along Hunter Hill Road have a higher
percentage of minorities. According to the National Center for Education Statistics,
Benvenue Elementary School, located in the DCIA, has a minority percentage of
approximately 57°Io of the total enrollment. Benvenue Elementary School, as well as
Englewood Elementary School and Winstead Avenue Elementary School, are all
classified as Title 1 Schools. Title 1 funding is based on a formula that counts the
31
number of students living in poverty from US Census data. As observed during the site
visit, there was public housing located on the far western end of the DCIA.
While the percentage of elderly people in the Demographic Area (21.8%) is higher than
in the County (12.4%), a look at the individual block groups that comprise the
Demographic Area reveals that Census Tract 105.02Block Group 4 and Census Tract
105.02Block Group t account for some of these higher percentages. According to data
from the US Census Bureau, population percentages in these block groups that are 65
years or older are approximately 34% and 24%, respectively. The Breckenridge Nursing
Home is located in Census Tract 105.02Block Group 1 and the Guardian Care Nursing
Home is located on the border of Census Tract 105.02Block Group 1. Since none of
these facilities are located directly along the project conridor, it does not appear that these
elderly populations will be adversely affected by TIP U-4019.
Based upon Census data, Rocky Mount was also determined to have a lower
median income, higher poverty rate, and lower housing value when compared to the other
categories. While no low-income housing was noticed during the site visit or mentioned
in conversations with local officials, this could indicate possible low-income areas within
the Demographic Area. The majority of the Demographic Area included higher median
incomes, lower poverty rates, and higher housing values.
j. CIA Conclusions
Land uses along Winstead Avenue are mostly commercial/retail and
office/institutional, with residential uses in sporadic locations along the corridor. TIP U-
4019 is not expected to change land use patterns along Winstead Avenue. TIP U-4019 is
also not likely to cause instability in the community or disrupt neighborhood cohesion.
Some pockets of minorities live in the DCIA, but not within close proximity to the
corridor. In general, residents within the Demographic Area are non-minority, generally
better educated, have a higher household income, and have a higher median age than
Rocky Mount, the County and the State. Nash County experienced an overall decrease in
employment between 1990 and 2003, primarily due to the decrease in the number of
manufacturing jobs.
B. Qualitative Indirect and Cumulative Effects (ICE) Assessment
1. ICE Methodology
Indirect impacts are those impacts that, as a result of an event such as this
proposed transportation project, occur over a longer period of time or can take place
away from the immediate project area. A short-term example would be the development
of a small subdivision along a new or widened roadway that would otherwise not have
occurred. Closely related is the concept of cumulative impacts, which are the collective
effects of multiple events and actions. These may be dependent or independent of the
proposed action.
32
ECONorthwest and Portland State University's report entitled A Gccidebook for
Evaluating the Indirect Land Use and Growth Impacts of Highway Improvement, the
NCDOT and North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources'
(NCDENR) Guidance for Assessing Indirect and Cumulative Impacts nf Transportation
Projects in North Carolina (Volumes I& II), the US Department of Transportation's
Community Impact Assessment.• A Quick Reference for Transportation, and the National
Cooperative Highway Research Program's Guidebook for Assessing the Social and
Economic Effects of Transportation Projects (Report 456) provided guidance in assessing
indirect and cumulative impacts related to this transportation project.
NCDOT's Guidance indicates it's rational to study land use changes over a period
of about 20-25 years, since this is the time horizon used in most Metropolitan Planning
Organization (MPO) and local transportation plans. However, studies have shown that
the effects of the land use changes most often occur 7-10 years after the project has been
constructed.
2. ICE Study Area Boundaries
a. Future Land Use Study Area
The North Carolina DOT's and North Carolina Department of Environment and
Natural Resources' (DENR) Guidance for Assessing Indirect and Cumulative Impacts of
Transportation Projects in North Carolina indicates that the development effects of a
new roadway facility are most often found up to one mile around an interchange, and up
to two to five miles along major feeder roadways to the interchange. Based on this
guidance, an initial review of project area conditions, and the fact that TIP U-4019
involves alterations of an existing road-not a new road, it was determined that the
potential for growth impact as a result of this project would be primarily within a two-
mile radius of the project. This two-mile radius, referred to as the Future Land Use Study
Area (FLUSA), identifies where there is potential for induced development as a result of
the project. The two-mile radius will determine the data collection and analysis area, but
will not necessarily be the extent of the growth impact that is expected to occur. More
specific areas within the FLUSA that are most likely to experience land use changes over
the next 7-10 years as a result of the roadway improvements will be identified later in this
report.
b. Extended Demographic Area
The Extended Demographic Area (EDA) encompasses the FLUSA and is defined
in order to analyze the population and employment growth trends of the FLUSA. The
EDA includes the following year 2000 U.S. Census Tracts and Block Groups:
• Census Tract 103Block Groups 2 and 6,
• Census Tract 104Block Group 3,
33
• Census Tract 105.02BIock Groups 1-5,
• Census Tract 105.03Block Groups 1-2,
• Census Tract 105.04Block Groups 1-3,
• Census Tract 106Block Group 6,
• Census Tract 107Block Group 3,
• Census Tract 108Block Group 4, and
• Census Tract 111Block Group 1.
The EDA is generally bounded by NC 4 and Swift Creek to the north, US 301,
Gold Rock Road, Jeffreys Road, and N. Pine Street to the east, Grape Branch and Eastern
Avenue to the south, and Interstate 95, Womble Road, Turkey Foot Road, and Red Oak
Road to the west.
3. Study Area Direction and Goals
a. Regional Location Influences and Implications
The project corridor is located entirely within the City of Rocky Mount, which is
the largest municipality in Nash County, and is located 50 miles east of Raleigh and 50
miles south of the Virginia/North Carolina border. US Route 301 and Interstate 95
traverse the City in the north/south direction, while the main east/west access is provided
by US 64. According to local planners, Rocky Mount's development efforts are
concentrated in the downtown area and north and west of the City. The City's growth
pattern has historically been towards the west and driven by available land and the close
proximity to Interstate 95. Local officials plan to revitalize and reinvigorate the
downtown area, and encourage urban growth to the north and west of the City, some of
which land is located in the northern end of the FLUSA. Growth is being promoted in
the area because some land is available, contiguous residential development has already
occurred, and water and sewer services are available.
b. Demographic and Employment Trends
The EDA experienced a lower population gt•owth rate (11.7°Io) during the 1990s
than both Nash County (14.2%) and the State (21.4%). Nash County is forecasted to add
almost 9,200 people between 2000 and 2010, a growth rate of 10.5%, while North
Carolina is projected to grow at a rate of 17.9°Io. The forecasted growth rate between
2010 and 2020 for the County and North Carolina is lower at 10.4% and 15.5%,
respectively (see Table 19). Because of these forecasts, it is anticipated that the EDA's
population will also grow at a slower rate during this time frame than it did during the
1990s.
34
Table 19. Population Growth
Trends and Projections, 1980-2020
? Fxtettdc;d Nasli North
Dem??i±c Area Countv ('arolirm
PonulatiozV,
1980 N/A
1990 24,224
Percentage Growth 1980-1990 N/A
2000 27,064
PercentaLye Growth 1990-2000 11.7°Io
67,153
76,677
14.2%
87,420
5,881,766
6,628,637
12.7%
8,049,313
21.4%
2010 N/A 96,577 9,491,374
Percentage Growth 2000-2014 N/A 10.5% 17.9%
2020 N/A 106,617 10,966,138
Percenta2e Growth 2010-2020 N/A 10.4% 15.5%
Source: US Census Bureau and NC State Demographics h[tp://dcmog.state.nc.us/
The government (federal, state, and local) added the most jobs in Nash County
during this time period, with a total of 1,806 more jobs in 2003 than in 1990. However, a
total of 5,986 jobs were lost in the rnanufacturing sector during the same time frame.
c. Transportation Plans and Proposed Projects
As mentioned in the "Transportation Network" section of this document, TIP U-
4019 is included on the Rocky Mount Thoroughfare Plan, (Figure 6), and is designated as
a five-lane facility. Current cross sections for TIP U-4019 include a four-lane and six-
lane divided section. The NCDOT 2004-2010 Transportation Improvement Program
includes several proposed TIP projects that are likely to improve regional accessibility
and connectivity, thereby contributing to the potential for induced residential and
commercial growth in the FLUSA. Those other TIP projects include:
• R-2823: Rocky Mount Northern Connector, from Hunter Hill Road (SR 1604) to
US 301, widen to five lanes with curb and gutter, part on new location.
Construction to begin 2009.
• U-3331: Country Club Road (SR 1616), from US 64 Business to Jeffreys Road
(SR 1541), widen roadway to multi-lanes. Construction to begin 2005.
• U-2561: NC 43, from NC 48 to I-95, widen to five lanes with curb and gutter.
Construction to begin post years (after 2010).
• U-3621: Hunter Hill Road, Country Club Road to NC 43-48, widen to multi-
lanes. Construction to begin 2010.
35
According to Rocky Mount planners, there are no local transportation
improvement projects that are currently planned.
d. Local Land Use Plans, Future Land Use, and Zoning
Major corridors throughout the FLUSA will continue to serve as the City's
primary retail and office locations. Existing commercial areas in Rocky Mount include
the central business district, the rnajor retail areas that extend north along Wesleyan
Boulevard near US 64, and along Benvenue/Jeffreys Road. Commercial and office areas
exist and are proposed on both sides of Winstead Avenue, between Sunset Avenue and
Hunter Hill Road. Residential development is concentrated in the south and west of
Rocky Mount, while government/law/services are located in the downtown area. Some
crop fields and wooded areas are located outside of the city limits within the FLUSA.
The City has planned for residential development in the northern and eastern sections of
the FLUSA.
A small portion of the Town of Dortches, located northwest of Rocky Mount, lies
inside the TIP U-4019 FLUSA. The CIA for R-2823 indicates the Town of Dortches
includes land that is zoned mostly residential. However, properties located within the
center of town and near Interstate 95 are zoned for business uses.
Together Tomorrow - The Comprehensive Plan for the City of Rocky Mount, North
Carolina (June 2003) The Comprehensive Plan is intended to guide future growth of the
City and its periphery over the next 25 years. It was adopted by the Rocky Mount City
Council on June 9, 2003. The plan addresses such issues as Rocky Mount's community,
growth and change, and major development issues. It also covers other topics including:
• Transportation
• Land Use Policies
• Community Facilities
? Economic Development
? Housing and Neighborhoods
• Critical and Sensitive Areas
• Neighborhoods
• Natural Hazards
The Comprehensive Plan addresses both existing and future land use. Existing land
use along the TIP U-4019 project corridor is mostly retail and office, with some vacant
land near Stoney Creek and the intersection of Winstead Avenue and English Road.
Land uses are predominantly residential and public facilities in the southern end of the
FLUSA, and residential and agricultural uses in the northern areas of the FLUSA.
Future land use strategies include encouraging "Inward Growth" development
that targets the downtown area, and maintaining neighborhood quality through
36
reglilations and capital investment. The balanced approach recommended by the
Comprehensive Plan is intended to "encourage revitalization of declining parts of the
City, stabilization and strengthenin; of threatened parts of the City, and initiation of new
developments that blend well with f;xisting areas."
Other policies include encouraging growth in designated "smart growth areas"
along the periphery of the City, primarily north and west of Rocky Mount. A portion of
the Northwest Smart Growth Area is within the TIP U-4019 FLUSA, east of Dortches,
near the intersection of Benvenue Road and Browntown Road. The completion of TIP
U-4019, in conjunction with TIP R-2823, will likely make this area more attractive for
residential development. TIP R-2823, the Northern Connector, would help provide the
necessary infrastructure for future growth and development. The proposed Northern
Connector would serve as a major access point to the Northwest Smart Growth Area.
Local officials would also like to encourage growth in the north and west sections of the
City, and some of this area is part of the U-4019 FT.USA.
Rocky Mount planners do not anticipate TIP U-4019 altering future land use
plans. TIP U-4019 appears to be consistent with growth strategies in Rocky Mount since
it's not likely to induce substantial growth, and what growth it may induce is likely to be
residential and small-scale commercial.
Rocky Mount Land Development Code, Rocky Mount, North Carolina (Revised 2004)
Zoning within the FLUSA of TIP U-4019 falls under five broad categories.
While there are several different zoning designations under each of the five broad
categories, for the purposes of this report, these broad zoning categories were
consolidated into the following groups:
• Commercial - Includes a wide range of commercial uses including general
business, retail, "convenience goods" and personal ser-vice uses.
• Residential - Includes all residential developed areas within the study aYea,
regardless of density.
• Industrial - This includes the full range of light and heavy industrial uses.
• Office/Institutional & Medical Arts - Includes business and professional offices
and medical services such as medical/dental offices, hospitals, pharmacies, and
labs.
• Agricultural - Includes areas that are rural in nature, as well as open areas
where residential development could be a viable land use.
Most of the land along Winstead Avenue north of US 64 is zoned Commercial,
including the entire west side of Winstead Avenue between US 64 and Hunter Hill Road.
The areas south of US 64 are generally shown as Office/Institutional, with areas of
Residential just off Winstead Avenue. Agricultural zoning and Residential zoning areas
are located near each end of the FLUSA. There are also pockets of Industrial zoning,
west of Winstead Avenue along US 64. Rocky Mount planners do not envision any
37
changes in the zoning of this area due to TIP U-4019. The vacant parcels located along
Winstead Avenue are discussed in more detail in the "Development Trends" section of
this assessment. Rocky Mount planners do not anticipate TIP U-4019 or impacting
existing zoning designations along the corridor.
Nash Cvunty Land Development Plan, Nash County, North Carolina (1992)
The Nash County Land Development Plan is a countywide strategic plan that was
created in order to develop a vision for the future of Nash County in the areas of waste
management, economic development, small town growth and development,
infrastructure, private sector leadership, and quality of life. No specific strategies or
policies were developed as part of this plan in relation to TIP U-4019.
4. Environmental Regulations
a. Federal and State Regulations
According to the March 1997 NCDOT Best Management Practices for Protection
of Surface Waters report, BMPs include activities, practices, and procedures undertaken
to prevent or reduce water pollution, such as: on-site detention areas, vegetative buffers,
culverts, and erosion control. Site disturbances greater than one acre require both the
application of BMPs as well as a site plan. These regulations should provide adequate
water resource protection for any project-related land clearing activity that may occur as
a result of TIP U-4019.
In 1972, the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program
was established under the authority of the Clean Water Act. Phase I of the NPDES
stormwater program was established in 1990. It requires NPDES permit coverage for
large or medium municipalities with populations of 100,000 or more. In North Carolina,
there are six Phase I communities. The Phase II program extends permit coverage to
smaller (< 100,000 pop.) communities and public entities that own or operate a municipal
separate storm sewer system (MS4) by requiring them to apply for and obtain an NPDES
permit for stormwater discharges. Federal law requires communities and public entities
that own or operate an MS4, and that meet either of the following two conditions, to
obtain an NPDES Phase II stormwater permit:
1) The MS4 is located in an urbanized area as determined by the latest Decennial
Census of the Bureau of the Census. If the MS4 is not located entirely within an
urbanized area, only the portion that is within the urbanized area is regulated.
2) The community or public entity is designated by the NPDES permitting authority.
In the state of North Carolina, the NPDES permitting authority is the
Environmental Management Commission (EMC).
38
Based on the 1990 Census data, Rocky Mount has been automatically designated
by the EPA as a Phase II permittee. Consequently, as required by the Federal regulations,
Rocky Mount must, at a minimum, develop, implement, and enforce a stormwater
program designed to reduce the discharge of pollutants from the MS4 to the maximum
extent practicable using the six minimum control measures of the Phase II program.
Each of the six minimum controls requires the use of Best Management Practices (BMPs)
and measurable goals (i.e., narrative or numeric standards used to gauge program
effectiveness). Among other things, the developed stormwater program will provide
regulatory controls for future developments using post construction stormwater
management techniques such as planning and growth controls, site-based local controls
(e.g., impervious surface limits), as well as miscellaneous storage, vegetative, and
infiltration practices. In Rocky Mount's stormwater management plan, the reference is
made to the Tar-Pamlico Buffer Protection Rule, which requires that "50-foot riparian
buffers be maintained on all sides of intermittent and perennial streams, ponds, lakes and
estuarine waters in the basin." Also the City of Rocky Mount's design manual does not
currently contain any standards for design of water quality BMPs and therefore the City
will defer to the design standards referenced by the State of North Carolina for the design
of water quality BMPs. The City may chose to incorporate water quality design
standards into its manual at some point in the future but development of these standards
is not a specific element of this plan.
b. Basins and Water Supply Watershed Regulations
TIP U-4019 FLUSA falls within the Tar-Pamlico River Basin, which is the fourth
largest basin in North Carolina. The North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ)
prepared a Tar-Pamlico Basinwide Water Quality Plan in March 2004 in an effort to
create long-term water quality management strategies for local and state officials. The
North Carolina Environmental Management Commission adopted riparian buffer
protection rules for the Tar-Pamlico River Basin on January 1, 2000. These rules require
maintaining and protecting 50-foot vegetated riparian areas along waterways in the Tar-
Pamlico River Basin. The rule does not require establishment of new buffers unless the
existing land use in the buffer area changes.
Almost the entire southern portion of the FLUSA for TIP U-4019 is located
within the Class N Tar River (Rocky Mount) Water Supply Watershed. The critical area
of this Water Supply Watershed is within the FLUSA, southeast of the Winstead Avenue
corridor.
Development in the protected area of Class IV water supply watersheds (Tar
River) is lirnited to two dwelling units per acre or 24% built-upon area under the low
density option. Under the high-density option, 24-70% built-upon area is allowed if
developers control for the 1" storm event. In the critical area, the low-density option is
the same as it is in the protected area. However, the high-density option only allows 24-
50°Io built-upon area if controlling for the 1" storm event.
39
The 10/70 provision is allowed in the protected area of Class III and Class IV
water supply watersheds. This provision allows local governments to use 10% of the
non-critical area of each watershed within its jurisdiction for new development or
expansion up to 70% built-upon area (without storm water control), provided that the
low-density option is used in the remainder of the watershed.
The stormwater rule requires six municipalities and five counties in the Tar-
Pamlico Basin to develop and implement stormwater programs within two and a half
years. The City of Rocky Mount and Nash County aze included in this list. These local
governments were identified based on their potential nutrient contributions to the Pamlico
estuary. Local programs are to include the permitting of new development to reduce
nitrogen runoff by 30 percent compared to pre-development levels, and to keep
phosphorus inputs from increasing from those levels. The local programs must also
identify and remove illicit discharges, educate developers, businesses, and homeowners,
and make efforts toward treating runoff from existing developed areas.
5. Activities That May Cause Effects
For the most part, the land along Winstead Avenue has already been built upon at
the time of this assessment. One exception is the undeveloped tract of land east of
Winstead Avenue at English Road. Accarding to Rocky Mount planners as of December
2004, there have been discussions about a Cracker Barrel restaurant being built at this
location, but there are no approved site plans as of yet.
Another exception is the undeveloped land along the west side of Winstead
Avenue, north of Stoney Creek. While the City is not opposed to development of this
land, it may be difficult to develop due to the close proximity of Stoney Creek. Some of
the land directly adjacent to Stoney Creek is shown on the FEMA floodplain map. Local
planners indicate that some of this land along Executive Drive is owned by Nash General
Hospital and may be developed as additional medical facilities at a later date. A CIA
completed for TIP project R-2823 in August 2004 also references planned developments
north of the TIP U-4019 corridor, but there are discrepancies in the type of development
that may occur.
6. Potential Indirect and Cumulative Effects For Analysis
Guidance for Assessing Indirect and Cumulative Impacts of Transportation
Projects in North Carolina outlines a set of factors that can be used to evaluate potential
indirect and cumulative effects, and to determine if further analysis is necessary. The
following is an assessment of these factors as they apply to TIP U-4019.
a. Conflict with local plan
The Rocky Mount Thoroughfare Plan, (Figure 6), lists Winstead Avenue as a
continuous five-lane facility through the City of Rocky Mount. The proposed typical
40
sections of the Winstead Avenue project are a four-lane divided facility and a six-lane
divided facility. A five-lane section was analyzed, but was eliminated based on safety
issues. TIP U-4019 is consistent with the Thoroughfare Plan in that it is a widening of
Winstead Avenue. Winstead Avenue is classified as a Major Thoroughfare in this plan,
and as a Minor Arterial in the NCDOT Statewide Functional Classification System.
TIP U-4019 is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan for the City of Rocky
Mount and the Rocky tVlount Land Development Code. Local planners have indicated
that the TIP project is not anticipated to alter existing land use patterns or anticipated
future land use patterns, nor should it create conflicts with existing zoning.
b. Explicit economic development purpose:
This widening project does not have an explicit economic development purpose.
c. Planned to serve specific development
TIP U-4019 is expected to help alleviate congestion and increase traffic flow
along this portion of Winstead Avenue. It is not planned to serve a specific development.
d. Likely to stimulate land development having complementary (to
highway-related travel) functions
The assessment of this factor involves the evaluation of a subset of factors
commonly used to determine induced growth. This subset includes:
• Distance to a major urban center
• Traffic volumes on intersecting roadways
• Presence of frontage or service roads
• Availability of water/sewer
The TIP U-4019 project area is located entirely within the City of Rocky Mount,
and is located in close proximity to the City's largest retail centers. The closest major
urban center is Raleigh, located approximately 50 miles to the west of Rocky Mount.
For the year 2002, estimated traffic volumes on Winstead Avenue ranged between
28,600 vehicles per day (vpd) near US 64 to 8,400 near Hunter Hill Road. Traffic
projections for 2025 indicate an increase to 56,600 to 21,400 vpd for the same locations
listed above. Some of the cross streets and their estimated Average Daily Traffic
Volumes are:
• Hunter Hill Road (west of Winstead Ave.) - 8,900 (2003)
41
• US 64 (east of Winstead Ave.) - 41,000 (2003)
• Sunset Avenue (east of Winstead Ave.) - 24,000 (2003)
There is an existing service road paralleling US 64 on the north side, west of
Winstead Avenue, but there are no service roads directly adjacent to Winstead Avenue,
nor are there any service roads or frontage roads proposed as part of this widening
proj ect.
Water and sewer services are available throughout most of the TIP U-4019
FLUSA except for the extreme northern portions near portches Boulevard and
Browntown Road. Despite this fact, TIP U-4019 is not likely to stimulate much land
development having complementary functions since most of the land is either already
developed, planned for development or re-development, or not easily developable.
e. Likely to influence intra-regional land development location
decisions
Typically, if the conditions are favarable for development andlor a region is
currently undergoing urbanization, an improvement in the transportation infrastructure is
likely to influence where development will occur. In combination with R-2823 and other
projects that are increasing capacity in the area, and given the role of being part of an
urban loop, it appears that this project may influence interregional land development.
See the CIA for TIP project R-2823 for additional information on the combined influence
of TIP U-4019 and TIP R-2823.
In the case of TIP U-4019, most of the land within the FLUSA has more or less
already urbanized. The Winstead Avenue corridor is almost completely developed at the
time of this assessment; therefore, this project is not likely to influence intra-regional land
development location decisions. Planners from the City of Rocky Mount anticipate the
majority of the City's future growth to occur downtown and in areas north and west of
the project corridor. Large-scale developments are not likely to be developed in the
FLUSA due to the construction of TIP U-4019.
7. Indirect and Cumulative Effects
The evaluation of the following set of indicators helps to determine the potential
for land use change as a result of highway projects, such as those proposed under TIP U-
4019 (see Table 20). The results of this evaluation also assist in the determination of
whether or not a more quantitative analysis of potential indirect and cumulative effects is
necessary.
42
Table 20. Potential for Land Use ChanL-e
Chanac:
iny 5LIPP1y Watcrl
C11a"we iii ! Pi-c7peetv Farccastcd r°s. Lancl ' SC«cr ' Martet For ' PtahIie
12atin? AccessEbilit r Values Urowth ; Demand ?Avai1abiii[v Developm::nt' Pciticv
> 501:;:
increasc > 317? < 10- Less
> 10 min. in annual year Existing Development stringent; no
travel time property pop. supply service activiry growth
Stron savin s values owth of land available abundant mana ement
n
" X
" X X
" X X X
" X
No 0-1% > 20- No service More
< 2 min. property annual year available Development stringent;
travel time value pop. supply now or in activity growth
Weak savin s increase Growth of land future lacking mana ement
No new access is being provided to previously inaccessible land. The increase in
overall traffic volumes as a result of a four- or six-lane highway, however, may more
than compensate for the slight access deterioration.
Population growth for the Extended Demographic Area (EDA) between 1990 and
2000 was 11.7%, or close to 1.2% per year. Population growth rates between 2000 and
2020 are expected to be slightly higher than 1°Io per year in Nash County.
Land availability along the Winstead Avenue corridor is limited due to the urban
nature of the project corridor. There are only a couple of undeveloped areas located
immediately along Winstead Avenue, which include the area west of Winstead Avenue
between Stoney Creek and Executive Drive, and the area that stretches along the south
side of English Road, east of Winstead Avenue. There are also some larger undeveloped
tracts of land in the northwest corner of the intersection of Hunter Hill Road and
Winstead Avenue, north of the project corridor. Additional land is available in the
northern portion of the FLUSA near portches Boulevard. The area in the northern end of
the FLUSA contains vacant agricultural land that may be available for development
momentum shifts to this vicinity. However, the market for development could increase
with the construction of TIP R-2823 in conjunction with TIP U-4019. These projects are
part of a northern loop around Rocky Mount, and could influence interregional land
development.
As mentioned earlier, water and sewer services are widely available. According
to local planners, Rocky Mount's development efforts are concentrated in the downtown
43
area and north and west of the City, some of which includes land in the northern sections
of the FLUSA.
8. Evaluation of Analysis Results
a. Evaluation of Indirect Effects
Overall, there are some development opportunities in the FLUSA. Most of the
future development in Rocky Mount is expected to occur in the northern and western
sections of the City, part of which is located within the TIP U-4019 FLUSA. TIP U-4019
may induce some residential and commercial development to the north of the project
within the FLUSA. According to local planners, development is not expected to occur in
any intense fashion due to the construction of TIP U-4019. Therefore, the overall
potential for induced growth due to TIP U-4019 is low. Furthermore, since most of the
land in the vicinity of Winstead Avenue is developed, minimal impacts to water resources
are expected.
b. Evaluation of Cumulative Effects
The potential cumulative effects of a transportation improvement project increase
when considered along with other proposed TIP projects and local road improvements,
which together would improve regional mobility. TIP U-4019, when combined with TIP
R-2823, would improve access from northern Rocky Mount to western Rocky Mount and
points further west via 1-95 and US 64. According to local planners, most of the growth
in the next few years is expected to occur in the northern and western sections of Rocky
Mount, and some of this land is in the northern areas of the FLUSA. The City has
identified a portion of this land to be in the Northwest Smart Growth Area. TIPs R-2823
and U-4019 combined will serve as a major thoroughfare providing commuters from both
the southwestern and northwestern portions of Rocky Mount with access to commercial
and industrial areas located in northern Rocky Mount. Construction of TIP U-4019,
especially in conjunction with TIP R-2823, could make portions of the northern ICE Area
more attractive for residential development by increasing access.
In addition to other transportation projects, other major local or regional
developments or activities can contribute to potential cumulative effects related to TIP U-
4019. According to local planners, there are no proposed major public or private projects
within the FLUSA.
9. ICE Conclusions
Findings indicate that TIP U-4019 alone should not induce much commercial or
residential development, thus impacts to overall water quality will be minimal.
The majority of growth-inducing factors analyzed in this document are rated low.
Winstead Avenue serves as a major north/south route in western Rocky Mount. It also
44
serves as a connector route between the residential areas south of Sunset Avenue to US
64. The City has identified future growth areas that are mostly outside the realm of the
TIP U-4019 FLUSA, except for the "Northwest Smart Growth Area." With the
completion of TIP U-4019 in conjunction with TIP R-2823, residential uses and basic
commercial service could become more prevalent in this area. Cumulative effects may
occur in the northern areas of the FLUSA once TIP R-2823 is constructed and ties into
TIP U-4019.
C. CIA and ICE Mitigation, Enhancement, and Recommendations
TlP U-4019 could have potential benefts to several community resources.
Inclusion of pedestrian amenities such as crosswalks/pedestrian signal heads would only
help increase the connectivity for pedestrians and bicyclists traveling to local retail
centers, doctors' offices and those using public transit, especially since sidewalks will be
constructed along this corridor as part of the project. Constructing 14-foot outside lanes
would help accommodate bicyclists, especially if the greenway is built along Stoney
Creek.
D. Cultural Resources
This project is subject to compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 35 CFR Part 800. Section 106
requires that if a federally funded, licensed, or permitted project has an effect on a
property listed in or eligible for the National Register of Historic Places, the Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation will be given an opportunity to comment.
Potential historic architectural and archaeological resources within the proposed
project corridor were assessed and are detailed below:
1. Archaeological Resources
State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) has conducted a review of the
proposed widening of Winstead Avenue and are aware of no archaeological sites
which would be affected by T.I.P. Project U-4019. Please see letter from SHPO
dated July 15, 2002 in Appendix A.
45
2. Architectural Historic Resources
The Historic Architecture Section of the NCDOT Office of Human
Environment surveyed the area of potential effect (APE) for T.I.P. Project U-
4019, in March 2002. During the site visit, four historic properties that are more
than fifty years of age were found in the project area, none eligible for inclusion
in the National Register of Historic Places.
The Historic Architecture Survey Report is on file with the Project
Development and Environmental Analysis Branch of NCDOT. The SHPO has
reviewed the report. Please see SHPO concurrence form in Appendix A.
3. Section 4(f) and Section 6( fl Resources
Section 4(f) of the U. S. Department of Transportation Act of 1966
specifies that publicly owned land from a public park, recreation area, historic site, or
wildlife and waterfowl refuge of national, state, or local significance may be used for a
federal-aid project only if:
• There is no feasible and prudent alternative to the use of such land, and
• Such highway program or project includes all possible planning to
minimize harm to Section 4(f) lands resulting from such use.
There are no Section 4(f) resources are located in the project area.
Section 6(f) of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 states that "no
property acquired or developed with assistance under this section shall, without the
approval of the Secretary [of the Department of the Interior], be converted to other than
public outdoor recreation uses."
The are no properties within the proposed project corridor which have
been acquired or developed with assistance of Section 6(f) funds.
E. Natural Resources Technical Report
Regional Characteristics
The project study area is located in Nash County, North Carolina within the
northwest section of the City of Rocky Mount. The project study area begins at the
intersection of SR 1613 (N. Winstead Ave.) and SR 1770 (Sunset Ave.) and continues
north along SR 1613 to the intersection of SR 1613 and SR 1604 (Hunter Hill Rd.). The
project study area is comprised of commercial, residential, and institutional development
46
areas in addition to utility easements, maintained fields, agricultural fields, recently
timbered areas, and undeveloped forested areas.
The majority of the project study area is comprised of commercial development
and existing roadway structures, while natural communities comprise the least amount of
land uses within the project study area. The project study area lies primarily in the
Southeastern Plains Physiographic Province, more specifically within the Rolling Coastal
Plain Ecoregion (Griffith et al., 2002). Irregular plains with broad interstream areas in
addition to a mosaic of cropland, pasture, woodland, and forested areas are within this
ecoregion. This ecoregion is generally characterized as having gradual relief with
moderate elevations and stream gradients. This ecoregion has greater relief, elevation,
and stream gradients than those found within the coastal plain ecoregions. The Rolling
Coastal Plain Ecoregion is biologically less diverse than the coastal plain ecoregions.
2. Soils
The process of soil development depends upon both biotic and abiotic influences.
These influences include past geologic activities, nature of parent material, environmental
and human influences, plant and animal activity, time, climate, and topographical
position. The project study area lies within the Norfolk-Rains soils association. This
association is comprised of nearly level to gently sloping, well drained and poorly
drained soils that have a loamy or clayey subsoil. There are nine soil units that lie within
the project study area. Individual soil units within the project study area are described in
Table 21 (USDA, 1989; USDA, 1995).
Table 21 . Soils List for Pro'ec t Stud Area
? •..? ? ?? w ? ? ? ? ???? ? .?.. e
Bibb loam frequently thermic Typic Poorly drained and nearly level hydric soil
Bb flooded Fluva uentS
q located in bottomlands and has a vcry slow
surface runoff.
Norfolk loamy sand, 0 thermic Typic Well drained non-hydric (with hydric
NoA to 2 percent slopes Paleudults inclusions) soil that is nearly level located on
broad interstream divides of u lands.
Norfolk loamy sand, 2 thermic Typic Well drained and gently sloping non-hydric
NoB t0 6 percent slopes Paleudults (with hydric inelusions) soil located on
convex ridaes and side slo es.
Norfolk-Urban land thermic Typic Well drained and gently sloping Norfolk non-
NuB complex, 0 to 6 percent paleudults hydric soils and Urban land that are small and
slo es too mixed to ma se aratel .
thermic Typic Poorly drained and nearly level hydric soil
Ra Rains fine sandy loam
Paleaquults located at the lowest landscape position of
broad, smooth u lands.
Consists of non-hydric soil areas where the
Ud Udorthents, loamy N/A natural soil layering sequence has been
destro ed b earthmovin machines.
Ur Urban land N/A Consists of non-hydric soil areas 85 percent of
which are covered with streets, buildings,
47
arkinv lots, railroad ards, and air orts.
Wedowee coarse sandy thernlte Typic Well drained and moderately sloping non-
WeC loam, 6 to 10 percent Hapl
u dults hydric soil located on side slopes breakina to
slo es streams.
Wickham fine sandy theTmlc Typ1c Well drained and nearly level to gendy sloping
WkA loam, 0 to 3 persent
Hapludults non-hydric soil located on high stream
slo es, rarel flooded terraces.
3. Water Resources
This section contains information concerning water resources likely to be
impacted by the proposed project. Water resource assessments include the physical
characteristics (determined by field survey), best usage classifications, and water quality
aspects of the water resources. Probable impacts to surface waters are also discussed, as
well as measures to minimize impacts.
a. Physical Characteristics of Surface Waters
The project study area is located within the DWQ subbasin 03-03-02 upper Tar-
Pamlico River Basin (NCDENR, 2003) and the USGS 8-digit HUC 03020101 (USDA,
1995). There are three surface water bodies within the project study area and they are
described below. Table 23 lists the dimensions of surface waters within the project study
area. Descriptions of each surface water body within the project study area are provided
below.
The first surface water body, Stony Creek, crosses the project study area
approximately 1,780 feet north of the intersection of SR 1613 and SR 1770. There is
approximately 410 linear feet of Stony Creek within the project study area. At the
crossing of SR 1613, Stony Creek was approximately 60 feet wide and contained a sandy
silt bottom with sparse rock and gravel mixtures. Slightly turbid conditions were
observed during field investigations conducted on April 15, 2004. The side slopes of
Stony Creek were well defined with a moderate gradient. The approximate top of bank
and water depth is 5 feet and 3 feet, respectively. Ultimately, Stony Creek drains east to
its confluence with the Tar River.
The second surface water body (UT-1) is an unnamed tributary to Stony Creek
and crosses the project study area approximately 820 feet north of the intersection of SR
1613 and US 64. There is approximately 2101inear feet of UT-1 within the project study
area. At the crossing of SR 1613, the unnamed tributary was approximately 3 feet wide
and contained a sandy silt bottom. The side slopes were well defined with a moderate
gradient. The approximate top of bank and water depth is 4 inches and 2 inches,
respectively. Along the extreme eastern side of the project study area, evidence of recent
beaver activity was observed within the unnarned tributary.
The third surface water body (UT-2) is an unnamed tributary to Stony Creek and
crosses the project study area approximately 1,820 feet south of the intersection of SR
48
1613 and SR 1604. There is approximately 186 linear feet of UT-2 within the project
study area At the crossing of SR 1613, the unnamed tributary was approximately 5 feet
wide and contained a sandy silt bottom with sparse rock and gravel mixtures. The side
slopes were well defined with a moderate gradient. The approximate top of bank and
water depth is 4 inches and 2 inches, respectively. Evidence of past of channelization
activities were observed.
b. Best Usage Classification
Surface waters in North Carolina are assigned a classification by the DWQ
designed to maintain, protect, and enhance water quality within the state. Stony Creek
and the two unnamed tributaries within project study area have been assigned a DWQ
stream index number of 28-68. Stony Creek and the two unnamed tributaries are
classified as Class C and NSW waters by DWQ. Class C waters are protected for
secondary recreation, fishing, wildlife, fish and aquatic life propagation and survival,
agriculture and other uses. Secondary recreation includes wading, boating, and other
uses involving human body contact with water where such activities take place in an
infrequent, unorganized, or incidental manner. There are no restrictions on watershed
development or types of discharges. Class NSW (Nutrient Sensitive Waters) is a
supplemental classification intended for waters needing additional nutrient management
due to their being subject to excessive growth of microscopic or macroscopic vegetation.
Management strategies for point and nonpoint source pollution control are site specific
and require eontrol of nutrients (nitrogen and/or phosphorus usually) to limit excessive
growth of vegetation. No waters classified as Outstanding Resources Waters (ORW),
High Quality Waters (HQW), Critical Area (CA), or Water Supply (WS-II or WS-I)
occur within 1.0 mile of the project study area.
c. Water Quality
This section describes the water quality of the water resources within the study
area. Potential impacts to water quality from point and non-point sources are evaluated.
Water quality assessments are based upon published resource information and field study
observations. Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act (CWA) requires states to develop a
list of waters not meeting water quality standards or which have impaired uses. Stony
Creek was sampled in 2002 to evaluate its status on the 303(d) list. Based on the
sampling results Stony Creek was listed as impaired due to biological impairment, and is
therefore included on the State's 2002 303(d) list (NCDENR, 2002).
i. Basin Wide Assessment Report
The DWQ has initiated a basinwide approach to water quality management for
each of the seventeen river basins within the state. The Environmental Sciences Branch
within the Water Quality Section of the DWQ collects biological and physical data for
use in basinwide assessment and planning. River basins are reassessed every five years.
The Basinwide Assessment Program assesses water quality by sampling for benthic
49
macroin vertebrate (benthos) organisms throughout North Carolina. The monitoring sites
may vary according to needs assessed for a particular basin. Based on the Tar-Pamlico
River Basinwide Assessment Report, for subbasin 03-03-02 an ambient water quality and
benthos monitoring has been performed within the project vicinity approximately 0.5
mile upstream of the project study area. The stream was historically listed as impaired
from its source to the confluence with Tar River for sediments based on biological
impairment. Sampling within the creek in 1992 rated the creek Fair. Adequate sampling
could not be achieved in 1997. In 2002, impacted conditions still existed in Stony Creek
even though a Good-Fair rating was assigned using the Coastal A criteria (NCDENR,
2003).
ii. Point Source Discharge Permits
Point source discharges in North Carolina are permitted through the National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program administered by the DWQ.
Permits are required to discharge into surface waters. No permitted dischargers are listed
within one mile of the project study area (NCDENR, 2002). There were no discharges
observed within the project study area during field investigations conducted on April 15,
2004.
d. Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Table 23 lists the dimensions of surface waters within the project study area.
Activities associated with project construction, such as clearing and grubbing on
streambanks, instream construction, extending or replacing existing pipes and culverts,
fertilizers and pesticide application in re-vegetation, and pavement installation are likely
to impact water resources in the project area. Impacts may be manifested as:
• Increased sedimentation and siltation downstream of the crossing and
increased erosion in the study area,
0 Changes in light incidence and water clarity due to increased
sedimentation and vegetation removal,
0 Alteration of water levels and flows due to interruptions and/or additions
to surface and groundwater flow from construction,
• Changes in and destabilization of water temperature due to vegetation
removal,
• Increased nutrient loading during construction via runoff from exposed
areas,
• Increased concentrations of toxic compounds in roadway runoff,
• Increased potential for release of toxic compounds such as fuel and oil
from construction equipment and other vehicles,
• Alteration of stream discharge due to silt loading and changes in surface
and groundwater drainage patterns.
50
Successful minimization of construction related impacts can be achieved by
implementing erosion and sediment control (ESC) measures on construction sites to
prevent soil movement/loss. Further benefits from ESC measures include enhanced
project aesthetics, reduced complaints from area residents, and, most importantly,
elimination of appreciable damage to off-site receiving channels, property, and natural
resources. In order to minimize potential impacts to water resources in the project study
area, NCDOT's Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters will be
strictly enforced during the construction phase of the project. In addition, strict
adherence to the DWQ Tar-Pamlico Buffer Rules (15ANCAC 2B.0259) will be
implemented. A description of the Tar-Pamlico Buffer Rules is discussed on page 57 of
this report.
4. Biotic Resources
Terrestrial and aquatic communities are included in the description of biotic
resources. Living systems described in the following sections include various
communities of associated plants and animals. These descriptions refer to the dominant
flora and fauna in each community and the relationships of these biotic components.
Descriptions of the terrestrial systems are presented in the context of plant community
classifications. Representative animal species that are likely to occur in these habitats
(based on published range distributions) are also cited. Scientific nomenclature and
common names (when applicable) are used for the plant and animal species described.
Subsequent references to the same species are by the common name only.
a. Terrestrial Communities
Terrestrial communities found in the project study area most resemble the Mesic
Pine Flatwoods, Maintainedldisturbed, and Coastal Plain Levee Forest communities, as
described by Schafale and Weakley (1990). Transitions between these communities exist
in the project study area. Dominant faunal components associated with these terrestrial
areas are discussed in each community description. Many species are adapted to the
entire range of habitats found within the study area, but may not be mentioned separately
in each community description.
i. Mesic Pine Flatwoods
This forested community of primarily loblolly pine occurs within the few
remaining undeveloped forested areas within the project study area. These few areas are
located within proximity to Stony Creek and the intersection of SR 1613 and US 64.
Most of this community has been disturbed due to past timbering activities and is forested
with both deciduous and evergreen species. A recently timbered area exists
approximately 600 feet south of the intersection SR 1613 and SR 1604 along the western
side of the project study area. The recently timbered area is now considered apart of the
Maintained/disturbed terrestrial community, visual examination revealed that the area
51
would have most likely been characterized as a Mesic Pine Flatwoods terrestrial
community.
The Mesic Pine Flatwoods terrestrial communities occur on either flat or rolling
Coastal Plain sediments with loamy, fine-textured, or sandy soils. This terrestrial
community is dominated by loblolly pine (Pinus taeda) mixed with an understory of
southern red oak (Quercus falcata), water oak (Quercus nigra), and sweet gum
(Liquidarrabar styraciflua). A low shrub layer of varying density exists consisting of
American holly (Ilex opaca), Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense), and wax myrtle
(Myrica cerifera). The herbaceous layer is dominated by wire grass (Aristida stricta) and
bracken fern (Pteridium aquilinum) and the vine layer is dominated by common
greenbrier (Smilax rotundifolia), muscadine grape (Vitis rotundifolia), and Japanese
honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica).
Animals likely found in this community within the project study area include
whitetail deer (Odocoileus virginianus), eastern cottontail (Sylvilagus floridanus),
Virginia opossum (Didelphis virginiana), raccoon (Procyon lotor), gray squirrel (Sciurus
carolinensis), blue jay (Cyanoeitta cristata), copperhead (Agkistrodon contortrix), rat
snake (Elaphe obsolete), scarlet kingsnake (Lampropeltis triangulum), eastern box turtle
(Terrapene carolina), American toad (Bufo americanus), Fowler's toad (Bufo
woodhousei), and spring peeper (Hyla crucifer). A gray squirrel and tracks of a whitetail
deer were observed on the day of the field investigations.
ii. Maintained/Disturbed
This community encompasses areas that have recently been or are currently
impacted by human disturbance, such as commercial, residential, and institutional
landscaping areas, maintained roadside right-of-ways, utility easements, maintained
fields, recently timbered areas, and agricultural fields. Because of mowing and periodic
clearing, this community is kept in a constant state of early succession. Regularly
maintained areas are dominated by fescue (Festuca spp.), Bermuda grass (Cynodon
dactylon), ryegrass (Lolium spp.), white clover (Trifolium repens), red clover (Trifolium
pratense), plantain (Plantago rugelii), wild onion (Allium spp.), wood sorrel (4xalis
spp.), and dandelion (Taraxacum officinale). Irregularly maintained areas are dominated
by those species previously listed, as well as Japanese honeysuckle, tick-seed sunflower
(Bidens spp.), loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), trumpet creeper (Campsis radicans), ragweed
(Ambrosia artemisiifolia), sneezeweed (Helenium spp.), Johnson grass (Sorghum
halepense), lespedeza (Lespedeza spp.), goldenrod (Solidago spp.), Queen Anne's lace
(Daucus carota), wild blackberry (Rubus argutus), and multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora).
Transitions of this community with the other listed terrestrial communities also exist. It
should be noted that there is a recently timbered area located approximately 600 feet
south of the intersection SR 1613 and SR 1604 along the western side of the project study
area. This area is most likely being prepared for future development and is now
characterized as a Maintained/disturbed community. Visual examination of remnant
52
vegetation within this area revealed that the area was once an upland area and would have
most likely been characterized as a Mesic Pine Flatwoods terrestrial community.
Maintained/disturbed communities adjacent to forested tracts provide rich
ecotones for foraging, while the forests provide forage and cover. Common animals that
are likely inhabit disturbed communities include red fox (Vatlpes vulpes), gray catbird
(Dumetella carolinensis), Virginia opossum, northern cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis),
northern mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos), and mourning dove (Zenaida macroura). An
American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos) was observed within a maintained roadside
right-of-way along SR 1613. The Carolina wren (Thryothorus ludovicianus), eastern
towhee (Pipilo erythrophthalmus), and several species of mice (Peromyscus spp.) inhabit
the less maintained margins or ecotones of road shoulders. Mortality among animals that
migrate across roadways provides forage for opportunistic species such as the turkey
vulture (Cathartes aura).
iii. Coastal Plain Levee Forest
This forested community occurs along channels on natural levee deposits that are
seasonally to intermittently flooded. These areas are located along Stony Creek and
along two unnamed tributaries within the project study area. Along Stony Creek, the
Coastal Plain Levee Forest is relatively small due to adjacent land development such as
commercial development located on the both sides of Stony Creek and an utility
easement located along the southern side approximately 20 feet from the top of bank.
The Coastal Plain Levee Forest terrestrial communities contain dominate
hardwoods of water oak, sweet gum, willow oak (Quercus phellos), river birch (Betula
nigra), and American elm (Ulmus americana). The understory is dominated by Virginia
willow (Itea virginica), sweet pepperbush (Clethra alnifolia), ironwood (Carpinus
caroliniana), and American holly. The herbaceous layer is dominated by large sedge
(Carex gigantea) and bladder sedge (Carex intumescens) and the vine layer is dominated
by common greenbrier, muscadine grape, and Japanese honeysuckle. Animals previously
listed may also be found in this community.
b. Aquatic Communities
Aquatic communities within the project study area exist in the form of Stony
Creek and two unnamed tributaries to Stony Creek. Table 23 lists the dimensions of
surface waters within the project study area. Stony Creek has undergone significant
sedimentation as a result of urban development. Only an extremely narrow forested
buffer zone exists within the project study area to filter stormwater runoff.
Riverbanks, which are steep and heavily eroded, exhibit vegetation previously
mentioned in terrestrial community descriptions. Amphibians and reptiles observed in
and adjacent to Stony Creek and which may be present within UT-1 and UT-2 include
three-lined salamander (Eurycea guttolineata), green frog (Rana clamitans). Other
amphibians and reptiles including the pickerel frog (R. palustris), and banded water snake
53
(Nerodia fasciata) may also be present in the three surface water bodies. The three
sui•face water bodies may support low numbers of redfin pickerel (Esox americanus),
chain pickerel (E. niger), American eel (Anguilla rostrata), creek chubsucker (Erimyzon
oblongus), redbreast sunfish (Lepomis auritus), bluespotted sunfish (Enneacanthus
glnriosus), dusky shiner (Notropsis cummingsae), sawcheek darter (Etheostoma
serriferum), pirate perch (Aphredoderus sayanus), and yellow bullhead (Ictalurus
natalis).
c. Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Project construction will have various impacts to the previously described
terrestrial and aquatic communities. Any construction activities in or near these
resources have the potential to impact biological functions. This section quantifies and
qualifies potential impacts to the natural communities within the project study area in
terms of the area impacted and the plants and animals affected. Temporary and
permanent impacts are considered here along with recommendations to minimize or
eliminate impacts.
i. Terrestrial Communities
Table 22 lists the total amount of acreage for each terrestrial community within
the project study area. There will be terrestrial communities permanently impacted by
the proposed project from clearing, grading, and paving activities. Final design of the
proposed project has not been completed. Project construction right-of-way often does
not require the entire project study area; therefore, actual impacts may be considerably
less than that listed for the total acreage within the project study area.
Table 22. Terrestrial Communities within the Pro_iect Studv Area
Maintained/disturbed 39.4
Mesic Pine Flatwoods 5.7
Coastal Plain Levee Forest 1.1
Total 46.2
Destruction of natural communities within the project study area will result in the
loss of foraging and breeding habitats for the various animal species that utilize the area.
Animal species will be displaced into surrounding communities. Adult birds, mammals,
and some reptiles are mobile enough to avoid mortality during construction. Young
animals and less mobile species may suffer direct loss during construction. The project
study area is comprised of commercial, residential, institutional, and agricultural land
uses and is considered moderately urbanized. The disturbed nature of the project study
area has fragmented the natural communities forcing wildlife to adapt.
54
ii. Aquatic Communities
Table 23 lists the dimensions of surface waters within the project study area.
Aquatic habitat in the project area will be both directly and indirectly affected by
construction of the project. Direct impacts will include the destruction of habitat by the
discharge of dredged or fill material. Impacts on aquatic communities include
fluctuations in water temperatures as a result of the loss of riparian vegetation. Shelter
and food resources, both in the aquatic and terrestrial portions of these organisms' life
cycles, will be affected by losses in the terrestrial communities. The loss of aquatic
plants and animals will affect terrestrial fauna which rely on them as a food source.
Temporary and permanent impacts to aquatic organisms may result from
increased sedimentation. Aquatic invertebrates may drift downstream during
construction and recolonize the disturbed area once it has been stabilized. Sediments
have the potential to affect fish and other aquatic life in several ways, including the
clogging and abrading of gills and other respiratory surfaces, affecting the habitat by
scouring and filling of pools and riffles, altering water chemistry, and smothering
different life stages. Increased sedimentation may cause decreased light penetration
through an increase in turbidity. Dissolved oxygen levels may be lower as well due to
the influx of organic materials and increase in water temperature. Impacts to aquatic
communities can be minimized by strict adherence to best management practices.
Recommendations to Minimize Impacts
Habitat disturbance and sedimentation are extremely detrimental to aquatic and
terrestrial ecosystems. Best Management Practices (BMPs) for protection of surface
waters, will be strictly adhered to, to ensure the biological integrity of water bodies
impacted by this project. Particular methods can be incorporated into the design and
construction phases of road construction to minimize impacts to aquatic and terrestrial
ecosystems.
The water bodies in the project area have been impacted to some degree by land
use practices within the watershed. Additional impacts to these water resources may
have dramatic cumulative effects on the waters impacted, and thus, it is extremely
important to ensure that potential impacts are minimized/eliminated to the fullest extent
possible.
5. Jurisdictional Topics
This section provides inventories and impact analyses for two federal and state
regulatory issues: "Waters of the United States" and rare and protected species. In
addition, the application of applicable buffer rules that may apply within the study area
are discussed for areas associated with "Waters of the United States".
55
a. Waters of the United States
Wetlands and surface waters fall under the broad category of "Waters of the
United States" as defined in 33 CFR § 328.3 and in accordance with provisions of
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344). These waters are regulated by the
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). Any action that proposes to dredge or
place fill material into surface waters or wetlands is subject to these provisions.
Surface waters within the project study area are within the Tar-Pamlico River
Basin. In 1989, the Environmental Management Commission classified the Tar-Pamlico
River Basin as nutrient sensitive (NSW) due to excessive algal blooms and fish kills in
the upper Pamlico Estuary. This designatian required the DWQ to develop the "Tar-
Pamlico River Basin, Nutrient Sensitive Waters Management Strategy." Therefore, the
surface waters within the project study area are subject to the DWQ Tar-Pamlico Buffer
Rules (15 ANCAC 2B.0259).
i. Characteristics of Wetlands and Surface Waters
Jurisdictional "Waters of the United States" were identified within the project
study area in the form of wetlands and surface waters. Jurisdictional surface waters are
described in Section 23.1 (Physical Charactersitics of Surface Waters). Descriptions of
jurisdictional wetlands are characterized belQw. Delineation of wetlands was performed
in accordance with the "Wetlands Delineation Manual" (USACE, 1987) which includes
evidence of hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation, and wetland hydrology criterion. Three
jurisdictional wetland areas were identified, flagged, and GPS located within the project
study area and are shown in Figure 5. A jurisdictional wetland determination was issued
on May 28, 2004 by the USACE (USACE Action Id. 200411467) confirming the wetland
delineation and that the wetlands within the project study area are jurisdictional under
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (Appendix B, USACE May 28, 2004 letter). The
jurisdictional determination is valid until May 28, 2009. The three wetlands would be
classified as palustrine forested broad-leaved deciduous seasonally flooded (PFO1C)
wetlands based on the "Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habrtats of the United
States" (Cowardin, 1979). The three jurisdictional wetlands received ratings that ranged
from 55 to 59 (out of a possible 100 score) based on the criteria established in the
"Guidance for Rating the Values of Wetlands in North Carolind" (NCDEHNR, 1995).
The southernmost wetland (Wetland A) is located adjacent and hydrologically
connected to Stony Creek along the western side of the project study area. Dominant
species within this wetland included water oak, American elm, ironwood, and soft rush
(Juncus effusus). Soils within Wetland A include silty clay hydric soils that ranged from
10YR4/1 to 10YR6/1 matrix colars and contained 14YR6/8 common distinct mottles.
Saturation within 12" of the soil surface, water marks, and drainage patterns are examples
of primary hydrologic indicators observed within the wetland at the time of the site visit.
The value rating for Wetland A was 59.
56
The second wetland (Wetland B) is located adjacent and hydrologically connected
to UT-1 (unnamed tributary to Stony Creek) along the western side of the project study
area. Dominant species within Wetland B included red maple (Acer rubrum), tulip
poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), willow oak, and netted chain fern (Woodwardia
aerolata). Soils within Wetland B include sandy silt hydric soils that ranged from
10YR4/1 to 10YR6/1 matrix colors and contained 10YR5/6 common distinct mottles.
Primary hydrologic indicators of saturation within 12" of the soil surface and drainage
patterns in addition to secondary indicators of oxidized root channels and water stained
leaves were observed within wetland B at the time of the site visit. The value rating for
Wetland B was 55.
The third wetland (Wetland C) is also located adjacent and hydrologically
connected to UT-1 (unnamed tributary to Stony Creek) but located further downstream
along the eastern side of the project study area. The dominant species in Wetland C are
similar to those in Wetland B. Soils within Wetland C include silt sand hydric soils that
ranged from 10YR4/1 to 10YR6/1 matrix colors with no rnottles observed. Primary
hydrologic indicators of saturation within 12" of the soil surface, sediment deposits, and
drainage patterns in addition to secondary indicators of oxidized root channels and water
stained leaves were observed within Wetland C at the time of the site visit. The value
rating for Wetland C was 57.
ii. Buffers Associated with "Waters of the United States"
Surface waters, in the form of Stony Creek and two unnamed tributaries to Stony Creek,
are located within the project study area and drain east towards the Tar River, and
therefore, are subject to the DWQ "Tar-Pamlico River Basin, Nutrient Sensitive Waters
Management Strategy, Protection and Maintenance of Existing Riparian Buffers." This
Rule applies a 50-foot wide riparian buffer directly adjacent to surface waters in the Tar-
Pamlico River Basin (intermittent streams, perennial streams, lakes, ponds, and
estuaries), excluding wetlands. For the purpose of this Rule, a surface water is deemed to
be present if the feature is approximately shown on either the most recent version of the
soil survey map prepared by the Natural Resources Conservation Service of the United
States Department of Agriculture or the most recent version of the 1:24,000 scale (7.5
minute) quadrangle topographic maps prepared by the United States Geologic Survey
(USGS). Riparian buffers adjacent to surface waters that do not appear on either of the
maps are not subject to this Rule. Riparian buffers adjacent to surface waters that appear
on the maps are subject to this Rule unless an on-site determination shows that surface
waters are not present and when existing uses are present and ongoing.
There are four surface water features shown within the project area according to
the Soil Survey of Nash County, North Carolina (USDA, 1989). Three of the four
surface water features were determined to be present and were field verified on August
24, 2004 by a DWQ representative (Appendix A, DWQ letter dated September 29, 2004,
TPBRRO # 04-0252). As such, the three DWQ confirmed surface waters within the
project study area have 50-foot protected riparian buffers associated with them. The
57
protected riparian buffer has two zones. Zone 1 begins at the most landward limit of the
top of bank or the rooted herbaceous vegetation and extend landward a distance of 30 feet
on all sides of the surface water, measured horizontally on a line perpendicular to the
surface water. Zone 2 begins at the outer edge of Zone 1 and extends 20 feet as measured
on a line perpendicular to the surface water. The combined width of Zones 1 and 2 is 50
feet on all sides of the surface water.
b. Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Final design of the proposed project has not been completed. Project construction
right-of-way often does not require the entire project study area; therefore, actual impacts
may be considerably less than that listed for the total acreage within the project study
area. Additional areas outside the project study area might be indirectly affected due to
changes in water levels and siltation from construction activities; however, impacts to
these areas were not calculated. Table 23 lists the dimensions of surface waters and
acreage of Tar-Pamlico River 50' Protected Buffers within the project study area. Table
24 lists the acreage of jurisdictional wetlands within the project study area.
I'able 23. Surface 1Vaters and Btiffer Areas rr-ilhin the
'I. Stream I LineaX- F Tar-Pamlico ]
Area
'
Water Width Feet of Zone 1(30 feet) Zone 2(20 feet)
; {feet} 4trea:tta Acrea e Acrea e
Ston Creek 60 410 0.50 0.33
UT-1 3 210 0.34 0.30
UT-2 5 186 0.29 0.23
Total 68 806 1.13 0.86
Table 24. .Turisdictional Wetlands within the Proiect Studv Area

W
d
a .
etlan
Are 0.18
B 0.04
C 0.19
Total 0.41
c. Permits
Dredging or placement of fill material into surface waters or wetlands will require
permits from the USACE and certification from DWQ. A final permitting strategy
cannot be developed until the designs of the proposed improvements are finalized and
construction impacts are quantified. Section 401 of the CWA requires each state to
certify that state water quality standards will not be violated for activities that either
involve issuance of a federal permit or license ar require discharges to Waters of the
United States. The USACE cannot issue a Section 404 permit until a Section 401
certification is issued. Therefore, NCDOT must apply to DWQ for a Section 401 Water
58
Quality Certification as part of the permit process. If impacts are less than 1501inear feet
of stream and less than 0.33 acre of wetland, a General 401 Certification issued by DWQ
and a Nationwide Permit (NWP) issued by USACE may he applicable. However, if
impacts are greater than these thresholds, the DWQ will have independent authority
above USACE regulations to require mitigation. A Section 404 Nationwide Permit is
anticipated for this project and a North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ)
Section 401 Water Quality General Certification is required prior to the issuance of the
Section 404 permit. Factors which determine a Section 404 Nationwide Permit (NWP)
applicability include: hydrology, juxtaposition with a major resource; whether the
impacts occur as part of the widening of an existing facility, or as the result of new
location construction.
Since the surface waters within the project study area are within the Tar-Pamlico
River Basin, an Authorization Certificate pursuant to the DWQ Tar-Pamlico Buffer Rules
(15A NCAC 2B.0259) will have to be obtained if road crossings impact greater than 40
linear feet of protected riparian buffer. A determination as to whether an Authorization
Certificate should be pursued cannot be made at this time since the designs of the
proposed improvements are not finalized. If the road crossings impact greater than 40
linear feet but equal to or less than 150 linear feet or 0.33 acre of riparian buffer, the
project is allowable but will not require mitigation. If the road crossings impact greater
than 150 linear feet or 0.33 acre of riparian buffer, the project is allowable and mitigation
will be required.
d. Avoidance, Minimization, Mitigation
The USACE has adopted, through the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ),
a wetland mitigation policy which embraces the concepts of "no net loss of wetlands" and
sequencing. The purpose of this policy is to restore and maintain the physical, chemical,
and biological integrity of "Waters of the United States," specifically wetlands.
Mitigation of wetland impacts has been defined by the CEQ to include: avoiding impacts
(to wetlands), minimizing impacts, rectifying impacts, reducing impacts over time, and
compensating for impacts (40 CFR 1508.20). Each of the three aspects of avoidance,
minimization, and compensatory mitigation must be considered in sequential order as
designs of the proposed improvements are prepared. In addition, mitigation requirements
need to be followed in accordance with the Riparian Buffer Mitigation Program for the
Tar-Pamlico Basin (15A NCAC 213.0260) for impacts within the protected riparian
buffer.
i. Avoidance
Avoidance examines all appropriate and practicable possibilities of averting
impacts to "Waters of the United States". According to a 1990 Memorandum of
Agreement (MOA) between the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the
USACE, "appropriate and practicable" measures to offset unavoidable impacts must be
determined. Such measures should be appropriate to the scope and degree of those
59
impacts and practicable in terms of cost, existing technology, and logistics in light of
overall project purposes. Avoiding impacts to surface waters may not be possible for this
project since Stony Creek and UT-1 crosses SR 1613 and UT-2 is within close proximity
to SR 1613. As a consequence, avoiding impacts to Tar-Pamlico River 50' Protected
Buffers may not be possible either. Wetlands within the project study area are situated
within the landscape such that design considerations may be possible avoiding impacts to
all wetlands within the project study area.
ii. Minimization
Minimization includes the examination of appropriate and practicable steps to
reduce adverse impacts to "Waters of the United States". Implementation of these steps
will be required through project modifications and permit conditions. Minimization for
U-4019 focuses on decreasing the footprint of the proposed project through the reduction
of right-of-way widths and fill slopes. Other general means to minimize impacts to
surface waters and riparian buffer areas are described on page 54 of this document. If it
is determined that impacts to wetlands can not be avoided, then minimization of wetland
impacts may be possible. All practical means should be utilized to minimize project-
related water quality degradation.
iii. Compensatory Mitigation
Compensatory Mitigation is not normally considered until anticipated impacts to
"Waters of the United States" have been avoided and minimized to the maximum extent
practicable. It is recognized that "no net loss of wetlands" functions and values may not
be achieved in every permit action. Appropriate and practicable compensatory mitigation
is required for unavoidable adverse impacts that remain after all appropriate and
practicable minimization has been achieved. Compensatory actions often include
restoration, creation, enhancement, and preservation of "Waters of the United States,"
specifically wetlands. Such actions should be undertaken in areas adjacent to or
contiguous to the discharge site if practicable.
By the 1990 Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the USACE and the
EPA, it is required that projects authorized under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
permits strictly follow this mitigatio? sequence, and the applicant must demonstrate that
there are no practicable alternatives which would avoid impacts to "Waters of the United
States", and that the project is water dependent.
iv. Riparian Buffer Mitigation
Riparian Buffer Mitigation is required for road crossings of surface waters that
impact greater than 150 linear feet or 0.33 acre of riparian buffer. The required area of
mitigation will be determined by either the DWQ or the delegated local authority. The
required area of mitigation will be determined by applying a multiplier of 3 to impacts
within Zone 1 and a multiplier of 1.5 to impacts within Zone 2.
60
e. Rare and Protected Species
Some populations of plants and animals are declining either as a result of natural
forces or their difficulty competing with humans for resources. Rare and protected
species listed for Nash County, and any likely impacts to these species as a result of the
proposed project construction, are discussed in the following sections.
i. Species Under Federal Protection
Plants and animals with a federal classification of Endangered (E) or Threatened
(T) are protected under the provisions of Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973. The study area lies in Nash County, North Carolina. There is one
federally protected vertebrate species and two federally protected invertebrate species
listed for this county (USFWS list dated February 2003), which are shown in Table 25
below. The USFWS lists no vascular plant species under federal protection for Nash
County.
No suitable habitat exists within the project study area for the red-cockaded
woodpecker (Picoides borealis). Suitable habitat was found within the project study area
in Stony Creek and two unnamed tributaries for the dwarf wedgemussel (Alasmidonta
heterodon) and Tar spinymussel (Elliptio steinstansana). Biological conclusions
regarding potential impacts are summarized below.
Table 25. Federal Protected Species within Nash Countv
E eclei-al
Scientific Name Commoxi Narne ' Status BirS[ogzcal Conciusion
Vertebrate
Picoides borealis red-cockaded E No Effect
wood ecker
Invertebrates
Alasmidonta dwarf wedgemussel E May affect but not likely to
heterodon adversel affect
Elliptio Tar spinymussel E May affect but not likely to
steinstansana adversely affect
Notes:
E Endangered denotes a species in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its
range.
Picoides borealis (red-cockaded woodpecker)
Federal Status: Endangered
Family: Picidae
Federally Listed: October 13, 1970
61
The red-cockaded woodpecker once occurred from New Jersey to southern
Florida and west to eastern Texas. It occurred inland in Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas,
Oklahoma, and Missouri. The red-cockaded woodpecker is now found only in coastal
states of its historic range and inland in southeastern Oklahoma and southern Arkansas.
In North Carolina, moderate populations occur in the Sandhills and southern Coastal
Plain. The few populations found in the Piedmont and northern Coastal Plain are
believed to be relics of former populations.
The red-cockaded woodpecker is approximately 8 inches long with a wingspan of
14 inches. Plumage includes black and white horizontal stripes on its back, with white
cheeks and under parts. Its flanks are streaked black. The cap and stripe on the throat
and side of the neck are black, with males having a small red spot on each side of the cap.
Eggs are laid from April through June. Maximum clutch size is seven eggs with an
average of three to five.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Alasmidonta heterodon (dwarf wedgemussel)
Federal Status: Endangered
Family: Unionidae
Federally Listed: March 14, 1990
The dwarf wedgemussel is a small freshwater mussel with a trapezoidal-shaped
shell that is usually less then 1.7 inches in length and is brown to yellowish brown in
color. It is historically known to exist from New Brunswick, Canada to North Carolina.
Documented populations in N.C. have occurred in Johnston, Wake, Orange, Nash,
Wilson, Granville, Person, Vance, Franklin and Warren Counties.
The dwarf wedgemussel inhabits creeks and rivers close to the banks, under
overhangs, and around submerged logs. It is also known to live on firm substrate of sand,
gravel, and muddy sand with a slow to moderate current, and requires clean water that is
well oxygenated and nearly silt free. Hosts for the dwarf wedgemussel larvae (glochidia)
that have been identified include the tessellated darter (Etheostoma olmstedi), Johnny
darter (E. nigrum), and mottled sculpin (Cottus bairdi).
Biological Conclusion: May affect, but not likely to adversely affect
A search of the NCNHP database of rare species and unique habitats, conducted
on April 7, 2004, indicated no records of occurrences in the project study area or project
vicinity. Biologists performed field investigations within the study area on April 15,
2004. Based on the field investigations, habitat for the dwarf wedgmussel exists within
the project study area in Stony Creek and two unnamed tributaries. A mussel survey was
conducted by NCDOT biologists at the project site in Stoney Creek on November 10,
62
2004. The survey extended 100 meters upstream and 400 meters downstream of SR
1613, and no dwarf wedge mussels were found.
Elliptio steinstansana (Tar spinymussel)
Federal Status: Endangered
Family: Unionidae
Federally Listed: June 27, 1985
The Tar spinymussel is only known to occur in North Carolina. Historically it is
believed to have occurred in the Neuse and Tar River Basins in the Costal Plain and
Piedmont. Today, only a few populations are known to exist.
The Tar spinymussel is one of three known North American freshwater mussels
with spines. Juveniles may have up to 12 spines; however, they tend to lose them as they
mature. It is a medium sized mussel reaching about 2.5 inches in length. It is found in
rivers and large creeks in relatively silt-free gravel and or course sand with fast-flowing,
well oxygenated riffles.
Biological Conclusion: May affect, but not likely to adversely affect
A search of the NCNHP database of rare species and unique habitats, conducted
on April 7, 2004, indicated no records of occurrences in the project study area or project
vicinity. Biologists performed field investigations within the study area on April 15,
2004. Based on the field investigations, habitat for the Tar spinymussel exists within the
project study area in Stony Creek and two unnamed tributaries. A mussel survey was
conducted by NCDOT biologists at the project site in Stoney Creek on November 10,
2004. The survey extended 100 meters upstream and 400 meters downstream of SR
1613, and no Tar spinymussels were found.
Federal Species of Concern and State Status
Federal Species of Concern (FSC) are not legally protected under the Endangered
Species Act and are not subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7, until they are
formally proposed or listed as Threatened or Endangered. Table 26 below includes FSC
species listed and their state classifications for Nash County. Organisms that are listed as
Endangered (E) or Special Concern (SC) on the NCNHP list of Rare Plant and Animal
Species are afforded state protection under the State Endangered Species Act of 1987 and
the North Carolina Plant Protection and Conservation Act of 1979. State listed species
are not afforded the protections of the Act on NCDOT projects.
Table 26. Federal Species of Concern within Nash Countv

............... Vertebrates
Noturus uriosus o. 2 "Carolina" madtom SC YES
Lythrurus matutinus Pinewoods shiner SR YES
Invertebrates
Fusconaia masoni Atlantic i toe E YES
63
S eyeria diana Diana fritillar butterfl SR NO
Lasmi ona stsbviridis Grecn floater E YES
Elli tio lanceolata Yellow lance E YES
Lam silis cariosa Yellow lam mussel E YES
Vascular Plants
Trillium pusillurn var.
usillum Carolina least trillium E NO
Lilium yro hilum Sandhills bog lil E-SC NO
Notes:
SC A Special Concern species is one that reyuires monitoring but may be taken or coltected and sold.
SR A Significantly Rare species is not lisCed as Endangered, Threatened, or Special Concern but
exis[s in the state in small numbers and has been determined to need monitoring.
E Endangered denotes a species in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its
range.
No FSC species have been recorded within 1.0 mile of the project study area
based upon the NHP database as of April 7, 2004. No FSC species were observed during
the surveys conducted on April 15, 2004.
F. Air Quality Analysis
The project is located in Nash County, which has been determined to be in compliance with
the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. The proposed project is located in an attainment
area therefore 40 CFR Parts 51 and 93 Of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) are not
applicable. This project is not anticipated to create any adverse effects on the air quality of this
attainment area. Please refer to Appendix C for the complete air quality analysis.
During construction of the proposed project, all materials resulting from clearing and
grubbing, demolition or other operations will be removed from the project, burned or
otherwise disposed of by the contractor. Any burning done will be done in accordance
with applicable local laws and ordinances and regulations of the North Carolina SII' for
air quality in compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520. Care will be taken to insure burning
conditions are such as to create a hazard to the public. Burning will be performed under
constant surveillance. Also during construction, measures will be taken to reduce the
dust generated by construction when the control of dust is necessary for the protection
requirements for air quality. This evaluation completes the assessment requirements for
air quality of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments and the NEPA process, and no
additional reports are necessary.
See Appendix C for the full Air Quality Analysis Report.
G. Highway Traffic Noise/Construction Noise Analysis
For four-lane symmetric widening, one receptor along Winstead Road would be
impacted, a residence. No receptors would experience a substantial noise level increase.
There is no control of access proposed for this project, as Winstead Avenue is already
developed with businesses, medical offices, and residence. For a noise barrier to provide
64
sufficient noise reduction it must be high enough and long enough to shield the receptor
from significant sections of the highway. Access openings in the barrier severely reduce
the noise reduction provided by the barrier. It then becomes economically unreasonable
to construct a barrier for a small noise reduction. This eliminates the consideration of
berms or noise walls as noise mitigation measures.
In addition, businesses, churches, and other related establishments located along a
particular highway normally require accessibility and high visibility. Solid mass,
attenuable measures for traffic noise abatement would tend to disallow these two
qualities, and thus, would not be acceptable abatement measures in this case.
In accordance with NCDOT Traffic Noise Abatement Policy, the Federal/State
governments are not responsible for providing noise abatement measures for new
development which building permits are issued within the noise impact area of a
proposed highway after the Date of Public Knowledge. The Date of Public Knowledge
of the location of this proposed highway project will be the approval date of the Finding
of No Significant Impact (FONSI). For development occurring after this public
knowledge date, local governing bodies are responsible to insure that noise compatible
designs are utilized along the proposed facility.
Based on these preliminary studies, traffic noise abatement is not recommended, and
no noise abatement measures are proposed. This evaluation completes the highway
traffic noise requirements of Title 23 CFR Part 772, and unless a major project change
develops, no additional noise reports will be submitted for this project. Please refer to
Appendix D for the complete noise analysis.
H. Hazardous Material and Geotechnical Impacts
A"Limited Phase I Site Assessment" report will be prepared for the proposed
project. The main purpose of the report is to identify recognized environmental
conditions, which are defined by the ASTM Standard Practice E 1527-97 as the
"presence or likely presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products on the site
under conditions that indicate an existing release, a past release, or a material threat of a
release of hazardous substances ar petroleum products into structures on the property or
into the ground, groundwater, or surface water of the property." Acquisition of these
properties, identified to contain hazardous materials, could result in future environmental
liability. Results from this report will be included in the Finding of No Significant
Impacts Document. A copy of this "Limited Phase I Site Assessment" report will be on
file with the North Carolina Department of Transportation's Project Development and
Environmental Analysis Branch.
If further design studies indicate right of way needs to be acquired from the
properties identified in the "Limited Phase I Site Assessment" report, preliminary site
assessments for soil and groundwater contamination will be performed prior to right of
65
way purchase. If contaminants are located on the proposed right of way, the current
landowner or the NCDOT will take appropriate action to decontaminate the area.
1. Hydraulic Concerns
Stormwater drainage will be controlled and not shunted directly into the existing
stream channels.
The City of Rocky Mount currently participates in the National Flood Insurance
Regular Program. The majority of the proposed widening of Winstead Avenue drains
into the Tar-Pamlico River Basin. Erosion and sedimentation will be controlled through
the specification, installation, and maintenance of more stringent erosion and
sedimentation control methods.
V. COMMENTS AND COORDINATION
A. Comments Received from Federal, State, and Local Agencies
Comments were received from the following federal, state, and local agencies.
These comments have been taken into consideration in the planning of this project and
the preparation of this document. Written comments were received from agencies noted
with an asterisk (*). Copies of the comments received are included in Appendix A.
*U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
*U. S. Department of Interior - Fish and Wildlife Service - Raleigh
*N. C. State Clearinghouse, Department of Administration
*N. C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources-
Division of Water Quality
*N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission
*N. C. Department of Cultural Resources
Region L Planning Agency (MPO)
City of Rocky Mount
Nash County
*Nash-Rocky Mount Schools
This Environmental Assessment will be provided to the appropriate federal, state,
and local agencies for comment. NCDOT will coordinate with pertinent agencies
regarding substantive issues raised as a result of their review. Responses to comments and
project related commitments will be incorporated into subsequent documentation for this
project.
66
Because the project wetland impacts are anticipated to be covered by a Nationwide
404 permit, this project did not follow the NEPA/404 interagency merger process.
B. Citizens' Informational Workshop
A Citizens' Informational Workshop for the proposed project was held on August
14, 2002. NCDOT representatives of the Project Development and Environmental
Analysis Branch, the Roadway Design Unit and the Division 4 Office were available to
explain the project, answer questions, and receive comments. Approximately 10 citizens
attended the workshop. Detailed information regarding the impact to properties along the
proposed project was not available at the time of the workshop. Workshop attendees were
able to review preliminary project information and comment on the project. Comment
sheets were provided to each workshop attendee. Most citizens were generally in favor
of the project.
C. Public Hearing
A public hearing will be held following approval of this document to provide
more detailed information to the public and to receive additional comments regarding the
proposed project. Comments received at the hearing will be reviewed by the NDCOT
and FHWA and will be incorporated into the project, as feasible and practicable.
67
YUM? 1 END PROJECT
Dr. ? _ ?..
1004
;
co0rul `
plem
?

Ry
?
. ?
3
m
?
? HNh
Oensrsl m
}IO?pitai ? Mp?
't o
! F1?\d 0? ?
•
?"?."? ,? • •_.•` $ o ?' _
j o
BrookvNM Dr. Damh s-n• ?
' . .?
,?c• ? O ''?''.? ?ti?n 0???< /• ? '._.'_ ? '`' f. BU8 ??.
? a• '? /?• pt• ZaEulon 64
'` •'
> ? a ??...i•. .`
ac
? O RO.
" ? x € C?xrai ? a
fi U • ° <Q r
1770 " W
¦nd }
?
? --?- --. 9
BEGIN PROJECT
NOM1IU7 C711\OVNP1 DIGrP\RI/C161d1 . .?
?,•??; OF T????RTATION
DM5ION OF HDGHWAY$
J/`r y PRoJEc't DEVELOPMENr e?ND i
????NMENTAL ANALYSIS 8PAd''Ic'M i
ROCKY MOUNT, N?TH CAROLINA
(SUNSET AVEj TO SSW604
E,(HUNTERSHiII RD)
Stat Pr ' No. • g232270
F.A ?roj.?lo. : STP?- 16i3_ 13)
FiGURE 1
Ar<nio?
' Gaslalia ?43
Golc a ?' '
RMOa? .? ,k'.L
s ?
Uo ?Ti
Iv A 5. ^
„+??? ?N?L?wa
s? :• ? ?? l
?
(,l
?
EXISTING WW VAR.
?E
10' 38' 3 1 0' 38' 10'
(15' yyiGR) (15' WiG
2' 14' 12' 12' 12' 12' 14'
2, , ,6„ 2,6 , 2,
,
02 02 02 02 02 02
6 LANE TYPICAL
FROM SR 1770 (SUNSEf AVE.) TO US 64
EXISTING WW VAR.
(i
10' 26' 3I0' 26' 10`
(15' WiGR) (15' WiGR)
14' 12' 12' 14' 2'
2,6, , 21 A?0
J
4 LANE TYPICAL
FROM US 64 TO SR 1604 (HUNTER HILL RD.)
Proposed Typical Cross Sections
U-4p19
FIG URE 3
: ur,:: E:ii: Gr.
\<
ti
? `
? \
4 S G
J 1
f 1?
?
A'
a 6
??
c
/ h1
?
r,
C
C
SR 1613 ?
VVinstead Ave.
1 ?
`
?
?
t
$?S 1!C
SUnSF(F.VE
2002 ESTIE?ATED AD i I
Nash County
General Hospitai
?
G
N? c
•? ? c
?
V1
¢mti
ccc ?=2OG
f E10C'
2coe
?ia+
500 Ic
c cc
Ln
v?
?n
h ? C
?3 c
tc
LEGEND
9-"4? N'PD,-4s OF VEHICLES FER DAl
#4-- • MUCE LESS 7HAN;W,-- N'Pll
F. M0VEMENT PROHIBITED
?> ON&R'A]'M0VEMEN7
?
L' S ? A
4
?
c
c
?
<&6oc
C
a9 '
?
I
?.
d

SR 1604
Hunter Hill Fd.
N
?
?`WNrs I
d mmetlia
Shopp?? Snw Care
E?'?E'Wilh,
M?Ka? CFnier
sR ,aeo
N. Vdoodrufi Rd.
f s'too
`y- 300
6200
100
P +--*0 S
/ lp
Q? 11

R 1544
Yunter Hili Rd.
Pm g
6DA__:k4 '3)
NC DO71 STAT-TEiVlDE PLANNING,
'31-R_A F)_)C FOREC.ASTING UNIT B
,
? r+„i,???.~? ?? Y~•r ?.
? D'r!1' DE?lG1 ROlF1??OLl??gr ; ?;, - _ n ' ---?--..?i-
K30= 30'7H }l?GY.ES7 ?iC?l F'_) 1 Gl.l Mi ?
? P'?i PM PE.47i PER30L' ?
? D B:RECTICN,aI SYL37 (°,?
's ---, IND7CA1i:S B;R1 t'7;ON C)li
? Rr\'ERS:. FLO'X FGF A17 "LA:_ ?
. (d.:j L'U:1L`', T7-c7c
C
C
A
?c
c
r
1 ? ?G
?
? I
' I
JpGc
C.
? IY
p?
i
?-
v:
c ?
c
N, 4 11 ?
SR 1E',/
EngliSt? nc
\
?
?
\
\
\
?
?
I
i
c;
°f
?
I
;l
c
^ ? t
?
r a 65G;
? 4oc
7?pC \A / F
?
LGCATION:
SR 1613 (\. WPr'STEA.D AVE.) FR0M SR 1771D (SuNSET A1'E.) TO SR 1604
(BiiNTER Hn..L RD.)
PRO3ECT:
ROAD,AIDENING FIGURE =4A
Cf UNTY: NASH
DP%'.: 4 DATi.: AutuSt.70u2
T 3P r U, -49 :g - -- W.O. # 8.232270F ?
vD
U s ,c
.F
J s ,
\
1C
`R
1
,.?.C
1?? .,Q?
j
Y? C??1? ?
A?
G C
?
cc
ti I
i3 ec ,•cf'?i ? r
Q? G V
D
`G
C-R 1E1?
'dJinsiead Fve

2025 ESTIMATED ADT
5k 1660
N. Woodruff Rd.
5R 1604
HuMer HiL FcC.
F 1E?. (NOrthem CtnLoatinues Na??tpw).
? 1300
? 790C
? I SOC
21
PM

SR 1544
Huntet Hill kd.
L 1: c???? ?? ???T-STA7,E "iVlDE PLANNIIVG,
t? IPD---xGFXEHICILS :'LFDA)
LLSS TH9N FD TIa-AFFeC F.OR?•?,??STlN17 IJNIT D
??: M0VEh1En7 PROH]Bl i Ll)
r?
ttr r„ ?:?,-?. • , ?-;? ?.-.,?rr r_, ?
Li;C DESIGN HCl'R1)",?Ct? 1?1?IE+`,,= ]::+f `-'=--?--
K3U = 301TH NIGNT s ; ; 0 t Rl l' 4 Li ?;1
F\1 P NIPESM PLR]Ql;
y DiREC710NA1 S; !1'
-----? iN D1CA7 i,F J`113:iC'710? ?RLVLRcL fLCR 1-0R .3`:
;=.t) Dlk"AL6.T;- 51'S 'I., ?
?= -- _._?? ? - -_?-?--- - -
?
--?
! LOCATIOPI:
; SR ] 6l3 (N. WIIdS'd'EA3? AVE.) FROM SR 1770 (SUNSET AVE.) 't0 SR 1604
(HL"NTER HILL RD.)
? PROJECT:
' RCAD WIBENIVG
?
?
I COUNTY: N7A5H
IG UIM
' DIN'. : 4
# U, -4 Cii9
w. 0. # :8.Z32? I0i
DA'fE: Au?a:st, 2iG:
W

0 ? (D
?

? 0
a
a
0 ? N ° 0

CIL

?
C
N
(D D
?
° 0 6 ? y w
N OL
0
N
? ? ? I

N N

0

'
' ?
?
0

?cn

m fD

N

?
m m
N ? ?
(D sv a
Q N ,
rt
Zr
O O a
m y *
m (D
C
m
-e
p1
7
?
C
?
(D
-s
Q
?
j m
Cf) C N
? 0 0
? N W
a1 ?` o 'S
?O j?
3 ?
C) N ?
O ?? ?
7 -n ?
-! j z
Oc?'O
?? O
J O (0
O 'F
-P.
Z
0
UEll
O
.?
v °.
Dm?
? O
? ?
N• N ;I
3
W??p
n j O
3 < ?
0 w
3
3 N
N-0
3 O
N w
M
0
3
?Y?, ?? y ?? . iN4?? ? ? ?. " ?p ?w ? ? • ? #? ? , 1
?l i:.' a?` ? flsr?a`? •? ? ??? i ?, , ?M
'.? '? yj?jy ?. d,,la ?? ? r N ?? f "??!???b?Nl'l:l
`.M.? i.
"`? . ??i • ? = , Oft
"?,?t ? r'; ?. ? ? :i •.? J.?? J ? , ? dr??,Y+tt ?„H?1, 1-:ef6 y'
?, t . - .. . ?
????, "? -s, ,? ?,? ?;:? ,?°M ;. ';v ??? `°.??? r. ??
t? ?'?,I? M ' ?^ er x gf
.? ?
1 ?'?1??I?.?•. , ???????.: ? ? ?
?? • *
?.?
p.."T ..' A

ff1
C
0
cn
0
M
?
n
W
N
;v
? ? ?
?? ..?.. ? ?
1 ` ?? z4
r? •
.? r M
?I
fQ _
?. ?. KfD
? ?
? ?n N
61D ..
I
5B
<
aZ
3w
E
Cf) ?w
0)?
J CD
W N
Z ? O
3 ? n
N
n N
C 31?
? 1 A
o
o?
N
17'CDp
1 Q
O r-M
?
t
r , q, f ?
? ?
D "0* ? to
f?D A?i 0
N Q,
' 5 W 0 N
' ? ,v
?0 ? ?
.. r? ? .?
m = c ,.. # ;?, .:s? `` ,., ? ??;•;?
? N. Q
WF Atw
0 C 6 ? ? CD k??
N o? ?, ? y .? fa?
m
N Q ? ???N'?4.''iT• °,? . i?' i 9 ????
-n
?
? w • ?? , ??
??' ? " ? . ?N M ^??? ? ' ' . • ?
. t ; i. r ?i h •\ ! , ? ' ? A, ; , .
' ,• ;,\, .? Y " I I .?t??? •' ? ' ?? ?T ? ? Y t ` ?' ,?, ? ? 1
?' ? ?• ''? ? ? f? ?_? ? OL
al
q ? 1 ' • t *+ . 54 4k
,?
? ?? "M w - . ? \? •? •? , *
I ' ti a. • '? r .?Y
.
N
N ??ar4p r
0
(D L-
m m' '*V,
0 w w -? ? ? '° ?e? ? • I ? ? ti ? -?
N ? '+ ? o ,y' ? ?!? ° y°,?` ? ?, ti'. 'v? ?? •`??. `'I . + .
O O a N G CD B , , ?? •,? * . ? . '?. t 3J 6 ??' , 9E
Cp
?
? N + U'+ 41 ?*N ? 1 i
*R?
7 Cj)• " ?? , ? tr?,? ?. , 3 •
Q • , `+
a,. At. m
? CL 7,v OW ? ?'? ^ ' o. ? e
k ? ? ?.
ip w' rW, r.;,. ?'` q1? 6%letl? n ? ? ` W N 5Tfi ?.?,?'?;i N?;f r-+ r ? ' „ Sf(J ? ? ?'?? , , ?
? N 'M a M r t' 'j ? ? i 1 DN%
CD ? ??? j? ° F?i f. ? ?" ??.W k . •9?0 ???, 0
? fD
10 3
, ? ??'
w (D , ;, , i ' ' ••?''i `r , + ru'? ? ` ? ,,,? t
. , .
N ? (D
.?+..d?- ,' •.:.'r ? ?t, ? R ?, `+;?,?.? .w .?
.
,
,. ; ?.
_ , .
? . ?..
? ? ? ? ? , ? ??. a ,?, ? ? ,? b ? _ . • ? ? ? ?+.?
CD
fn ?t . ? ?tni?. . ? ', ,? ?. • o, ' TJI- I ? k 9.•' ? - . m
Q O 1^?. ?41?}.,._ •I , S, e ?.?LC ?r ?' ` . ,? y . w ???:, y „«
C N
-' -u ;v l. ,y? r• •,?? w . 1
0
(D O U?
N O `6 ?' ' ? y.?. ? - Q ? • ??. ? . .? ?A ? '? ?
' cD =3 ? .. A , *. ? ? "'i?_` ??'i+' ? ? ? t _ ?. . . ?? - y_
;
-I D N 41
W ? M
.
.
'(D ,r'f' • ? ?
N A .. }?
? ? ? ,a+' " , ? S ?"1 ,.,'.?? ? .? ? .r„ ~ 5 ? '1 ?JI?
- , ?
? Ul.?'?+" ' _ ,A + ? a ? , i! _ 4 1 11 I
,? j
Maap y ? ? , ?r . • ? r
W? . , '? ?O?'?.,??n??, ?,? ? f,'?? ?? n' r..? 4 ?'.• ..{ ? 11.. r
? m
0 0
71?
3 Ul ?? ? ? ?1 ? i?...i Y???/y4 '?, ? ?•1?IY??
<p -0
D
1,? ?.: ? A..?` ? ``• ?, 1r .
IFIGURE 5C
?
?
?
?
.
,

?? i ? ;;c
?

?
,
i ? (1
Y
l ?
?
?
--- x -?

(D @
?
0
..•? ' `?""?° ?
,
;. ,
-? 9
AyA ?1 ?.
\
i O
1
r' ?7
. ?? ?. . ' .+1 _
?,,f- t a- , ;? .
•• P ? 1 .
'
H-
?
Z!a
?? ?
0
0 06
?
?Fo-O?i 3 g
3 tl
V
?
N ?
.^. ? C4
I
o0
(\\ ? ? ; ;?
?
7
Z • ? ?
W
1 JiI I I O?
z
FIG UR E 66]
APPENDIX A
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action Id. 200411467 County: Nash U.S.G.S. Quad: -77.8487/35.9737
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
_ Properiy Owner/Agent: Geor2e Buchholz, REM
Address: Buck Eneineerine - 8000 Reeencv Parkwav, Suite 200, Carv, North Carolina 27511
Telephone No.: 919463-5488
Size and location of property (waterbody, road name/number, town, etc.) Wetlands adiacent to SR 1613 (N. Winstead Ave.)
from SR 1770 (Sunset Ave.) to SR 1604 (Hunter Hill Road), Nash Countv, North Carolina. TIP No. U4019.
Indicate Which of the Following Apply:
_ Based on preliminary information, there may be wetlands on the above described property. We strongly suggest you have
this property inspected to determine the extent of Department of the Army (DA) jurisdiction. To be considered fmal, a
jurisdictional deternunation must be verified by the Corps.
X There are wetlands on the above described property subject to the pernut requuements of Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this determination may be
relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
_ We strongly suggest you have the wetlands on your property delineated. Due to the size of your property and/or our
present workload, the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wedand delinearion in a timely manner. For a more timely
delineation, you may wish to obtain a consultant. To be considered final, any delineation must be verified by the Corps.
X The wetlands on the property have been delineated and the detineation has been verified by the Cotps. We strongly
suggest you have this delineation surveyed. Upon completion, this survey should be reviewed and verified by the Corps.
Once verified, this survey will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to CWA jurisdicrion on the property
which, provided there is no change in the law or our published regulations, may be relied upon for a period not to exceed
five years.
The wetlands have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat signed by the Corps
Regulatory Official identified below on . Unless there is a change in ihe law or our published regularions, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
_ There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present on the above described property which are subject to the
pemut requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our
published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.
_ Thg Yrnr??, i-- tocarPd ;n pnP nf±hP ?q f e?stal Cour_ti°s sub;ect !e regn!at?nn und?r rhP (,nasta] .4rea MTr.agement Ar_t
(CAMA). You should contact the Division of Coastal Management in Washington, NC, at [phone] to determine
their requuements.
Remarks:
Corps Regulatory Official:
Date Mav 28. 2004 Expiration Date Mav 28, 2009
Page 1 of 2
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Officc
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
April 7, 2005
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Project Development and Environmental Analysis
1598 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1598
Dear Dr. Thorpe:
This letter is in response to your letter of March 16, 2005 which provided the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (Service) with the biological determination of the North Carolina Department of Transportation
(NCDOT) that the proposed widening of SR 1613 (N. Winstead Avenue) from SR 1770 (Sunset Avenue)
to SR 1604 (Hunter Hill Road) in Nash County (TIP No. U-4019) may affect, but is not likely to
adversely affect the federally endangered dwarf wedgemussel (Alasmidonta heteYOdon) and Tar
spinymussel (Elliptio steinstansana). In addition, NCDOT has determined that the project will have no
effect on the red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides horealis). These comments are provided in accordance
with section 7 ofthe Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543).
According to information provided, a mussel survey was conducted at the project site in Stony Creek on
November 10, 2004. The survey extended 100 meters upstream and 400 meters downstream of SR 1613.
Neither of the federaliy listed species was found. Based on the information provided and other
infonnation available, the Service concurs with your determination that the proposed project may affect,
but is not likely to adversely affect the dwarf wedgemussel and Tar spinymussel. We also concur that the
project will have no effect on the red-cockaded woodpecker. We believe that the requirements of section
7(a)(2) of the ESA have been satisfied. We remind you that obligations under section 7 consultation must
be reconsidered if: (1) new information reveals impacts of this identified action that may affect listed
species or critica] habitat in a manner not previously considered in this review; (2) this action is
subsequently modified in a manner that was not considered in this review; or (3) a new species is )isted or
critical habitat determined that may he affected by this identifi.ed actinn.
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,
`t
.: ?Pete Benjamin
Ecological Services Supervisor
?.?
cc: Bill Biddlecome, USACE, Washington, NC
Nicole Thomson, NCDWQ, Raleigh, NC
Travis Wilson, NCWRC, Creedmoor, NC
Chris Militscher, USEPA, Raleigh,NC
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
Post OEE'ice Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
August 20, 2002
Mr. Lubin V. Prevatt, Assistant Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
ii48 .'.iuii Sei v Ii.i. CCi1tGr
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
Subject: Widening SR 1613, Nash County, TIP No. U-4019
Dear Mr. Prevatt:
Thank you for your letter of July 1, 2002, requesting scoping comments from the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service) regarding the potential environmental impacts of the proposed
improvements to SR 1613 (N. Winstead Avenue). These comments are provided in accordance
with provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) (16 U.S.C. 661-667d) u:-Iu
section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543).
"This report also serves as initial scoping comments to federal and state resource agencies for use
in their permitting and/or certification processes for this project.
The Iv'orth Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to widen the three-lane
SR 1613 on existing location. A four lane divided, a five lane roadway, and a combination of
these designs are being studied. The project would tie into the Rocky Mount Northern
connector.
The only stream segment shown on the map of the project area is Stoney Creek. Jurisdictional
wetlands may occur along this waterway. Generally, the Service recommends that wetland
impacts be avoided and minimized to the maximum extent'practical as outlined in Section 404
(b)(1) of the Clean Water Act Amendments of 1977. In regard to avoidance and minimization of
impacts, we recommend that proposed highway projects be aligned along or adjacent to existing
roadways, utility corridors, or previously developed areas in order to minimize habitat
fragmentation and encroachment. Areas exhibiting high biodiversity or ecological value
important to the watershed and region should be avoided. Crossings of streams and associated
wetland systems should use existing crossings andlor occur on a structure wherever feasible.
Where bridging is not feasible, culvert structures that maintain natural water flows and hydraulic
regimes without scouring, or impeding fish and wildlife passage, should be employed. Highway
shoulder and median widths should be reduced through wetland areas. Roadway embankments
and fill areas should be stabilized by using appropriate erosion control devices and techniques.
Wherever appropriate, construction in sensitive areas should occur outside fish spawning and
migratory bird nesting seasons. - -
We reserve the right to review any federal permits that may be required for this project, at the
public notice stage. Therefore, it is important that resource agency coordination occur early in
the planning process in order to resolve any conflicts that may arise and minimize delays in
project implementation.
In addition to the above guidance, we recommend that the environmental documentation for this
project include the following in sufficient detail to facilitate a thorough review of the action:
1. A clearly defned and detailed purpcse and need fcr the propased project, supported'by
tabular data, if available, and including a discussion of the project's independent utility;
2. A description of the proposed action with an analysis of all alternatives being considered,
including the upgrading of existing roads and a"no action" alternative;
3. A description of the fish and wildlife resources, and their habitats, within the project
impact area that may be directly or indirectly affected;
4. The extent and acreage of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, that are to be impacted
by filling, dredging, clearing, ditching, ur draining. Acres of wetland impact should be
differentiated by habitat type based on the wetland classification scheme of the National
Wetlands Inventory (NWI)• Wetland boundaries should be determined by using the 198 i
Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual and verified by the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers (Corps);
5. The anticipated environmental impacts, both temporary and permanent, that would be
. likely to occur as a direct result of the proposed project. The assessment should also
include the extent to which the proposed project would result in secondary impacts to
natural resources, and how this and similar projects contribute to cumulative adverse
effects;
6. Design features and construction techniques which would be employed to avoid or
minimize the fragmentation or direct loss of wildlife habitat value;
7. Design features, construction techniques, or any other mitigation measures which would
be employed at wetland crossings and stream channel relocations to avoid or minimize
impacts to waters of the United States; and,
8. If unavoiciable wetland impacts are proposed, we recommend that every effort be made to
identify compensatory mitigation sites in advance. Project planning should include a
detailed compensatory mitigation plan for offsetting unavoidable wetland impacts.
Opportunities to protect mitigation areas in perpetuity, preferably via conservation
easement, should be explored at the outset.
The enclosed list identifies three Federally endangered species known to occur in Nash County:
the red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW) (Picoides borealis), dwarf wedge mussel (Alasmidonta
heterodon), and tar spinymussel (Elliptio steinstansana). While it is unlikely that the RCW
would inhabit the developed area along SR 1613, project plans should include a determination of
the direct and indirect impacts on each species, including the methodology and results of any
field surveys.
The list also give eight Federal Species of Cancerr. (FSC) known to occur in Nash County.
These are species for which the Service remains concerned, but further biological research and
field study are needed to resolve the conservation status of these taxa. Although FSCs receive no
statutory protection under the ESA, we would encourage the NCDOT to be alert to their potential
presence, and to make every reasonable effort to conserve them if found. The North Carolina
Natural Heritage Program should be contacted for information on species under state protection.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to com.ment on this project. Please continue to advise us
during the progression of the planning process, including your official determination of the
impacts of this project. If you have any questions regarding these comments, please contact
Howard Hall at 919-856-4520 (Ext. 27).
Sincerely,
J6?' ? 4?
.?.(-Garland B. Pardue, Ph.D.
Ecological Services Supervisor
Enclosure
cc: Eric Alsmeyer, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Raleigh, NC
Chris Militscher, U. S. EPA, Raleigh, NC
John Hennessy, NCDWQ, Raleigh, NC
David Cox NCDNR, Creedmoor, NC
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND Project Number
NATURAL RESOURCES p y - s - 002 ?
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH County
Inter-Agency Project Review Response -
/y'? ? 4'S ?'
Project Name 1Sf f CrO Type of Project r-e /6/Jf '?? A__i
? The applicant should be advised that plans and specifications or all vrater system
improvements must be approved by the Division of Environmental Heaith prior to the
award of a contract or the initiation af construction (as required by 15A NCAC 18C
.0300et. seq.). For information, contact the Public Water Suppfy Section, (919)
733-2321.
? This project will be classified as a non-community public water supply and must comply
with state and federal drinking water monitoring requirements. For more information the
applicant should contact the Pubiic 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 shelifish
sanitatior pragiam, the applicant should contact the Shelifish 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 Managem?r' 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 concerning rodent control,
contact the local health department or the Public Health Pest Management Section at
[phone].
? 7he applicant should be advised to contact the local health department regarding their
requirements for septic tank installations (as required under 1 SA NCAC 18A. 1900 et.
sep.). For information concerning septic tank and other on-site waste disposal methods,
contact the On-Site Wastewater Section at [phone].
? 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.
_.--
?'??,2.G?1.? c'-'
?
Reviewer SectionlBranch Date
PERMITS SPECIAL APPUCATION PRdCEDURES or REQUIREMENTS NQRnaI Process Til:
(Statutory Time Lim

0 Permit to driN expbratory oil u gas well Fle swery bond of $5,000 with DENR running to State of N.C. conditional that any 10 da
?
well opened by drill ope?amr shall, upon abandonmmt, be plugged according (N/A)
to DENR rules and regulations.
? Geophysical Expbration Permit Applicatian filed with QENR at kast 10 days prior to issue of pamit Application 10 days
by ktter. No standard application fo?m. (N/q)
L] State Lakes Construction Vermit Application fees based on shuRure size is charged. Must include desaiptions 15 - 20 days
& drawings of structure & prooF af ownership of riparian property. (N/A)
? 401 Water Quality Certifitation Wp 55 days
(130 days)
13 CAAAA Permit tor MAJOR development $250.00 fee must accompany application 60 days
(130 days)
? CAMA Permit (or MINOR deveiopmmt $50.00 fee must accompany application 22 days
I25 daysl
? Several geodetic monuments aye located in or near the project area If any monument needs to be moved or destroyed, pkase notiy:
N.C. Geodetic Survey, Boz 27687 Raleigh, N.C. 27611
L] Abandonment of any wells, if reqvired must be in accardance with Title 15A Subchapter 2CO100.
0 Notification of the proper regional oWice is requated if'arphan' underground storage tanks (USTS) are discovered during any excavation operation.
? Compliance with 15A NCAC 2H 1000 (Coastal Stamwater Hules) is req uired. 45 days
(N/A)
* Qther tommerKs (attach additional pages as necessary, being certain to cite comment authority)
44 c (A'S `, S ?'_Vi '-'? -i q`_ ?-12`us c o,.,' Czti'i14o? '-.., 5-1-
? ?., ???_r '94,,;,??? pe T S

PIzr /fl-ji- _11LOWS-
v'L;'? f+V.iz_?e e,
REGiONAL OFFICES
Questions regarding these permits shnuld be addressed to the Regional Office marked below.
? Asheville Regional Ofrice
59 Woodfin Place
Asheville, N.C.28801
[phone]
p Fayetteville Regional Office
225 Green Street, Suite 714
Fayetteville, N.C. 28301
[phone]
O Mooresville Regional Office
919 North Main 5treet
Mooresvil (e, N.C.28115
[phone]
Raleigh Regional Office
3800 Barrett Drive, P.O. Box 27687
Raleigh, N.C. 27611
[phone]
? Witmington Regional Office
127 Cardinaf Drive Extension
Wilmington, N.C. 28405
[phone]
? Washington Regional Office
943 Washington Square Mall
Washington, N.C.27889
[phone]
O Winston-Salem Regional Office
585 Waughtown Street
wnston-Salem, N.C.27107
[phone]
T Reviewing Office:
4??' State of North Carolina
NCDENR Department of Environment and Natural Resources P?ojeccNumber:P__I-L 202" oueoare:
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW - PROJECTCOMMENTS
After review of this project it has been determined tfiat the DENR permit(s) and/or approvals indicated may need to be obtained in order for this project
to comply with North Carolina Law. Questions regarding these permits should be addressed to the Regional Office indicated on tfie reverse of this form.
All app{ications, info?mation and guidelines relative to these plans and permiu are available from the same Regional Office.
• PERMfTS SPECIAL APPIICATION PROCEDURES or REQUIREMENT'S T0;na? Process Time
(Statutory Tirne Limit)
? Permit to consdutt 6 operate wastewata treatmmt Appliqtion 90 days beforc beqin conshuction or award of rnnstnxtion

facil'itia, sewer system eutensions & sewer systems
contracu. On-site inspettfon. Post,application technical conference uwal. 30 days
not discfiargirtg inm state surface waters. ?? dfi?l
Q NPDES-permit to discharge into surface water and/a Appfication t BO days before begin aRiviry. on-site inspection prcapplicatbn
permit to operate and construct wastewater facilities mnfercnce usuai. Additionally,obtain permit to construct wastewater trcatment 90-120 days
discharging into state surface watem facility-grantetl aRer NPDES. Replytimq, 30 days after receipt of plans or iuue (N/Ay
of NPDES permit-whichrver is bter.
? Water Use Permit Preapplication technical conference usuaUy necessary . 30 days
(WA)
? Well Construction Permit Compkte application must be received and permit issued prior to the 7 d
?
installacion d a well. (15 days)
? Dredge and RII Pe?mit Itpplication copy must be served on eacfi adjacent riparian property owner.
Or?-site inspection. Preapplication confermce vsuaL Flling may requirc Essement 55 days
. to Fill from N.C. Department of Administration and Federo! Dredge and Fil) Permit (90 days)
Q Pe tu construct & operate Air Pollution Abatement
fa ities and/a Emizsion Sources as per 15 A NUC N/A 60 days
o.o, oo. 20.030a 2Ko600r
Any open buming associated with subject proposal
must be in comp6ance with 15 A NCAC 213.1900
Ll Demolition or rtnovations of structures containing
asbesios material must be in compliance with
15 A NCAC 2D.1110 (a) (1) which requires notification N/A 60 daYs
and removal prior to demolition. Contact Asbestas (90 daYS)
Control Group 914-733-0820.
Complex Source PermR required under 15 A NCAC
2D
0800 dL,,,, ?,i
. h/
? The Sedimentation Pollutlon CoMrol Ac[ of 1473 must be properly addressed for any I nd dirturbing activity. ? n erosion & sedimerKation
control plan will be required if one or mae acres to be disturbed Plan fled with proper Regional Office (land Quality Section) at least 30 , ZO days
days before beginning activity. A fee of $40 for the First acre or any part of an acre. (30 days)
? The Sedirnentation Pdlvtion Control Act of 1973 must be addressed with respect to the refnenced Local Ordinance. 30 days
? Mining Permit On-site inspection usual. Surety bond filed with DENR Bond amount varia with
type mine and number of acres oF affected land. Arryr are mined greater than 30 days
one acre must be permitted. The appropriate bond must be received hefore (60 days)
the permit can be issued.
? Nortfi Carolina Burning permit On-sKe inspection by N.C. Division of Fwest Resources if permit enceeds 4 days t da
Y
(fV/A)
? Special Ground Clea?ance Buming Permit•22 counties Ort-site inspection by N.C. Division of Forest Resources required'if more than frve
d 1 d
?
in coastal N.C..with organic soils acres of groun
clearing activities are involved. Inspections should be requated
at least ten days before actual burn is planned.' (N?Aj
? Oil Refining Facilities
N/A 90 - 120 da
YS
(N/A)
? Dam Safety Permit If permit rcquired,appliwtion 60 days before begin construction. Applicant -
must hire N.C. qualified engineer to: prepare plans, inspect construction,certify
construction is according to DENR approved plans. May also require permk under
mosquito concrol program, and a 404 permit from Corps oF Engineers_ 30 days
M inspection of site is necessary to verify Hazard Classification. A minimum (60 dan)
fee of 5200.00 must accompany the application. An additional processing fee
based on a percentage orthetotal project cost will be required upon complecion.
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
--
c Inter-Agency Project. FtEwi0&;F3%ponse
Project Name /1/0 ? T 4_'.. ??oje
'W ``117
Comments provided by:
_ ? Regional Program Person
JS? Regional Engineer for Public V
? -Central Office program person
?
Name: M(CL - C' i
Telephone number: ? < <I ?-
l?.1-
County
;?•Q 16"2
?00
Supply,,Settion c?' ?
Date: ? T?
? ?l _ cl r7?.
Program within Division of Environmental Health:
1911" 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
M___'See comments below
?_Ct1,? ; Cc2?
?-?
C.4 5??611L??C???•? -?
?
Return to:
Public Water Supply Section
Environmental Review Coordinator
!or the
Division ot Environmental Health
08/13/2042 20:49 FAI
No1-th Caroli.iia NXj?l clfe Resources Comm ission
Ch;irles R. Fulixvood, E::ecuLivz I)ircc101"
'tiiENIOR4NDUN7
T(): 'vlclba McCree.
Office of Legislaiive and Intergovemmental p, ry?
FRQNl: David McHcnry, Coastal C:oordinalor
\iCWRC: - Habitat Conservation Sectioii
D:1TE: _auczust 1 1. 2 402
SUBJEC'T: ScnPinL commcrits on an EniJii•or,mznta[ Assas,mnellt (LA) lUr Nc?rth C_:arolinLt
beparrment ofTransporiation project io wicien SR ifil i{Winstead Avitt1uC),
Kockyyiount, Nash CUUnty. TIP L:-4019,
ULLk R 03-E-002')
B1o1o-zJ5t5 V1'lih ihe Narth Carolina V4'ildlifc Resources Coinmission (NC\VTZ(') revicwec3
*lie comment rcquest for this pr?ject with regard to the associaied impacts on fisl, and wildlife
resources_ A site vi5it nf the projcct arca was conducted G?t .?ueust 9. 2002. (?w, conunE:nts nre
provided in accoj•?ance with provisions otthe Fish and Wi1dlff? CUordination Act (48 Stiit. 4()1
,
as amended: 16 U.S,C, 661 et_ scq.)_ ihe Clean V1-ater Aci o-.,` I977 (as aineitded). and rhe Notth
Czirolina Environmental Policy Act (G_S. l 13A-I et seq.. as ar_;ended_ 1 NC:AC-25).
Ihe NC Depmzmetit of'I'ranSphYtation praposes wicie-nin? of S1? ] bl ?(??%instead A??enue)
in Rack}' Mbun: Irom SR 1770 (Sunset Avenue) to SR 160=+ (Hunte:- Flill Road). Vl'instead
Avenue is currzntl); a three lane roadwav and both faur and Gve lan2 roadw?y Opliuns w-e beinq
considered in thz proposed project. u?insTCad :Ivcnue SLonti C;reel: Tpwa1'd th,; projzet
t2rnziT:3tion a" `:wnset Avellue. '1'17is tributa,"t, tb Lhe Tar kiv::r 1-6 ;1zsnmaizd Inland Wa[c•rs and
clIssified as C\'SV',' bv the Lnvironmcntal Nlanapemeni Commistiioli.
The ;oes not appasz development pf"aFCSaI_ and ??cti?ities t)7at benzfit the
public when tiie pntztitia! for impacts on wetlands and aquatic reSources are miiZinuz.ed.
Thtrciore. a iheroszh alternative anah,sis and the associatcd w:;th;.nd in7pact5 of e3cl: project
alrcrnatiN,e sho:lld bt! included in the LnvirorunenT.aI Asse: sment (EA). In addlti411, ;17c NCIXRC
rcquests rhat th: follouring cn»cernG be add*esscd in the E!1:
]. 1)?-? clnpmetit projects in ihe Tw- Ri\,er 'Watershed rtceivz c1psC Scriilim aiid
revulatian (e.?.; 'i'ar-Pamlieo H?affcr R'?iles) bEcausc [i-?e vvatershzd is cxp4ncnein?
li? 42
Nlaiiing Address- Divisictin M iT,',,Anti` Fisrcries ' 1721 M0 Sc•n•icc C2r;ter i . 31
Tclcphone: (?J'_91 ?.i-3(,?,"•. CXl. ?S? ' Y'1X: ?OIi?•i i?-?n-?
48/13/2002 24:49 Fe1a
winsteaa1venoT
Augusi 11, 2002
increasiag pollution and caaesponding degraciation af aquatic habitats. Thercfore,
the potential of the propased projeci to c;ontribute to sedimentation in Stuny Creek ar
othcr'1'ar River tributaries should be chardcterized for all projeci altcmatives.
2. '1'he Tar R.iver Watershec3 is host to several rare or protected aquatic organisms. For
exarnple, the Statc; threatericd Roano e sIabshell (F.Ilrptio raanc?kcnsis) and the
significantly raze North Carolina spin 'crayiish (Dronecte,s tarolinensis) have been
documcntcd in the Tar River waters in Nash and Edgecomb Catuities. Bec:ause
the propased project will likely affec. StoiZy Croek through bridge mcydi(ication or
replacement the NCWItC requests #Y}at the N.C. Natural Heritnge Prograin be
consul#ed concerning the possible occiurence of State listed or rare aquatic spccies
and habitats in the project area. A survey For these organisms is also rccommended.
We appreciate the appotcunity to cammi
comments please call David McHenry, Coastal
on diis project. Cf you need to discuss ihese
bitat Coordinator, at [phone] cxt. 345.
ig U 3
Gc, Iones, T.w, - D3
O? W A 7-?9 Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
O? QG North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
cjj Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
3C ? Division of Water Quality
•.: ??
August 14, 2002
r, 'a'F rs (jy?ce ?..;
MEMORANDUM ???J?'
'v??i? .? 4 1? .
To: Melba McGee
l?
From: John Hennessy ;;z"C
.
Subject: Scoping comments on the proposed improvements to SR 1613 (N. Winstead Avenue) from SR 1770
(Sunset Avenue) to SR 1604 (Hunter Hill Road) in Rocky Mount in Nash County, Federal Aid Project No.
STP-1613(3), State Project No. 8.2322701, TIP U-4019, DENR No. 03E-0022.
Reference your correspondence dated July 1, 2002, in which you requested comments for TIP project U-4019.
Preliminary analysis of the project reveals the potential for impacts to Stoney Creek (DWQ Index No. 28-68,
CNSW) in the Neuse River Basin and potential associated wetlands. Further investigations at a higher resolution
should be undertaken to verify the presence of other streams and/or jurisdictional wetlands in the area. In the event
that any jurisdictional areas are identified, the Division of Water Quality requests that NCDOT consider the
following environmental issues for the proposed project:
A. The document should provide a detailed and itemized presentation of the proposed impacts to wetlands and
streams with corresponding mapping.
B. There should he a discussion on mitigation plans for unavoidable impacts. If mitigation is required, it is
preferable to present a conceptual (if not finalized) mitigation plan with the environmental documentation.
While the NCDWQ realizes that this may not always be practical, it should be noted that for projects
requiring mitigation, appropriate mitigation plans will be required prior to issuance of a 401 Water Quality
Certification.
Review of the project reveals that no Outstanding Resource Waters, Water 3upply Water, High Quality
Waters, or Trout Waters will be impacted during the project implementation. However, should further
analysis reveal the presence of any of the aforementioned waters, the DWQ requests that DOT scrictly adhere
to North Carolina regulations entitled "Design Standards in Sensitive Watersheds" (15A NCAC 04B .0024)
ihroughout design and construction of the project. This would apply for any area that drains to streams
having WS (Water Supply), ORW (Outstanding Resource Water), HQW (High Quality Water), SA (Shellfish
Water) or Tr (Trout Water) classifications.
D. When practical, the DWQ requests that bridges be replaced on the existing location with road closure. If a
detour proves necessary, remediation measures in accordance with the NCDWQ requirements for General
401 Certification 2726/Nationwide Permit No. 33 (Temporary Construction, Access and Dewatering) must
be followed.
E. Review of the project reveals that no High Quality Waters or Water Supply Waters will be impacted by the
project. However, should further aoalysis reveal the presence of any of the aforementioned water resources,
the DWQ requests that hazardous spill catch basins be installed at any bridge crossing a stream classified as
HQW or WS (Water Supply). The number of catch basins installed should be determined by the design of
the bridge, so that runoff would enter said basin(s) rather than flowing direc[ly into the stream.
F. If applicable; DOT shouid not install the bridge bents in the creek, to the maximum extent practicable.
N. C. Division of Water Quality 1650 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 [phone]
Customer Service: 1 800 623-7748
Ni:D
? W A 1-? Michael F. Easley, Governor
0 !? William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
O? pG North Carolina Department of Environmeni and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
¦ ??
> {..???` -i?
Q ? 'C
G. Wedand and stream impacts should be avoided (including sediment and erosion control structures/measures)
to the maximum extent practical. If this is not possible, alternatives that minimize wetland impacts should be
chosen. Mitigation for unavoidable impacts will be required by DiUQ'for impacts to wetlands in excess of
one acre and/or to streams in excess of 150 linear feet.
H. Borrow/waste areas should not be located in wetlands. It is likely that compensatory mitigation will be
required if wetlands are impacted by waste or borrow.
1. DWQ prefers replacement of bridges with bridges. However, if the new structure is to be a culvert, it should
be countersunk to allow unimpeded fish and other aquatic organisms passage through the crossing.
J. If foundation test horings are necessary; it should be noted in the document. Geotechnical work is approved
under Genera1401 Certification Number 3027/Nationwide Permit No. 6 for Survey Activities.
K. In accordance with the NCDWQ Wetlands Rules { 15A NCAC 211.0506(b)(6) }, mitigation will be required
for impacts of greater than 1501inear feet to any single perennial stream. In the event that mitigation
becomes required, the mitigation plan should be designed to replace appropriate lost functions and values. In
accordance with the NCDWQ Wetlands Rules { 15A NCAC 211.0506 (h)(3) }, the Wetland Restoration
Program may be avaiiable for use as stream mitigation.
L. Sediment and erosion control measures should not be placed in wetlands.
M. The 401 Water Quality Certification application will need to specifically address the proposed methods for
stormwater management ta be in compliance with the Neuse Riparian Buffer Rules. More specificaily,
stormwater should not be permitted to discharge directly inro the creek. Instead, stormwater should be
designed to discharge through riparian buffers as diffuse flow at non-erosive velocities.
N. While the use of National Wetland Inventory (NWI) maps and soil surveys is a useful office tool, their
inherent inaccuracies require that qualified personnel perform onsite wetland delineations prior to permit
approval.
0. The NCDOT is reminded that they will need to plan, design, and construct their project so that they comply
with all the Neuse River Rules. Issuance of the 401 Water Quality Certification is contingent upon adherence
to the Neuse Rules.
Thank you for requesting our input at this time. The DOT is reminded that issuance of a 401 Water Quality
Certification requires that appropriate measures be instituted to ensure that water quality standards are met and
designated uses are r.ot degraded or lost. If you have any questions or require additional information, please cootact
John Hennessy at [phone].
cc? Eric Alsmeyer, US Army Corps of Engineers
Howard Hall, USFWS
David Cox, NCWRC
Personal Files
File Copy
C':\ncdot\TIP U-4019\comments\U-4019 scoping comments.doc
N. C. Division of Water Quality 1650 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 [phone]
Customer Service: 1 800 623-7748
BUCK
E N G I N E E R I N G -,
August 31, 2004
gU(/(I Kc gcnc y Pa rkwny. Su i tc _' OO
Norlh C'?r0 i i n a 2 7S l 1
9 1 9.4 6 3.5 4 8 8
i 9.4 6 3.54 9 0
vv \vw .buck rn? inccring.cuw
Mr. Mike Horan, Environmental Specialist
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources ` •::
Division of Water Quality
1628 Mail Service Center ,
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699
Re: T.I.P. Number U-4019; Jurisdictional Water Resources Determination; Widen SR
1613 (N. WinsteadAve.) from SR 1770 (Sunset Ave.) to SR 1604 (Hunter Hill Rd.); Nash
County, North Carolina
Dear: Mr. Horan
The NCDOT proposes to widen SR 1613, located within the northwest section of Rocky
Mount, &om SR 1770 to SR 1604 in Nash County, North Carolina (see Figure 1). The
purpose of this project is to alleviate congestion from the ongoing and anticipated
development in the area, and improve safety on SR 1613. For the purposes of this natural
resources report, a 400-foot corridor (200-foot buffer from existing centerline) was
examined for approximately 8,7501inear feet (1.7 miles). At this time, Buck Engineering
is requesting a jurisdictianal water resource determination within the project study area.
T'he project study area is located in Nash County within the northwest section of the City
of Rocky Mount. The project study area begins at the intersection of SR 1613 (N.
Winstead Ave.) and SR 1770 (Sunset Ave.) and continues north along SR 1613 to the
intersection of SR 1613 and SR 1604 (Hunter Hill Rd.). The project study area is
comprised of commercial, residential, institutional development areas in addition to
utility easements, maintained fields, agricultural field, recently timbered areas, and
undeveloped forested areas. The majority of the project study area is comprised of
commercial development and existing roadway structures, while natural communities
comprise the least amount of land uses within the project study area.
Surface waters, in the form of Stony Creek and two unnamed tributaries to Stony Creek,
are located within the project study area and drain east towards the Tar River, and
therefore, are subject to the DWQ "Tar-Pamlico River Basin, Nutrient Sensitive Waters
Management Strategy, Protection and Maintenance of Existing Riparian Buffers." This
Rule applies a 50-foot wide riparian buffer directly adjacent to surface waters in the Tar-
Pamlico River Basin (intermittent streams, perennial streams, lakes, ponds, and
estuaries), excluding wetlands. For the purpose of this Rule, a surface water is deemed to
be present if the feature is approximately shown on either the most recent version of the
soil survey map prepared by the Natural Resources Conservation Service of the United
States Department of Agriculture or the most recent version of the 1:24,000 scale (7.5
6?

?r ?/?r?irsihl?• F, ncrrn ? ur?d , Sc fc?irce 1or u B<rtlc?r Ex ? lrr?un?«n[
h (: :t r c1 I i ri Ci • f.' 11 0 1' I?? t t c . N o r t li l' a [ i? I i n:t - ?`\ t I:i. n L:.1 . Ci c u r? i?i
BUCKG
*
minute) quadrangle topographic maps prepared by the United States Geologic Survey
(USGS). Riparian buffers adjacent to surface waters that do not appear on either of the
maps are not subject to this Rule. R.iparian buffers adjacent to surface waters that appear
on the maps are subject to this Rule unless an on-site determination shows that surface
waters are not present and when existing uses are present and ongoing.
There are four surface water features shown within the project area according to the Soil
Survey of Nash County, North Carolina (USDA, 1989). Three of the four surface water
features were determined to be present and were field verified on August 24, 2004 by
you. As such, the three DWQ confirmed surface waters within the project study area
have 50-foot protected riparian buffers associated with them. The protected riparian
buffer has two zones. Zone 1 begins at the most landward limit of the top of bank or the
rooted herbaceous vegetation and extend landward a distance of 30 feet on all sides of the
surface water, measured horizontally on a line perpendicular to the surface water. Zone 2
begins at the outer edge of Zone 1 and extends 20 feet as measured on a line
perpendicular to the surface water. The combined width of Zones 1 and 2 is 50 feet on
all sides of the surface water (see Figure 2).
Previously, Buck Engineering received for the referenced project a confirmed
jurisdictional wetland delineation from the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (see attached
USACE letter dated May 28, 2004; Action Id. 200411467). At this time, Buck
Engineering is requesting a jurisdictional water resource determination for the referenced
project study. After a review of the attached information, please give me a call at
19)459-9029 to schedule a field review.
Sincerely, -
?
?
George Buchholz, REM
• Biologist
? yV n I
4? rvu?uaci
r. ?aamy' vu-i-
qG William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
-y North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
f

12nr
Alan W. Kiimek, P. E. Director
Di
i
f W
t
Q
lit
i
v
er
ua
s
on o
a
y
Coleen H. Sullins, Deputy Director
Division of Water Quaiity
September 29, 2004
8uck Engineering
Attn: George Buchholz, REM
8000 Regency Parkway
Suite 200
Cary, NC 27511
TPBRRO # 040252
Nash County
Page 1 of 2
Subject Property: TIP Number U-4019 Widen SR 1613 (N. Winstead Ave.) from SR 1770 (Sunset Ave)
to SR 1604 (Hunter Hiii Rd.) Nash Co. Rocky Mount
UT to Stony Creek (28-68, c; NSW From source to Tar River, 030302)
Onsite Determinatlon for Applfcability to the Tar-Pamfico River Riparian Area Protection Rules (15A NCAC 2B
A259)
Dear Mr. Buchholz:
On 8124/04, at your request I conducted an on-site determination to review a stream feature located on the subject
property for applicabi(ity to the Tar-Pamlico Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 26 .0259). The stream feature is labeled as "A" on
the attached map initialed by me on 9/27/2004.
During my site visit it was deteRnined that feature "A" began at the cuivert and continued out of the project area
The Division of Water Quality (DWQ) has detertnined that the surtace water labeled as "A" on the attached map is
indeed a stream and is SubJect to the Tar-Pamlico Buffer Rule. This stream and its associated buffers should be
identified on any future plans for this property. The owner (or future rnnrners) should notify the DWQ (and other relevant
agencies) of this decision in any future correspondences concerning this property. This on-site determination shall expire
five (5) years from the date of this letter.
Landowners or affected parties that dispute a determination made by the DWQ or Delegated Local Authority that a
surface water exists and that it is subject to the buffer rule may request a determination by the Director. A request for a
determination by the Director shall be refened to the Director in writing cJo Jvhn Domey, DWQ Wetlands/401 Unit, 2321
Crabtree Blvd:, Raleigh, NC 27604-2260. Individuals that dispute a determination by the DWQ or Delegated Local
Authority that "exempts" a surface water from the buffer rule may ask for an adjudicatory hearing. You must act within 60
days of the date that yau receive this letter. Applicants are hereby notified that the 60-day statutory appeal time does not
start until the affected party (including downstream and adjacent landowners) is naafied of this decision. DWQ
recommends that the applicant coraduct this notification in order to be certain that third party appeals are made in a timely
manner. To ask for a hearing, send a written petitian, which conforms to Chapter 1508 of the North Carolina General
Statutes to the Office of Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, N.C. 27699-6714. This
determination is final and binding unless you ask for a hearing within 60 days.
7his letter only addresses the applicabifity to the buffer rules and does not approve any activity within the buffers. Nor
does this tetter approve any activity wi#hin Waters of the United States or Waters of the State. If you have any additional
questions or require additional information please call me at [phone].
North Carollna Oivision of Water Quality, 401 Wetlands Certification Unit,
1650 Mail Service Center, Rateigh, NC 27699-1650 (Mailing Address)
1nn. n?_u__ n?_.i n_i?:_? •r n-rcn• nncn a?--•+--`
...... -..y...........?d
Page 2 of 2
9/27/2004
r
M+chae! Horan,
DWQ, Raleigh Regional OfFice
cc: Bob Zarzecki, DWQ 401 Wetlands Unit
File Copy
Centrai Fiies
Nash County
Land Quality TPBRRO# 04-0252
9/27/2004
D?STAgO?
ti
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
David L. S. Brook, Administrator
Michael F. Easley, Govemor
Lisbeth C. Evans, Secretary
leffrey J. Cmw, Deputy Secretary
Office of Archives and History

Division of Historical Resources
David J. Olson, Director
cjE
IVFD
luii- 15, zooz
MEMOR11NDUM
TO: William D. Gilmore,Nlanager JUL 11 Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
Division of Highways ?yL?p ??V?dA?
/ ? ?
Department of Transportation 'Ao?'? E N q? AN ?
FROI?i: Da?rid Brook e&o? ?1 ?
SUBJECT: Reti-iew of Scoping Sheets, widening of SR1613 (Winstead Ave.) from SR 1770
(Sunset Ave.) to SR 1604 (Hunter Hill Rd.), Rocky 'Mount, U-4019, Nash County,
ER 02-10151
Vi1e regret that a member of our staff was unable to attend the scoping meeting for the above project
on June 26, 2002. However, we have conducted a review of tile proposed undertaking and are aware
of no historic resources or archaeological sites which would be affected bv this project. Therefore,
we have no comment on the undertaking as proposed.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act
and the Advison, Council on Historic Presen ation's Regulations for Compliance with Secrion 106
codificd at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank t-ou for your cooperation and considerauon. If you have questions concerning the above
comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earlev, em-ironmental review coordinator, at 919/733-
4763. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the above referenced tracking
number.
cc: I-?-sistina Solberg, NCDOT
Location M17ailing Address
Administration 507 N. Blount St, Raleigh, NC 4617 Atail Service Centci, Raleigh 2 7699-46 1 7
Restoration 515 N. Blount St, Raleigh , NC 4613 Mail Service Center, Raleigh 276994613
Survey & Planning 515 N. Blount St, Raleigh, NC 4618 Mail Service Center, Raleigh 27699-461 R
Telephone/Fax
[phone] •733-8653
[phone] •7154801
?919)7334763 •7154801
? ?Uer4
Public Schools of North Carolina -J?
?
Stace Board of Education Department of Public Instruction
Phillip J. Kirk, Jr., Chairman Michae] E. Ward, Scace Superintendent
www.ncpublicschools.org E, j/
4O
m ? 24 2002
July 22 2002
.
. o?'rfC OF ?
t ANAP
MEMORANDLrM
TQ: William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
FROM: Gerald H. Knott, Section Chief, School Planning
SUBJECT: ' TIP U-4019, Widening of SR 1613 (N. Winstead Avenue) from SR 1770 (Sunset
Avenue) to SR 1604 (Hunter Hill Road) in Rocky Mount, Nash Gounty, State Project
Nol. 8.2322701, Federal Aid Project No. STP-1613(3)
Enclosed is a response from Nash-Rocky Mount Schools in regard to the National Environmental
Policy Act inquiry.
/ed
Enclosure
301 N. WilmingEon Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2825
Telephone [phone]
An EquulOPPortunity/AffirmatiaeAction Emplaytr
Nash-Rocky Mount Schools
930 Eastern Ave. Nashville, N.C. 27856 -----
[phone] Fax [phone] ?`J,; t? t? j? ? `?Y} ? • ` ?-t. ,
- . . ... L . :.,.?JUIy 17, 2002
SCFl00L PLANNING
Mr. Gerald H. Knott
Section Chief- School Planning
301 N. Wilmington Street
Raleigh, NC 27601
Re: National Environmental Policy Act
TIP U-4019 (Widening of 5R 1613 - N. Winstead Avenue)
Deaz Mr. Knott:
Per your request, the above referenced project does not affect any existing or proposed
school sites or bus routes.
Please review the above information and contact me at any time if you have any questions
or comments.
Sincerely,

Mark Strickland
Special Assistant for Auxiliary Services
An Equal Opporiunity Employer
APPENDIX B
11 EIS RELOCATION REPORT
M E.I.S. ? CORRIDOR ? DESIGN
North Carolina Department of Transportation
RELOCATION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
WBS: 35014.1.1 coutvn Nash Alternate of Aiternate
1.D. No.: U-4019 F.A. PROJECT STP-1613 3
DESCRiPTioN oF PROJECT: Widening of SR 1613 (N. Winstead Ave.) from SR 1770 (Sunset Ave.) to SR
1604 Hunter Hill Rd. , Rock Mount
ESTIMATED DISPLACEES INCOME LEVEL
Type of
Displacees Owners Tenants 11 Total Minorities 0-15M 15-25M 25-35M 35-50M 50 UP
BUSIf12SS@S VA LUEOFbWELLiNG DSSDWELLfN G'AVAILABLE
Farms Owners Tenants For Sale For Rent
Non-Profit 0-20M $ 0-150 0-20nn $ 0-150
ANSWE R ALL QUES710NS ' 20-40M 150-250 20-40M 150-250
Yes No Explain all "YES" answers. 40-70M 250-400 40-70nn 250-400
1. Will special relocation services be necessary? 70-100M 400-600 70-100nn 400-600
2. W ill schools or churches be affected by 100 uP 600 uP 100 ua 500 uP
displacement? TOTAL
3. Will business services still be available REMARKS Res ond b Number
after project?
4. Will any business be displaced? If so, "NEGATIVE REPORT"
indicate size, type, estimated number of
employees, minorities, etc. Based on preliminary plans, the re are no relocate es
5. Will relocation cause a housing shortage?
! 6. Source for available housing (list).
7. Will additional housing programs be
needed?
8. Should Last Resort Housing be
considered?
9. Are there large, disabled, elderly, etc.
families?
10. Will public housing be needed for project?
11. Is public housing available?
12. Is it felt there will be adequate DS5 housing
housing available during relocation period?
13. Will there be a problem of housing within

?.
vY financial means?
14. Are suitable business sites available (list

!
15. source).
Number months estimated to complete
RELOCATION?
1-09-06
Date Relocation Coordinator Date
Ri ht of Wa A ent
FRM15-E Revised 09-02 Original & 1 Copy: Relocation Coordinator
z Lopy Uivision Fielocatfon File
APPENDIX C
? J r; E
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAtiL F. FASLEY
GoN eRNor,
December 20, 2002
MEMORANDUM TO: Kristina Solberg, PE
Project Planning Engineer
FROM: Bobby Dunn
Traffic Noise/Air Quality Section
LYNl)O TIPPETT
SECRBTARI'
SUBJECT: Air Quality Analysis for North Winstead Ave. (SR-1613) From
Sunset Ave. (SR 1770) to Hunter Hill Rd (SR 1604) Itocky
Mowit, Nash County, F.A. Proj. # SZ'P-1613(3), State Proj. 4
8.2322701, TIP # U-4019
AYR QUALITY ANALYSIS
Air pollution originates from various sources. Emissions from industry and
internal combustion engines are the most prevalent sources. The impact resulting from
highway construction ranges from intensifying existing air pollution problems to
improving the ambient air quality. Changing traffic patterns are a primary concern when
determining the impact of a new highway facility or the improvement of an existing
highway facility. Motor vehicles emit carbon monoYide (CO), nitrogen oxide (NO),
hydrocar-bons (HC), particulate matter, sulfur dioxide (S02), and lead (Pb) (listed in order
of decreasing emission rate). Automobiles are considei•ed to be the major source of CO
in the project area. For this reason, most of the analysis presented herein is concerned
with determining expected carbon monoxide levels in the vicinity of the project due to
traffic flow.
In order to determine the ambient CO concentration at a receptor near a highway,
two conceniration components must be used: local and background. The local
concentration is defined as the CO einissions from cars operating on highways in the near
vicinity (i.e., distances within 100 meters) of the receptor location. The background
concentration is defined by the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and
Natural IZesourees as "the concentration of a polllrtant at a point that is the result of
emissions outside the local vicinity; that is, the concentraiion at the upwind edge of the
local sources."
?
In this study, the local concentration vvas determined by the NCDOT Traffic
Noise/Air Quality Staff using line source computer modeling and the background
component was obtained from the North Carolina Department of Environment, Healtll
and Natural Resources (NCDEHNR). Once the two concentration components were
ascertained, they were added together to determine the ambient CO concentration for the
area in question and to compare to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS).
Automobiles are regarded as sources of hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides.
Hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides emitted from cars are carried into the atmosphere
where they react with sunlight to form ozone and nitrogen dioxide. Automotive
emissions of HC and NO are expected to decrease in the future due to the continued
installation and maintenance of pollution control devices on new cars. However,
regarding area-wide einissions, tllese technological improvements maybe offset by the
increasing number of cars on the transportation facilities of the area.
The photochemicll reactions that form ozone and nitrogen dioxide require several
hours to occur. For this reason, the peak levels of ozone generally occur 10 to 20
kilometers downwind of the soui•ce of hydrocarbon emissions. Urban areas as a whole
are regarded as sources of hydrocarbons, not individual streets and highways. The
emissions of all soLirces in an urban area mix together in the atmosphere, and in thc
presence of sunlight, the miXtLlre reacts to farxn ozone, .nitrogen dioxide, and othcr
photochemical oxidants. The best example of this type of air pollution is the smog that
forms in Los Angeles, California.
Automobiles are not regarded as signi#icant sources of particulate matter and
sulfur dioxide. Nationwide, highway sources account for less than seven percent of
particulate matter emissions and less than two percent of sulftiir dioxide emissions.
Particulate matter and sulfur dioxide emissions are predominantly the result of non-
highway sourees (e.g., industrial, commercial, and agricultural). Because emissions oI'
particulate matter and suliur dioxide from autoniobiles are very low, there is no reason to
suspect that traffic on the project will cause air quality standards for particulate matter
and sulfur dioxide to exceed the NAAQS.
Automobiles without catalytic converters can burn regular gasoline. The burning
of regular gasoline emits lead as a result of regular gasoline containing tetraethyl lead.
which is added by refineries to increase the octane rating of the fiiel. Newer cars with
catalytic converters burn unleaded gasoline eliminating lead emissions. Also, the United
States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has required the redtiction in the lead
content of leaded gasoline. The overall average lead content of gasoline in 1974 was
approximately 0.53 gram per liter. By 1989, this composite average had dropped to
0.003 gram per liter. In the future, lead emissions are expeeted to decrease as more cars
use unleaded fuels and as the lead content oFleaded gasoline is reduced. The Clean Air
Act Amendments of 1990 make the sale, supply, or transport of leaded gasoline or lead
additives unlawful after December 3 l, 1995. Because of these reasons, it is not expected
that trafific on the proposed project will cause the NAAQS for lead to be exceedcd.
;
A nlicroscale air quality analysis was performed to determine fiiture CO
concentrations resulting froin the proposed highway improvements. "CAL3QHC - A
Modeling Methodology For Predicting Pollutant Concentrations Near Roadway
Intersections" was used to predict the CO concentration near sensitive receptors.
Inputs into the mathematical inodel used to estimate hourly CO concentrations
consisted of a level roadway under normal conditions with predicted traffic volumes,
vehicle emission factors, anci worst-case meteorological parameters. The traffic volumes
are based on the annual avcrage daily traffic projections. Carbon inonolide vehicle
emission factors were calculated for the years 2005, 2010 aild 2025, using the EPA
publication "Mobile Source Emission Factors", and the MOBILESA rnobile source
emissions computer inodel.
The background CO concentration for the project area was estimated to be 1.8
parts pcr million (pprn). Consultation with the Air Quality Section, Division of
Environmental Management (DEM), North Carolina Department of Environment, Health
and Natural Resources indicated that an ambient CO concentration of 1.8 ppm is suitable
Cor most suburban and rtual areas.
The worst-ease air qualiry scenario was determined to be in the vicinity of the
intersection of SR 1613 and Cui-tis Ellis Drive. The predicted 1-hotzr average CO
concentrations far the evaluation build years of 2005, 2010 and 2025 are 4.7,4.8 and 5.20
ppm, respectively. Comparison of the predieted CO concentrations with the NAAQS
(rnaximum permitted for 1-hotnr averaging period = 35 ppm; 8-hour averaging period = 9
ppm) indicates no violation of these standards. Since tlle results of the worst-case 1-hour
CO analysis for the build scenario is less than 9 ppm, it ean be concluded that the 8-hour
CO level does not exceed the standard. See Tables A1 through A3 for input data and
OUtpLll.
The project is located in Nash County, which has been determined to be in
compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. 40 CFR part 51 and 93 is
not applicable, because the proposed projECt is located in an attainment area. This project
is not anticipated to create any adverse effects on the air quality of this attainment arca.
During construction oFthe proposed project, all materials resulting from clearing
and grubbing, demolitiorl or other operations will be removed from the project, burned or
otherwise disposed of by the Contractor. Any burning done will be done in accordance
with applicable local law•s and ordinances and regulations of the North Carolina SIP for
air quality in compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520. Care will be taken to insure burning
will be done at the gneatest distanee practical from dwellings and not when atmospheric
conditions are such as to create a hazard to the public. Burning will be performed under
constant surveillance. Also during construction, measures will be taken to reduce the
dust generated by construction when the control of dtist is necessary for the protection
and comfort of nlotorists or area residents. This evaluation completes the assessment
requirements far air quality of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments and the NEPA
process, and no additional reports are necessary.
Table A1
CAL30HC: LINE SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL - VERSION 2.0, JANUARY 1992
JOB: U-4019, SR-1613/CURTIS ELLIS DR., NASH C0. RUN: U4019,SR-1613/CURTIS ELL[S DR.,NASH C0.
SITE
--- - & METEOROLOGICAL
- - ---------- VARIABLES

VS = ---
.0 CM/S ---------
VD = .0
CM/S
ZO =
108.
CM
U= 1.0 M/S CLAS = 4 (D) ATIM = 60. MINUTES MIXH = 1000. M AMB = 4_0 PPM
LINK VARIABLES
LINK DESCRIPTION * LINK COORDINATES (M) * LENGTH
* X1 Y1 X2 Y2 * (M)
--- - -- - -------------*------- - - - - - -- --- --------*----------
1. Link 1 E6 Appr *-1000.0 -12.0 .0 -12.0 * 1000.
2. Link 2 EB LT 0 * -36.0 .0 -60.7 .0 * 25.
3_ Link 3 E6 TNRU/RT -36.0 -12_0 -50.3 -12.0 * 14.
4_ Link 4 EB DEPT * .0 -12.0 1000.0 -1 Z 0* 1000.
5. Link 5 WB App * 1000.0 12.0 .0 12.0 * 1000.
6. Link 6 W6 LT * 36.0 .0 39.8 .0 * 4.
7. Link 7 WB THRU/RT * 36.0 12.0 82.8 12.0 * 47.
8. Link 8 WB DEPT * .0 12.0 -1000.0 12.0 * 1000.
9. Link 9 NB APPR * 18.0 -1000.0 18.0 .0 * 1000.
10. Link 10 NB LT * .0 -24.0 .0 -37.5 * 13.
11. Link 11 NB THRU/RT * 18.0 -24.0 18.0 -40.3 * 16.
12. Link 12 NB DEPT * 18.0 .0 18.0 1000.0 * 1000.
13. Link 13 SB APPR " -18.0 1000.0 -1II.0 .0 * 1000.
14. Link 14 SB LT * .0 24.0 .0 37.5 * 13.
15. Link 15 SB THRU/RT * -18.0 24.0 -18.0 40.3 * 16.
16. Link 16 SB DEPT * -1II.0 .0 -18.0 -1000.0 * 1000.
ADDITIONAL QUEUE LINK PARAMETERS
------------------- - - - - -- -
LINK DESCRIPTION * CYCLE RED CLEARANCE APPROACH SATURATIDI
* LENGTH TIME LOST T[ME VOL FLOW RATE
* (SEC) (SEC) (SEC) (VPH) (VPH)
------ - - -- - ----- - - -*--------------------- - ------- ------------------
2. Link 2 EB LT 0 * 120 91 2.0 163 1600
3. Link 3 E6 THRU/RT * 120 95 2.0 90 1600
6. Link 6 WB LT * 120 94 2.0 24 1600
7. Link 7 W6 THRU/RT * 120 120 2.0 119 1600
10. Link 10 NB Li * 120 106 2.0 75 1600
11. Link 11 NB THRU/RT * 120 65 2_0 300 1600
14. Link 14 SB LT * 120 106 2.0 75 1500
15. Link 15 S[3 THRU/RT * 120 65 2_0 300 1600
BRG TYPE VPH EF H W V/C 4UEUE
(DEG) (G/MI) (M) (M) (VEH)
-------- - ------------------------
90. 252. 15.6 .0 32.0
270. 672. 100.0 .0 12.0 .49 4.1
270. 702. 100.0 .0 12.0 .32 2.4
90. 142. 15.6 .0 32.0
270. 142_ 15.6 .0 32.0
90. 695. 100.0 .0 12.0 .08 .6
90. 887. 100.0 .0 12.0 **** 7.8
270. 252. 15_6 .0 32.0
360. 558. 15.6 .0 44.0
180. 783. 100_0 .0 12.0 .56 2.2
180. 961. 100.0 .0 24.0 .22 2.7
360. 558. 15.6 .0 44.0
180. 558. 15.6 .0 44,0
360. 783. 100.0 .0 12.0 .55 2.2
360. 961. 100.0 .0 24.0 .22 2.7
180. 558. 15.6 .0 44.0
IDLE SIGNAL ARRIVAL
EM FAC TYPE RATE
(gm/hr)
----- -----------------
330.b0 i 3
330.60 1 3
330.60 1 3
330.60 '. 3
330.60 1 3
330.60 1 3
330.60 1 3
330_60 1 3
Table A1 ( con't)
RECEPTOR LOCATIONS
----- ------------
* COORDINATES (M) *

-- RECEPTOR
- - - - ----
----- *
-------*--- X
---------- - Y
------------ Z
----- - --- *
*
-
1. Receptor 1 * 70.0 300.0 1.8 *
2. Receptar 2 * 80.0 180.0 1.8 *
3. Receptor 3 * 120.0 100.0 1.8 *
4. Receptor 4 * 190.0 90.0 1.8 *
5. Receptor 5 * 70.0 -300.0 1.8 *
6. Receptor 5 * 80.0 -180.0 1.8 *
7. Receptor 7 * 120.0 -100.0 1.8 *
8_ Receptor B * 190.0 -90.0 1.8 *
9. Receptor 9 * -70.0 -300.0 1.8 *
10. Receptor 10 * -80.0 -1II0.0 1.8 ?
11. Receptor 11 * -120.0 -100.0 1.8 *
12. Receptor, 12 * -190.G -90.0 1_8
*
13. Receptor 13 * -70.0 300.0 1_8 *
14. Receptor 14 * -80.0 180.0 1.8 *
15. Receptor, 15 * -120.0 100.0 1.8 *
16. Receptor 16 * -190.0 90.0 1.8 *
MODEL RESULTS
-------------
REMARKS : In search of the angle corresponding to
the maximum concentration, onty the first
2ngle, of thc angles with same maximurn
concentrations, ia indicated as maximum.
WIND ANGLE RANGE: 0.-360.
WIND * CONCENTRATION
ANGLE * (PPM)
(DEGR)* REC1 REC2 REC3 REC4 RECS REC6 REC7 REC8 REC9 REC10 REC11 REC12 REC13 REC14 REC15 REC16
------ * ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - -------
MAX * 4.4 4.6 4.7 4.3 4.4 4.6 4.6 4.4 4.3 4.5 4.6 4.4 4.3 4.6 4.6 4_4
DEGR. * 183 195 209 228 348 334 304 298 3 10 42 58 146 155 111 117
THE HIGHEST CONCENTRATION [S 4.70 PPM AT 209 DEGREES FROM REC3 .
Table A2
CAL30HC: LINE SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL - VERSION 2.0, JANUARY 1992
JOB: U-4019, SR-1613/CURTIS ELLIS DR., NASH C0. RUN: U4019,SR-1613/CURTIS ELLIS DR.,NASH C0.
SITE &
-- - --- METEOROLOGICAL
--------------- VARIABIES
---------
VS = .0 CM/S VD = .0 CM/S ZO = 108. CM
U= 1 .0 M/S CLAS = 4 (D) ATIM = 60. MINUTES MIXH = 1000. M AMB = 4.0 PPM
LINK VARIABLES
--------------
LINK DESCRIPTION * LINK COORDINATES (M) * LENGTH BRG TYPE VPH Ef H W V/C QUEUE

---
------
--------------- x
*- X1
-------
- Y1
------------ X2
---------- Y2
------- *
-- * (M)
----------- (DEG)
-----------
----- (G/MI)
------ (M)
---- (M)
---
----- (UEH)
------
1. Link 1 EB Appr -1000. 0 -12.0 .0 -12. 0 * 1000. 90. 291. 15.4 .0 32.0
2. Link 2 EB LT 4 * -36. 0 .0 -65.1 . 0 * 29. 270. 636. 100.0 .0 12.0 .56 4.8
3. Link 3 EB THRU/RT ? -36. 0 -12.0 -51.0 -12. 0 * 15. 270. 658_ 100_0 ,0 12.0 .32 2.5
4. Link 4 EB DEPT * . 0 -12.0 1000.0 -12. 0 * 1000. 90. 168. 15.4 .0 32.0
5. Link 5 WB App * 1000. 0 12.0 .0 12. 0 * 1000. 270. 16E3. 15_4 .0 32.0
6. Link 6 WB LT * 36. 0 .0 40.0 . 0 * 4. 90. 658. 100.0 .0 12.0 .08 .7
7. Link 7 WB THRU/RT * 36. 0 12.0 175.1 12. 0 * 139. 90. 841_ 100_0 .0 12.0 **** 23.2
8. Link 8 NB DEPT * . D 12.0 -1000.0 12. 0 * 1000. 270. 291. 15_4 .0 32.0
9. Link 9 NB APPR * 18. 0 -1000.0 18_0 . 0 * 1000. 360. 648. 15.4 .0 44.0
10. Link 10 NB LT * . 0 -24.0 .0 -39. 5 * 15_ 180. 756. 100.0 .0 12.0 .67 2.6
11. Link 11 NB THRU/RT * 18. 0 -24.0 18.0 -43. 2 * 19. 180. 905. 100.0 .0 24.0 .26 3.2
12. Link 12 NB DEPT * 18. 0 .0 18_0 1000. 0 * 1000. 360. 648. 15.4 .0 44.0
13. Link 13 SB APPR * -18. 0 1000.0 -18.0 . 0 * 1000. 180. 648. 15.4 .0 44.0
14. Link 14 SB LT * . 0 24.0 .0 39. 5 * 15. 360. 756. 100.0 .0 12.0 .67 2.6
15. Link 15 SB THRU/RT * -18. 0 24_0 -18.0 43. 2 * 19. 360. 905. 100_0 .0 24.0 .26 3.2
16. Link 16 SB DEPT * -18. 0 .0 -18.0 -1000. 0 * 1000. 180. 648. 15_4 .0 44.0
JOB: U-4019, SR-1613/CURTIS ELLIS DR., NASH C0. RUN: U4019,SR-1613/CURTIS ELU S DR.,NASH C0.
ADDITIONAL QUEUE LINK PARAMETERS
- - ------------- --------------
LINK DESCR[PT[ON *
*
*
---------------------- *
2. Link 2 EB LT Q *
3. Link 3 EB THRU/RT *
6. Link b WB LT *
7. Link 7 WB THRU/RT "
10. Link 10 NB LT *
11. Link 11 NB THRU/RT *
14. Link 14 SB LT *
15. Link 15 SB THRU/RT *
CYCLE RED CLEARANCE APPROACH
LENGTH TIME LOST TIME VOL
(SEC) (SEC) (SEC) (VPH)
-------------- ----------------- - --
120 90 2.0 194
120 93 2_0 97
120 93 2.0 26
120 119 2_0 142
120 107 2.0 80
120 64 2.0 360
120 107 2.0 80
120 64 2.0 360
SATURATION IDLE SIGNAL ARRIVAL
FLOW RATE EM FAC TYPE RATE
(VPH) (grn/hr)
-- ----------------- - ----------------
1600 316.30 1 3
1600 316.30 1 3
1600 316.30 1 3
1600 316.30 1 3
1600 316.30 1 3
1600 316.30 1 3
1600 316.30 1 3
1600 316.30 1 3
Table A3
CAL3QHC: LINE SOURCE O[SPERS[ON MODEL VERSIDN 2.0, JANUARY 1992
JOB: U-4019, SR-1613/CURTIS ELLIS DR., NASH C0. RUN: U4019,SR-1613/CURTIS ELLIS DR.,NASH C0.
SITE
----- & METEOROLOGICAL
----------------- VARIABLES
---------
VS = .0 CM/S VD = .0 CM/S ZO = 108. CM
U= 1.0 M/S CLAS = 4 (D) ATIM = 60. M[NUTES MIXH = 1000. M AMB = 4.0 PPM
LINK VARIABLES
L[NK DESCRIPTION * LINK COORDINATES (M) * LENGTH BRG TYPE VPH EF H W V/C QUEUE

---
------
----------- - -- *
*-- X1
-- - -
-- - Y1
---- - - X2
- - --- Y2
-- - --- *
-
* (M)
- - (DEG)
-------
----
---- (G/M])
---- (M) (M) (VEH)

1_
Link
1 E6 Appr
*
-1000.
0
-18.0
.0
-18. -
0 * -- - -
-
1000. -
90.
405. -----
15.2 ----------
.0 32.0 ----- - -----
2. Link 2 E¢ LT Q * -36. 0 _0 -82.4 . 0 * 46. 270_ 629. 100.0 .0 12.0 .80 7.7
3. Link 3 EB THRU/RT * -36. 0 -12.0 -54.1 -12. 0 * 18. 270. 650. 100.0 .0 12.0 .37 3.0
4. Link 4 E6 DEPT * . 0 -12_0 1000.0 -12. 0 * 1000. 90. 248. 15.2 .0 32.0
5. Link 5 W6 App * 1000. 0 12.0 .0 12. 0 * 1000. 270. 248. 15.2 .0 32.0
6. Link 6 W6 LT * 36. 0 .0 41.0 . 0 * 5. 90. 643. 100.0 .0 12.0 .10 .8
7. Link 7 W6 THRl1/RT * 36. 0 12.0 242.6 12_ 0 * 207. 90. 829. 100.0 .0 12.0 **** 34.4
8. Link 8 We DEPT * . 0 12.0 -1000.0 72_ 0 * 1000. 270. 405. 15.2 .0 32.0
9. Link 9 NB APPR " 18. 0 1000.0 18.0 . 0 * 1000. 360. 918. 15.2 .0 44.0
10. Link 10 N[3 LT * . 0 -24.0 .0 -105. 3 * 81. 180. 760. 100.0 .0 12.0 1. 20 13.6
11. Link 11 NQ 'fHRU/R? * 18. 0 -24.0 18.0 -51. 1 * 27. 180. 898. 100.0 .0 24.0 . 37 4.5
12. Link 12 NB DEPT ? 18. 0 .0 18.0 1000. 0 * 1000. 360. 918. 15.2 .0 44.0
13. Link 13 SQ APPR * -18. 0 1000.0 -18.0 . 0 * 1000. 180. 918. 15.2 .0 44.0
14. Link 14 SB LT * , 0 24.0 .0 105. 3 * 81. 360. 760. 100.0 .0 12.0 1. 20 13.6
15. Link 15 SB THRU/RT * -18. 0 24.0 -18.0 51. 1 * 27. 360. 898. 100.0 .0 24.0 . 37 4.5
16. Link 16 S6 DEPT * -18. 0 .0 -18.0 -1000_ 0 * 1000. 180. 918. 15.2 _0 44_0
AUDIiIONAL QUEUE LINK PRRAMETERS
LINK DESCRIPTION " CYCLE RED CLEARANCE APPROACH SATURATION [DLE SIGNAL ARRIVAL
* LENGTH TIME LOST T[ME VOL FLOW RATE EM FAC TYPE RATE

-
---
----- ---- *
-x-- (SEC)
-------- (SEC)
-------- (SEC)
----------- (VPH)
----- -- (VPH)
---- -- (gm/hr)
--------
---
--
----
2 . Link 2 EB LT Q * 120 89 2.0 288 1600 316.30 ------
1 -
-
3
3 . Link 3 EE THRU/RT * 120 92 2.0 118 1600 316.30 1 3
6 . Link 6 WB LT * 120 93 2.0 32 1600 309.20 1 3
7. Link 7 WB THRU/RT * 120 120 2.0 217 1600 309.20 1 3
10. Link 10 N6 LT * 120 110 2.0 95 1600 309.20 1 3
11. Link 11 NB THRU/RT * 120 65 2.0 500 1600 309.20 1 3
14. Link 14 SB LT * 120 110 2.0 45 1600 309.20 1 3
15. Link 15 SB THRU/RT * 120 65 2.0 500 1600 309.20 1 3
Table A2 (con't)
RECEPTOR LOCATIONS
---------------
* COORDINATES (M) *

--- RECEPTOR
- - - - ----
---- *
--------*--- X
--------- - Y
- ----------- Z
-------
---*
1. Receptor 1 * 70.0 300.0 1.8
2. Receptar 2 * 80.0 180.0 1.8 *
3. Receptor 3 * 120.0 100_0 1.8 *
4. Receptor 4 * 190.0 90.0 1.8 *
5. Receptor 5 * 70.0 -300.0 1.8 *
6. Receptor 6 * 80.0 -180.0 1.8 *
7. Receptor 7 * 120.0 -100.0 1.8 *
B. Receptar 8 * 190.0 -90.0 1.8 *
9. Receptor 9 * -70.0 -300.0 1.8 *
10. Receptor 10 * -80.0 -180.0 1.8
11. Receptor 11 -120.0 -100.0 1_8 *
12. Receptor 12 * -190.0 -90,0 1.8 *
13. Receptor, 13 * -70.0 300.0 1.8 *
14. Receptor 14 * -80.0 180.0 1.8 *
15. Receptor 15 * -120.0 100.0 1.8 *
16. Receptor 16 * -190.0 90.0 1.8 *
JO B: U-4019, SR- 1613/CURT[S ELLIS DR., NASH C0. RUN: U4019,SR-1613/CURTIS ELLIS UR.,NASH C0.
MODEL RESULTS
-------------
REMARKS : In search of the angle corresponding to
the maximwn concentration, only the first
angle, of the angles with same maximum
concentrations, is Sndicated as rnaximum.
WIND ANGLE RANGE: 0.-360.
WIND * CONCENTRATION
ANGLE * (PPM)
(DEGR)* REC1 REC2 REC3 REC4 RECS REC6 REC7 REC8 REC9 REC10 REC11 REC12 REC13 REC14 REC15 REC16
--- _ *- ---- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
MAX r 4.5 4.7 4.8 4.8 4.5 4.7 4.7 4.7 4.5 4.7 4.8 4.5 4.5 4.6 4.8 4.5
DEGR. * 182 201 188 206 349 338 309 318 24 21 50 61 150 145 117 115
THE HIGHEST CONCENTRATION IS 4.80 PPM AT 188 DEGREES FROM REC3
Table A3 (con't)
RECEPTOR LOCATIONS
* COORDINATES (M) *

- RECEPTOR
--
--
------- *
* X
-------------- Y
------
- Z *
*
-
1. ---
--
Receptor -
1 * 70.0 -
-
300.0 -----------
1.8 *
2. Receptor 2 * 80.0 180.0 1.8 *
3. Receptor 3 * 120.0 100.0 1.8 *
4. Receptor 4 * 190.0 90.0 1.8 *
5. Receptor 5 * 70.0 -300.0 1.8 *
6. Receptor 6 * 80.0 -180.0 1.8 *
7. Receptor 7 * 120.C -100.^u 1.8 *
8. Receptor II * 190.0 -90.0 1_II *
9. Receptor 9 * -70.0 -300.0 1_8 *
10. Receptor 10 * -80.0 -180.0 1.8 *
11. Receptor 11 * -120.0 -100.0 1.8
12. Receptor 12 * -140.0 -90.0 1.8
13. Receptor 13 * -70.0 300.0 1_8 *
14. Receptor 14 * -80.0 180.0 1.8 ?
15. Receptor 15 " -120.0 100.0 1.8 *
16. Receptor 16 * -190.0 90.0 1.8 ?
MODEL RESULTS
-------------
REMARKS : In search of the angle corresponding to
the maximum concentration, only the first
angle, of the angles with same maximum
concentrations, is indicated as maximum.
WIND ANGLE RANGE: 0.-360.
WIND * CONCENTRATION
ANGLE * (PPM)
(DEGR)* REC1 REC2 REC3 REC4 RECS REC6 REC7 REC8 REC9 REC10 REC11 REC12 REC13 REC14 REC15 REC16
------ * --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MAX * 5.0 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.0 5_2 5.1 4.9 5.0 5.2 5.1 5.0 5_0 5.2 5.2 5.0
DEGR_ * 191 205 250 226 347 329 313 307 12 30 43 54 163 146 110 124
THE HIGHEST CDNCENTRATION IS 5_20 PPM AT 329 DEGREES FROM REC6 .
APPENDIX D
2
The weighted-A decibel scale is used almost exclusively in vehicle noise
measurements because it places the most emphasis on the frequency range to which the
human ear is most sensitive (1,000-6,000 Hertz). Sound levels measured using a
weighted-A decibel scale are often expressed as dBA. Throughout this report, all noise
levels will be expressed in dBA's. Several examples of noise pressure levels in dBA are
listed in Table Nl.
Review of Table Nl indicates that most individuals in urbanized areas are
exposed to fairly high noise levels from many sources as they go about their daily
activities. The degree of disturbance or annoyance of unwanted sound depends
essentially on three things:
1) The amount and nature of the intruding noise.
2) The relationship between the background noise and the intruding noise.
3) The type of activity occurring when the noise is heard.
Over time, particularly if the noises occur at predicted intervals and are expected
individuals tend to accept the noises that intrude into their lives. Attempts have been
made to regulate many of these types of noises including airplane noise, factory noise,
railroad noise, and highway traffic noise. In relation to highway traffic noise, methods of
analysis and control have developed rapidly over the past few years.
NOISE ABATEMENT CRITERIA
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has developed Noise Abatement
Criteria (NAC) and procedures to be used in the planning and design of highways to
determine whether highway noise levels are or are not compatible with various land uses.
These abatement criteria and procedures are set forth in the aforementioned Federal
reference (Title 23 CFR Part 772). A summary of the noise abatement criteria for various
land uses is presented in Table N2. The Leq, or equivalent sound level, is the level of
constant sound which in a given situation and time period has the same energy as does
time varying sound. In other words, the fluctuating sound levels of traffic noise are
represented in terms of a steady noise level with the same energy content.
AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS
Ambient noise measurements were taken in the viciniry of the project to
determine ambient (existing) noise levels for the identified land uses. The purpose of this
noise level information was to quantify the existing acoustic environment and to provide
a base for assessing the impact of noise level increases. The existing Leq noise levels in
the project area were measured at 50 foot from edge of pavement Ranged from 63.5 dBA
to 673 dBA. A background noise level of 45 dBA was determined for the project to be
used in areas where traffic noise was not the predominant source. The ambient
measurement location is shown in Figure Nl and Table N3.
The existing roadway and traffic conditions were used with the most current
traffic noise prediction model in order to calculate existing noise levels for comparison
with noise levels actually measured. The calculated existing noise levels averaged less
than 1 dBA than the measured noise levels for the location where noise measurements
were obtained. Hence, the computer model is a reliable tool in the prediction of noise
levels. Differences in dBA levels can be attributed to "bunching" of vehicles, low traffic
volumes, and actual vehicle speeds versus the computer's "evenly-spaced" vehicles and
single vehicular speed.
PROCEDURE FOR PREDICTING FUTURE NOISE LEVELS
In general, the traffic situation is composed of a large number of variables that
describe different cars driving at different speeds through a continual changing highway
configuration and surrounding terrain. Due to the complexiry of the problem, certain
assumptions and simplifications must be made to predict highway traffic noise. The
procedure used to predict future noise levels in this study was the TNM I.I. The TNM
traffic noise prediction model uses the number and type of vehicles on the planned
roadway, their speeds, the physical characteristics of the road (curves, hills, depressed,
elevated, etc.), receptor location and height, and, if applicable, barrier type, barrier ground
elevation, and barrier top elevation.
In this regard, it is noted that only preliminary alignment was available for use in
this noise analysis. The project proposes the widening SR 1613 (N. Winstead Avenue)
from SR 1770 (Sunset Avenue) to SR 1604 (Hunter Hill Road). This noise analysis
evaluated six widening alternatives, symmetrical, west side, and east side widening in
combination with either 4 or 5 lanes. Only those existing natural or man-made barriers
were included in setting up the modeL The roadway sections and proposed intersections
were assumed to be flat and at-grade. Thus, this analysis represents the "worst-case"
topographical conditions. The noise predictions made in this report are highway-related
noise predictions for the traffic conditions during the year being analyzed.
Peak hour design and level-of-service (LOS) C volumes were compared, and the
volumes resulting in the noisiest conditions were used with the proposed posted speed
limits. Hence, during all other time periods, the noise levels will be no greater than those
indicated in this report. The TNM computer model was utilized in order to determine the
number of land uses (by type) which would be impacted during the peak hour of the
design year 2025. A land use is considered impacted when exposed to noise levels
approaching or exceeding the FHWA noise abatement criteria and/or predicted to sustain
a substantial noise increase.
TRAFFIC NOISE IMPACTS AND NOISE CONTOURS
4
Traffic noise impacts occur when the predicted traffic noise levels either. [a]
approach or exceed the FHWA noise abatement criteria (with "approach" meaning within
1 dBA of the Table N2 value), or [b] substantially exceed the existing noise levels. The
NCDOT definition of substantial increase is shown in the lower portion of Table N2.
Consideration for noise abatement measures must be given to receptors that fall in either
category.
In accordance with NCDOT Traffic Noise Abatement Policy, the Federal/State
governments are not responsible for providing noise abatement measures for new
development which building permits are issued within the noise impact area of a
proposed highway after the Date of Public Knowledge. The Date of Public Knowledge of
the location of a proposed highway project will be the approval date of CEs, FONSIs,
RODs, or the Design Public Hearing, whichever comes later. For development occurring
after this public knowledge date, local governing bodies are responsible to insure that
noise compatible designs are utilized along the proposed facility.
The number of receptors in each activity category for each section predicted to
become impacted by future traffic noise is shown in Table N5. These are noted in terms
of those receptors expected to experience traffic noise impacts by either approaching or
exceeding the FHWA NAC or by a substantial increase in exterior noise levels. Under
Title 23 CFR Part 772, 1 residence and 1 business are predicted to be impacted due to
highway traffic noise in the project area by the selection of the 41ane, west side widening,
this being worse case. The maximum extent of the 72-dBA noise level contour is 67.9
feet from the center of the proposed roadway. The maximum extent of the 67-dBA noise
level contour is 1121 feet from the center of the proposed roadway. Contour information
in Table NS shows this contour information by section. This information should assist
local authorities in exercising land use control over the remaining undeveloped lands
adjacent to the roadway within local jurisdiction. For example, with the proper
information on noise, the local authorities can prevent further development of
incompatible activities and land uses with the predicted noise levels of an adjacent
highway.
Table N6 exhibits the exterior traffic noise level increases for the identified
receptors by roadway section. There were no substantial noise level impacts anticipated
by this project by the selection of any of the widening options evaluated. The predicted
noise level increases for this project range from +3 dBA to +9 dBA. When real-life
noises are heard, it is possible barely to detect noise level changes of 2-3 dBA. A 5-dBA
change is more readily noticeable.
TRAFFIC NOISE ABATEMENT MEASURES
If traffic noise impacts are predicted, examination and evaluation of alternative
noise abatement measures for reducing or eliminating the noise impacts must be
considered. Consideration for noise abatement measures must be given to all impacted
receptors. There are impacted receptors due to highway traffic noise in the project area.
The following discussion addresses the applicability of these measures to the proposed
project.
Highway Alignment Selection
Highway alignment selection involves the horizontal or vertical orientation of the
proposed improvements in such a way as to minimize impacts and costs. The selection of
alternative alignments for noise abatement purposes must consider the balance between
noise impacts and other engineering and environmental parameters. For noise abatement,
horizontal alignment selection is primarily a matter of siting the roadway at a sufficient
distance from noise sensitive areas. Changing the highway alignment is not a viable
alternative for noise abatement.
Traffic System Management Measures
Traffic system management measures, which limit vehicle type, speed, volume
and time of operations, are often effective noise abatement measures. For this project,
traffic management measures are not considered appropriate for noise abatement due to
their effect on the capacity and level-of-service of the proposed facility.
Past project experience has shown that a reduction in the speed limit of 10 mph
would result in a noise level reduction of approximately 1 to 2 dBA. Because most
people cannot detect a noise reduction of up to 3 dBA and because reducing the speed
limit would reduce roadway capacity, it is not considered a viable noise abatement
measure. This and other traffic system management measures, including the prohibition
of truck operations, are not considered to be consistent with the project's objective of
providing a high-speed, limited-access faciliry.
Noise Barriers
Physical measures to abate anticipated traffic noise levels are often applied with a
measurable degree of success on fully controlled facilities by the application of solid
mass, attenuable measures strategically placed between the traffic sound source and the
receptors to effectively diffract, absorb, and reflect highway traffic noise emissions. Solid
mass, attenuable measures may include earth berms or artificial abatement walls.
The project will maintain uncontrolled or limited control of access, meaning most
commercial establishments and residents will have direct access connections to the
proposed roadway, and all intersection will adjoin the project at grade. For a noise barrier
6
to provide sufficient noise reduction it must be high enough and long enough to shield the
receptor from significant sections of the highway. Access openings in the barrier severely
reduce the noise reduction provided by the barrier. It then becomes economically
unreasonable to construct a barrier for a small noise reduction. Safety at access openings
(driveways, crossing streets, etc.) due to restricted sight distance is also a concern.
Furthermore, to provide a sufficient reduction, a barrier's length would normally be 8
times the distance from the barrier to the receptor. For example, a receptor located 50'
from the barrier would normally require a barrier 400' long. An access opening of 40' (10
percent of the area) would limit its noise reduction to approximately 4 dBA
(FUNDAMENTAL AND ABATEMENT OF HIGHWAY TRAFFIC NOISE, Report No.
FHWA-HHI-HEV-73-7976-1, USDOT, chapter 5, section 3.2, page 5-27). Hence, this
type of control of access effective eliminates the consideration of berms or noise walls as
noise mitigation measures.
In addition, businesses, churches, and other related establishments located along a
particular highway normally require accessibility and high visibility. Solid mass,
attenuable measures for traffic noise abatement would tend to disallow these two
qualities, and thus, would not be acceptable abatement measures in this case.
Other Mitigation Measures Considered
The acquisition of property in order to provide buffer zones to minimize noise
impacts is not considered to be a feasible noise mitigation measure for this project. The
cost to acquire impacted receptors for buffer zones would exceed the abatement threshold
of $25,000 per benefited receptor. The use of buffer zones to minimize impacts to future
sensitive areas is not recommended because this could be accomplished through land use
control.
The use of vegetation for noise mitigation is not considered reasonable for this
project, due to the amount of substantial amount of right-of-way necessary to make
vegetative barriers effective. FHWA research has shown that a vegetative barrier should
be approximately 100' wide to provide a 3-dBA reduction in noise levels. In order to
provide a 5-dBA reduction, substantial amounts of additional right-of-way would be
required. The cost of the additional right-of-way and plant sufficient vegetation is
estimated to exceed the abatement threshold of $25,000 per benefited receptor. Noise
insulation was also considered; however, no public or non-profit institutions were
identified that would be impacted by this project.
"DO NOTHING" ALTERNATIVE
The traffic noise impacts for the "do nothing" or "no-build" alternative was also
considered. If the proposed widening did not occur, no receptors are anticipated to
approach or exceed the FHWA NAC. Also, the receptors could anticipate experiencing
7
an increase in exterior noise levels of approximately +1 to +5 dBA increase. As
previously noted, it is barely possible to detect noise level changes of 2-3 dBA. A 5-dBA
change in noise levels is more readily noticed.
CONSTRUCTION NOISE
The major construction elements of this project are expected to be earth removal,
hauling, grading, and paving. General construction noise impacts, such as temporary
speech interference for passers-by and those individuals living or working near the
project, can be expected particularly from paving operations and from the earth moving
equipment during grading operations. However, considering the relatively short-term
nature of construction noise and the limitation of construction to daytime hours, these
impacts are not expected to be substantiaL The transmission loss characteristics of
nearby natural elements and man-made structures are believed to be sufficient to
moderate the effects of intrusive construction noise.
SUMMARY
Traffic noise impacts are an unavoidable consequence of transportation projects
especially in areas where there are not traffic noise sources. All traffic noise impacts
were considered for noise mitigation. Based on these preliminary studies, traffic noise
abatement is not recommended, and no noise abatement measures are proposed. This
evaluation completes the highway traffic noise requirements of Title 23 CFR Part 772,
and unless a major project change develops, no additional noise reports will be submitted
for this project.
J
?
W
J
W'^
v J
O
Z
a
LLI
J
F--
W
m
?
Q

O
? w
co
r ?
co
r
T
?

N O M N
N
M 0
(o °v Ce)
N r

o6

? O
00
U
W
0 ?
0 C,
?
?

?
Lq
O
O ?
?
N
d'
?
T O
o
<D
tn
? T
U)
O

?

? M
? LA
?

?
r ? n m
? LO r- ?
C/) N
?
? E
?
z p
Z
O
?
? ? W

? Q
O ?
N 9
V
? ?
C7 ?
C7
..-
N
C

0
w
co
Z =

w v
CV) o °o
(ID

T ?
co
C
?
?
?
o ?--
1 ?

m ?
(D
?
? W O

? 0 a to ?

-
CL
O

,

r ?

,
(V
?
?
?
.?
?
?
W
M W
?
H°z
H
z
?
?
?
CIN
?
0
?
?
?
a
?
H
?
?
?
?
0
U
?
?
?
z
bA
.?
?
?
b
?
?
?
>
?
03
C/I
C
. r,
?
z
?
M
?
?
.-?
?
?
W
?
Q m ?

0

?

?
w
A
z

?
?
°
Q
O ,D
W ?
o ?

? o
? .?

?
?.
PQ
a°?i

M M

?
?
?
z
?
?
oq
a
?
?
?
0
v?
zw
?w
?
? O
U
H
?
?
0
?
?
?
a
H
?
?
?
0
U
?
z
?
0.4
?
.?
a?
b
?
?
?
?
?
cri
?
?
?
w
?
U
z a
? + + + + + + + + + + + +

?
?D
?D ?D
?O ?c
?D \o
?D oo
10 in
?O
\O
?O
\O
?O
M
?

cn
0
z
?.
A ?

?
U
?

a
? ? a a a a ?a ? a o x .? a x x
Q cn ? o o o o o o o ? o o o o o
3 A ? o0 0 N N r+ O cn oo N ?--? O? ?Y

`? > x
CO)
A Q ?
cn

a z o ?
? Y

\0
\O
\O
?O N
?o cn
\D
?O
?
tn
in
v) d V
kn

?
(40 o
~ 0
?"
3 ? ° -
- -
-
-
? a ?

? o '0 o ?
Z w ? w w
a"
¢ d
o ? ? U U U U U U U ? ? c? ? ca w
?
? 3 3
o ? z z ?
? ? M y

rv/?7
N

G? hv?

V 6i

h

N
y
c
n
N
v
v??
N

""

?

?n

N

??
v
G?

y

?
a ? G L?' G C G ? C ? ? .i"'i
N C'.
•.6 'O
~ V

?+ ,? C/? pa pq pq p] Gq W fl7 a] Gq G? GQ ? U
R?
[Zl,
?
N
M
?'
v'?
?O
t?
oo
a?
O
*-?
N

?.
00
>. ?
cC °O
3 `...°
o •?
0
?
.?
o ?
?
0
Q
b?
? U
?b
.?a
?
? V
y m
N
3 ¢'
o?
? .?
?. O
?
p. cd
:> rN,
A A
? ?
?
?
ao
a
?
?
0
? a
zw
?
? O
U
?
O
?
?
?
a
Fy
?
?
O
?
z
?
?
?t
to
.?
-d
3
M
?
?
W

+ +
z

a ?

w
?
?

A ?
W
E?
U
?

A;
?.

¢ ? ? o 0
A c?o o
? ? ?
? o

`n A
?

? ?
zO vV, I
a Z o
? I

? ?
Z a `n i

?

cn
?

? "
Zwrx w
?r
Q

d U I
3

? M
--i ? NI
? .

a ? r? aa

vW
a
A
00
>, It
cq 00
3 °
o °
?. ?
o ?
o ?
? o
a
0
? .?
O
G
b?
G ?
•? U
? b
O t--
U ?
.--?
N
O ?
? M
? a
? .?
?
O G
0 0
A A
4 *
N
N
bA
CL?
?D
UO
a
zw
? O
-
U
H
?
1-4
C)
?
?
a
?
?
?
U
?
z
i
?
?
?
.?
?
b
3
M
?
?
?
?

+ +

a ?

?
w
?
?

A '
W
E?
U
?
a
a
.? b
? G? o 0
?
A
?
o?o
N

A
? ? ..
?
Z p

a z
?
s
?
w a ?
o kn 00

w
0

C7 4 I
cz) W ? U U
C
¢ U ?

c" ? N
? ?
? C
. G

[i] GQ Pq
?
?
.:
00
3 ?
o ?
0 ?
o ?
?
? o
V y
>
.? •s
?
?w
bo
a ?
•? U
? b
a ?
?a
a?
'o U
r. M
>,
cd °?
3 a'
o??+
.`a
O ? O
G
G. cd
O O
? N
A A
? ?
M
N
DA
a
C#4)
?
?
O
? A4
zW
a?
?
?o
U
E-+
?
?
0
?
?
?
a
?
H
a;
?
0
?
z
?
?
?
.?
b
?
?
?
?
?
M
?
?
x
?
w
?
? ? ? ? ? tn 't ?o ? t- c- ?
Z a ? + + + + + + + + + + + +

? rn t? ?o ?o \o oo v, tn ? t- ?
M
a ? `O

w
?
?

A '

?
U
A
. . . . . , . . . . . .
a
o
? a a a a a a a x a a x x
?
Q ? ? o o o o o o o a: o o o o o

3 ?
A
? v;
OO vi
O vi
N o
N vi
.? p
O o
M -' vi
o0 o
N o
?--? o
O\ vi
ef
U °
E. a > x
cn
?

o
a
Z o ?

?? ? v> t•1 ?--? N N cn W') oo ON O V

+. M ? M
cn

? ? U U U U U U U ? U U U a1 W

? ? 3 3

M y v? y ?n ?n y
4?i ?n
N M
`""? ?n ?n v? G

?
PQ Ga PG W al W W PQ PG 1:4 U
M ? W) ?O I? oo O\ O ? N

c?
A I H
?
??
M 00
a°
? s
...
?. ?
0
s
.?
a?
?o
U y
a ?
o ?
C
bo
? U
?b
oCr-I
? a
?
'o U
? m
? N
3 a'
"C5 ?
o?
O .?
O q
a?
a? Y
O O
A A
? *
?r
a?
oq
a
?
G4
?
0
??
zw
?
?o
U
E-+
?
O
?
?
a
0-4
E?
?
0
u
z
(L)
a
?t
aA
.?
a?
b
?
M
?
?
W
?

?
+ +

?
?
?

z ?.
A '
W
F
U

Q,

Q ? ? o 0

?A a
?
cn
O
?
? ?
cn
Z
a z o
?
?
?
?

m O ? ? ? o
?

°
?

?Z w x w"

? Q
? ? U U
I--1 ?1 L
? U G

o z
? ?
,'? M v? co
?

U •--? N
? A
?
3 ?
o •°
?. ?
os
0
?
o?
?
?o
?
G ?
?
? w
b o
a U
c ?
o r--
> ?
?
o U
? M
3 a'
o aC
o
O q
a?
O o
A A
? *
kr)
0
t:lo
a
?
?
?
O
z?
w
aW
?
?O
U
F
?
0
?
?
?
a
?
?
0
U
?
z
?
?
?t
.?
on
.?
a?
3
M
?
?
w
?
? ? ?
?o
00
a U
i + +
?
z

W ?
?
W
?
...

z ?.
A '

?
?
a

Q E rx o o

U

a ..
w
?

a z ?
,
a?

'o^

V) °

w
0
E? C7 Q ? en

Z W ? t?

4

Q U ?
?

? ? M
~ y y

?D
.-? G

.? G

.
?
N ,.? t/? 0.1 OG

U ? ?
R]
W ?
00
b?
o ?
50
?
o?
.?
., o
?
S?
b?
?w
b?
o ?
? b
b ?
°v ?
?
?a
?
?
'o U
? M
3 a'
oa
Fw c!
14
O .y
?L O
G
? cq+3
i ?
? N
A A
? *
14D
4)
?
a
?
?
?
C/]
0
zW
?
Hz°
U
?
o?
?
0
?
?
?
?
a
F?
?
Q
?
0
?
z
?
?
?
?
.?
?
b
3
N
7:1
C/1
.?
?
?
M
?
?
?
W
?
? ?p kn v-) ?o In \o 00 00 %o

z a
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+ tn
+
?
? 1 oo t- t- t- a ND t- \D Nv

w
?

z ?.
A ?

?
v

, , , , , . , , , ,
a

..,
? a a ? a a a a g x a a x x
Q E" ? o 0 0 0 0 0 0 ? o 0 0 0 0
O o0 .--? ON O O, d v7
?
U o
O y
cn

° cn
'
x
a z o cn
?

0
H cn ? N N m ?-+ v1 00
' ON O V
Ul V
7 v1 1D ?

? o O
tn
?
cn ? - - - - -

?
wa "
Z w w

x ?.
' ..
¢ Q
o ? "IM? v u v U V U V 'l7, U V V aa w
?
¢ ? 3 3

? ?D M fn vl Cn tn V1 Vi N M y Vl V] ?
? ? G G C C p C G ? ? ? G b y.V.,
Z4 ;6
.-a C? G? C?I W al a1 C? GU c/? CG Ga Pa R?. U

? A
0
cd 00
3 ?
o .o
w ?
?
00
? y
?
?
C6?
.?
? -?
?
?
o?
0
? .?
.b O
?
?
b Q
G ci
•? U
?b
?
o ?
?a
?
?
'o U
? m
T ?
ct?
o a
?L O
?
a ?c
0 0
A A
? ?
?
?
?
a
?
?
?
?. a
zw
U
E?
?
?
O
?
?
a
?
E-?
?
?
0
?
z
?
a
?
t1o
.?
?
?o
?
M
?
?
W
?
wa?
?
?,
M
z w ? + +
? 00 \0

VO
?
a ?

?
w
cn
0
„
z ?.
A '

?
U
?

?
Q ?
?
? a
o a
o
a A
? o
O

A Q
?o cf)

?
a
z roo
o
?
?
x
?
?za o
?

?j
? ..+ M

?

wzwrx
w c
n
Q
cz) C7
W ? U U
Q U ?

o ?
?D z
M
v?
v?
?
? ..?, ..?.

E-? ,? v? GQ PG
U ?-+ N
W
a
A
.:
00
3 ?
? .?
N y
o?
? o
b ?
>
0
b?
a
?
?w
G ?
•? U
? b
.. ?
O ?
?
o U
G M
? N
3 ¢'
o ?
o ?
?
? Cd
O O
A A
4 ?
oc
(1)
?
a?
?
?
?
O
a
Z r?
a?
?
H°z
U
O?
0
?
?
?
a
?
?
0
?
z
?
?
?
?
.?
?
•o
3
M
0
?
w
?
+ +

?
a

?

w
?
?

z ?.
a ?

?
U
A
a
`? o x a
Q ? 1? o 0
a
A
~
?
?
?
~
M

a
w .?

?

a z ?
?

? a ?
p1
aa O ? ? , °°

w
0

? cn ?o
?
? "
Zwrx w

o ¢
"
cz) W g U U
U ?
Q

o ? z
? an) C?31

In

? 00 0-1
a A
00
3 °
o •°
?. ?
? G
?
0 o
a?
W)
o?
?
?o
8 N
>
0
? t)
?
,
?w
b ?
c ?
•? U
? .d
o ?
> ?
? a
?
?
'o U
? m
`n N
cC ?
o
cu
o .?
?
a?
00
a A
4 :21
?
?
ao
a
?
?
?
0
zW
?W
?
?
Hz°
U
H
?
?
C)
?
?
a
F
?
?
0
U
?
z
?
?
0
.?
-o
?
N
C/2
?
w
cri
?
?
?
W
?
[? "? ¢
?
M
M
'cf
M
C+1
M
M
C?
?O
?p
Q?
?
i + + + + +
z ? ? + + + + + + +

?o ?O \0 ?o ?

?
?
0
z ?.
A '
W
E?
U
A
a
? ? ? a .? ? ? a o x a a x x
?
d ? ? o o o o o o o p: o o o o o
3 A v] p? ? m m N ? ? [? M ? [? M
U °
y
O
? ??
>
?
A
Q 1y1
?,

?
`?
=
`
=
- ?
?
`
=
=
Z o ? ?
a Z o U
?

V
kn
In oo
kn rn
W) O
\O ?
tn

?
F C7 ? o
•.?
m 0
?
cn

UO
-
c ?
'
?
w? o n o
a
Z w w
? > >
Q Q

¢ " 3 3

M rn
N ?n
N v?
N v?
? cn
C? ?n
a? vi
N M
`"" v?
N (n
a? ?n
? U
y
•?
? ? ? ? G G C C C C ? p
?0 ?
rA q
n •d U
"
?+ ,? v? al G? GG 0.
1 W W f]q C/a pq ?A
A W ? C.)
w
U ? N m ? v? ?O t? 00 0\ O
-. *-?
-. N
-+
c? A . . r
r:
00
ca °O
3 °
"C?
O
W ?
o ?
?
.. o
? N
?
G
?o
? U
?b
?
o?
?
?a
?
?
?0 U
? `^
N
cd
? a
oa
O .
g, O
?
c,3
A A
? *
0
?
?
c?
a
v?
?
rA
zW
.?.1 W
rA
E-?
?
H°z
U
O
?
?
?
a
?
?
?
0
?
z
a
a
?
?
an
.?
?
M
?
?
W
?

+ +

a

w
?
?
o
z ?.
A

?
U
?

Q ? ? o o
A o`r'o o
? ? ~
? ?
O
F" ? >
"' A Q

a z o

?
?

0
?

? o

?
Z w x w

>

? ¢
b
z
O W ? U U
¢ U ?

a ? z
(((???,,,,,,

r"
? ?
..?i N
..?.

W ? N
U
p?
c?
Q
?
00
?00
o •?°
w ?
o ?
?
?
0
? F
.. o
b -q
o ?
0
? .?
a
? W
'b o
o U
?
.. ?
ocl-
> ?
?
?
'o U
? M
3 a'
? a
O .?
O q
a ?s
cn a
0 0
A A
4 *
?
?
?
?
a
rr?
?
v?
O
,Rt ?
zW
U
E-
?
?
?
?
a
H
?
?
0
U
.?
z
?
a
?
.?
'b
?
M
?
?
W
?
°I + +
Z

w
?
0
„
A ?

?
U

a
a

Q ? R: o
o
U
O
A ..

?

a Z ?

N
? &
'n N
w
0
H C7 Q ?
cn ?
?

z w a w"

Q ¢
? W ? U U
¢ U ?
?
?
p; z

? ?
? G
. C

W
U oo ?

.:
00
?00
3 ?
o •S
w :3
0 0
o ?
?o
o?
U ?
O
? ..?i
.d O
G
bo
a ?
o v
.?
?
o?
? a
4
? U
? M
N
T ?
o ?
? ..y
?
0 O
?
a ?e
0 0
?1 A
? *
N
?
?
c?
a
?
?
?
zk
w
aCOO
?
F-? O
U
?
?
?
0
?
?
?
?
?
?
0
U
?
z
?
?
?
?
.?
a?
•o
?
?
?
?
?
M
r,
?
?
W
?
n
?T It kn 'Rl' v ?r ?r c
U +
?
z a + + + + + + + + + + +

? \0 \0 \0 - v k \ 'M
oN
\O
\O
\O [
\O n
?O N
?D n
?D D
?O h
?D V
M

?
C/]
?

z ?.
A ?

?
U
?

a
? ? a ? ?a a a ?a a o x a a x x
? o o o o o o o u; o o o o o
ul
oo ?
O V1
N ?
N H
? O
O C=
M '?
00
N
?--?
O
?
?? > x
A
? cn Q
i
? ..
?

C4 ?
a z o ?

? N
O
C
j] t 2 It

0
•" n
?O M
?D
?O
?O
?D
?O
?O
?
V1
vo01
Vl O
?O V
?
kn

?
[? ? o
++
M 0
?
M

C4 ? ? -

zw? " "
x w w
? > >
O d ¢
? W
-r ?
+ U U U U U U U ? U U U r?a W
F E
? r
? 3 3

M rn cn rn
cn CA
N fn
N cn
N ?n
cn M rvn? v) rn U

V
? ? ? ? ? ? G G C ? G C G •O „
4
O ? D ? D O O D D ?„ ? ? D N ?
['i ?l VJ Rl R1 L?1 W 0.1 W f? V] GG W C? LYi U
U ? N M d ?n ?D t? oo O? O ? N
? A
?
00
??:g
00
3 ?
o •?
? y
tz?
O Q
O ?
o ?
n ?
.n
0
5 ?
G ?
o ?
O
? .?
.b O
O
?w
b?
G ?
•? U
.? ?
.. ?
o?
G U
N M
N
?. ?
? a
"I C',
o ?.
N ?
O .?
O ?
ace
O O
A A
? *
u
?
a
?
?
?
a
zW
?
H°z
U
H
O?
?
?
?
P,
F?
?
?
0
U
?
7
?
a
?
0
.?
?
-e
3
cri
?
v?]
w
?

?

w
?
0
„

A ?

?
U

a

Q ? ? o 0

V o
o
F a ?

a Z o

I?
,--i
?

?
Z
`.? 'o^
?

?
F C7 Q m
?
? co?
?Z w ? w

O 4

? w ? U U
Q Q G

?
M
?

Fti.
W
?-+
N
V

0
3 ?
o °
0 0
? y
?
?
0
?o
? .?
S ?
?
O
? .?
b o
?
,
?• w
bo
?
a ?
•? U
? b
o ?
?a
? N
cC ?
3 a'
oa
O .?
o ?
R, cd
0 0
A A
? 21
?
?
?
?
a
?
a
?
?a
zw
a?
?
Hz°
U
E?
O?
?
?
a
?
?
0
.c
z
?
?
?
?Q
.?
?
M
?
?
?
w
?
W ? ?
? ?o 00
+
+

a ?

a
w
?
?
o z ?.
A '
W
F
U
W ?
a
a,
? b
Q ? c? o o
a A ? r- o
?
I N

w

a z
?
? I--1
w •0
?
?
a?apw
o
?
°

w
O

Ln va
o ?c
?
? cn
Z w x u"

7 ¢
zo C
W ? U U
Q U ?
o
? z
M
?

?
? .
? o a
? a
U 00 C?
W ?
.:
00
??g
00
3 ?
o •?
o S
o r,
0
a
b ?
? ?'
y
?.?+ ?
? h
b ?
c
? W
b?
C ?
•? ?
?b
.? ?
o?
?
?
- w N
cd °?
o ?
? cn
o 'o
?
a. ci
y Y
? 0
A A
? ?
?
?
a?
Cd
a
v?
?a
?
0
a
zW
U
H
?
?
0
?
?
?
?
a
F?
?
?
0
U
..L.,"
?
z
?
?
?
.?
H
?
N
'O
?
?
?
ri
?
?
W
?
? V) in in kr) ?10 ul) \o oo oo ?o ?
cn
z + + + + + + + + + + + +

? o oo ?o t-- r- o, ?o

w
?
?
z ?.
A '
W
F?
U

a
`? a a a a .? ? ? o x a a x x
? o
M o
M o o o o o r? o o o o o.
:
p A ,.? (? O? M
? 00
O M
O 00
o0 00 a\ 00
O 00
ON N
O C-
tn
a
0
?
a
a
cooA Q x

?Z o ? '? :
tn
a z o ?
?
pn? r
?

? kn cn '-. N N m ? w tn
vi oo
tn o\
v'> p
\O V
in
°
? w

y.
o o
? - ? -
?

?
w? o
"
Z w w

O 4 ¢
cz) C7 ? U U U U U U U ? U V U PU W
Q U rw
3 ?
3

C) ? z ?
cu
Q

? ?
? ,..a GG Oa GU P? GG W G? /] P? Fa Gq R; U
U ?-+ N m ? ?n 00 0N o +? N
c? A
00
co ?
3 ?
? o
o •?
? c
O
?
.?
o.y ?C
•Y ?
?
0
?im
?y
a ?
?
N ?
?
?
? W
b ?
0
? CQ
o ?
•? U
? .d
o ?
a; a
?
'o U
a M
ca ?
3 a'
o?
o .?
O ?
a?
.?
O O
A A
4 *
?
?
?
?
a
?
?
?
O
zW
a?
?o
U
?
?
O
?
?
?
a
?
?
?
?
z
?
a
kIl
?
?
.?
?
?
M
0
?
w
C/)

H ?
M
M
{.N
+
+
? ? ?
?
w
?
?
o
z ,;
A

?
U

Q ? ? o 0
?
A
~
?
C'N
?
q
Q V $ ~
E" ? >

a Z o
?
ti
cn

?

cn M

?
z
wa w"

p W ? U U

o ? z
? ? m n H
? .
a
a
?
? ..a t/] ft1 ?G

?J
?
A
00
T?
3 ?
o •?
o ?
o?
? o
U y
cn >
?
O ~
? y
?
?- w
? o
? cts
o v
.?
o?
?a
? U
cm M
N
>, ?+
3 ¢'
o R,
0 ?
O
R
p. cd
N ?
?1 A
4 *
?
?
?
?
a
v?
?
?
? a
zW
?W
?
?o
U
H
ON
?
?
?
a
?
?
0
u
z
?
a
?
an
.?
?
b
?
M
?
?
w
?

U
z + +
a

?

w
?
?
z ?.
A '
W
F
U

a
?. y

a
A
~
?
?
M
Q
a
U
,
.?

a
Z ?
?
's
a
b ? ?

w
g

?
?
Zu
x w

Q d
U U
U ?
¢

o ? z

? .

W
U 00 Q\
? Q
ao
3 ?
w
w ?
? -?
? o
o?
.?
0
?
o ?
0
? cn
b ?
?
?w
bo
o ?
? b
?
o?
?
?C U
? M
N
?. y
3 ¢'
o a?,
'? ..?+.
o c
rz? cC
N N
0 0
A A
? *
00
?
a?
Cd
a
?
?
?
0
'RT?
zW
a W
?
hz°
U
?
?
O
d'
?
?
a
?
E?
t-"
?
0
?
z
?
?
?
.?
?
a?
?o
?
?
w
ri
?
?
?
W
?
w a¢
M
M
?T
M
M
M
?'
I?
lp
1p
O\
?
a U . + + . + + . . + . '}' .
rC-'
F7
? oo ?O In v1 v'> >O kn

a ?
w
14
z '
?
A '
W
E?
U
?
F?
a
? ? .? a ? a a a o x a a x x
? o o o o o o o c2 o o o o o

a
La
?
o? t-
,--? t?
cn cV
m t-
N N
,--? fV
?t M
t- N
cn N
N oo
t? tYi
cn
o ? °
y

cn
a Z o

z c? 'o^
'n
tn oo
tn O\
v'> O
\O V

? ?
a a •
o ?
?
F CJ ¢ o
w
M 0
?
M
- - -
? o o
o ? cn
x
?
? " "
Zwr w w
? > >
O ¢ ¢
cz)
? W
F•. ? U U U U U U U ? U V U P? W

o ? z ?
rT
?^
?

Q
M

?
h
y
h
H
y
v?
v?
m
N
cv??
Vi ?

q?j

•s=+
? -+
r .C ? p
7 ? Q G G ? C? C C
`" 'Cf
, a ? ? ?
? ?n in c
n ?n O
? ? v] Ga L? (?G CG W Ga GA C
/] G?l ? GQ 0.?i U
U ? N cn ?' vl ?D t? oo O? O ? N
F?. Q
?
00
T ?
3 ?O
0
o p
g
?
?
0
?
.. a
b ?
a ?
o ?
0
.d o
? W
b O
o cz
'y U
?b
U ?
?a
?
0
= U
N m
N
?
'C U
o aEi
'? • i
O ?
G
a?
O O
A A
? *
?
a)
?
a
C/]
?
?
CI?
?t O
z?
Hz°
U
H
?
O
?
?
?
HQ
F?I
U ?
?o
?z
z
M
?
?
?
W

?
Z a ? + +

w ?
w
?

o ?

?
U
A
a

Q ? ? o 0
3 o?o o
?
¢
l
?
-
cn
p
z
a z o
?
?

? cn
?
@)

?

? 70
C,D

? "
Z w x w

4

U
3
? ?
O W '
? v? rr i

W ? N

?.
00
b ?
0
w ?
O
.?
y ?
o ?
.? o
?
V y
0
? .?
b?
?
b o
? 0;
?03
•? U
ob
., ?
o?
?
? U
? c'
? N
T y
3 R'
o ?
o
O ?
G
? A
? *
0
N
N
c
a
?
?
?
? a
zW
?
? O
U
?
o,
0
?
?:s
?
?
pA
U ?
? O
z
z
M
?
?
?
w
?S] ? Q
V'i
vn
°zau + +
? C) m

w
a
w
?
?

z ?.
A ?

?
?
?

a

a A ?E ? o

A ?

a z @)
?

z > b ? ?°
? ?
w
0
F? C7 Q ? m
?

?
w o CC
Z
..
O ¢

Q U ?

o ?; z
? G G
?
? ..-a PG PQ
W
U CO O\
W
?4
Q
r:
00
3 ?O
o •?
i
00
-b
,tl t
0
-fl o
>
O
Q v?i
.y O
G
bo
o ?
•7 U
?b
?
o?
?
?a
h
o U
G cn
3 R"
o a
b .?
O C
? N
A A
a *
?
N
?
?
a
?
?
?
zw
a?
?
Hz°
U
H
rn
0
?
?
a
? A
U ?
?o
?z
z
C'r1
?
?
04
DO
W
?
z ? ? t + t + + + + + -F + } +

? 1.0 \C ?

a
w
?
?
z ?
Q ?

?
U
?

G?
a
?, F a ? ? a a ? a o rx a a x x
¢ ? ? o 0 0 0 0 0 0 ? o 0 0 0 0
v- i
00 vi
O vi
N o
N vi
? p
O o
cn -? kri
oo o
N o
? o
O vi

r?
•--i
.-+
?--i
?--i
?
?--i
?
.-?
e? .
e-ti \ ?f
?--i
V o ?
O
?
n
c
A
Q
.?
? C-0

a Z o ?
? y

? V
!? ? ?• ?D ?D ?D ?O ?O ?O ti0 ? v? v? ON
v'? O
?O ?
tn

? o
0

m

wr? " w
w
? > >
Q Q ¢
? `? ? U V U C? U U U ? U U V aa w

? v 3 3
O
? M fn vi v? Vi w Vi V? M ?n tn v? U
? z ,--? .? .? .? .? .? .? ,? ? ,? .? .? ?o ?
? 7
? ,..a r? r.? r? a7 m rsa aG w C4 w aa rx U
U •-? c? m ? v? ?o t? 00
W Q
00
cl ?
3 ?
o ?
0 0
?
?
H ?
?
?
.. o
b ?
U y
O
G
?
bo
?t4
? U
? b
?a
? U
? M
T N
cC y
'U U
? a
?
°oa 'o
?
a m
? L
0 0
A A
? *
,-0
? ?
? O
? a
W ?
E"o
n
.C
z U
?
wHz
W
F W ?
?
°zz
?
? M
.--i
x~
w ?
Q 0 W o 0 o Q ? W o 0 o Q p W o 0 0
U ? U ? U ?
¢ az? az
?
a„ C. 0 0 ? A F p o 0 0 ? p? q o 0 0

??ad ? ?a ? ?aQ
.?
w Q C?
F'v?CU
U
O
O
O
W¢?
U
u
--?
O
? .?
W¢?
U
U
O
O
O
0 ? ?
q
w m X
W r? W
X
7 Gq o .? .?
?
a
4UF a?
V? aVE?
?
¢? Q o 0 o .
Q? Q o 0 0 ¢? Q o 0 0

V7
(?
(V oo
p?
01
/?
? V] d
Pc? ~
N

~ oo

ON
L/]
W
U Q
C? ~
C`1 00

?

'
Ov ? av ? v? ?
? ? v?
? E-?
O x F
O
Q ? ? ? ? ? p

N o
N F ? U A ? C14 F ? U A ?
t-- o
N

?
n N
n N
n

V)
s C?
?
C\
a
g C?
?
?
;
g
?
?
; N
? N
? N

?W-1 ^ ? ? ? w ^
? C-- "D
v
i? ?
°z °z °z

? cr cr
O
W) O
l, cc
?O
tn (D
t, oo
?o O
W) p
t- 00
?D

W
o ?
? ?
o S o^ o^

z? zw °
o? 07 oZ ? o oz E
? o?

? w? w
^x a
a w
' ?
w ? a w
> w
a
x? ,-,¢ >? x , ..¢
; ? » x? ^¢
; »
y ? Vf C)
?r V]
' C)
?D
'
Qz ?`- W
Q? •O
?
y? O
??
?° ?°

? z? zo z? z-s 3 z? za
M
.--i a"
O
C
?
W
rn Gi. W
v5 p, ? W
N Q
W ? N
?
b
?
O
? b
a?
?
? o
> o
? w
?a
G C
w ?
O V
s. y
?
U O
N ?
o ?
w?
?
?
Cd o
? o
O W
N ^?7
., a
w
o 0
¢
O
?
w T?
O N
W) r--
- N
V')
z
?
Q
H
A?
U F w o 0 o Q0
U F W o -. o o ci0
U F
0 w o 0 0
az? az? a
?
?QF Q o 0 0 ?A? q o 0 0 ?AF (? o 0 0

??a ??
Q

wQr?
F-? va U
U
o
0
o o
,
W¢p;
U
U
o
0
o
WQp;
U
C,J
o
0
0
o
?
W pq
o .. .., ?? W Cq
o r.• .-• ??
W
r?
o
? o ?
? 0
?

U U U
r ¢ o 0 0 ¢ ¢ o 0 0 ¢?F' Q o 0 0

v]
W

O Q
al
v M
? O
?
?
h
;
v)
C4 W Q

c ?`?

~ O

o,
/\
1
1

W

?

•v

~
A

?
Z ? v? ?OZ ? v? OZ t- cn

?OA

b
N C) O

Q
N
N

0
\0 \-O ? N ? ? F

W S C14 ?°o W g c-i ?°o w

?¢ o ? ?o aQ wp ? ?o a¢ ? c? ?o
rn pq
-- 'C7 o
? ?n
?O v
?D W a1
i„?,? •b O
,-, '?
?O ?
?o w
?,?„i ,.0
r,
ID
z z z

cr
0 0 ? o o ? o o ?

W
O? O ^
2 Ri
0 ;s o ^ o ^
? ? +
+
? ? `
1?
z a
0 ?? ?i
E y (/?
r?i W
-
r! 0 ?-+

G N

F-. W
?
.?. O ]

? ?
Q

Ow G

Q
.?.

0 Z
a?
7 w>
Q ?"x
^ ?
aE-?,„a
In w'
Q wx
^ aE-?.4 o4
..Q
^

U 'n ? ? > v
W
cn ??
cli ?V, Q ? ?`o
Q? ? Ln U)
Q 30 3?

U ? 30 ??

U ?
?
30 3?

U
r
,
Iv?l ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? •?

W
?
V GL
o ? M C?J
O U rn ?
O W
A M CdJ
? ? M G.
o
D ? C/) ? ? ?

?
"' a, cn W k
W
v? w
Q
v? P. cn W

Li

y
r!;
??
?
-
ni
WL
-
c- ? ?i
O?
?
O
?
?
?
?
H
?-+
Q
?
?
U
?
?
c?
z
?
>
?
b
?
?
?
?
?
?
z
M
--1
?
--4
?
?
3
?
0
c
?
cl)
? o
? O
? a
cnw
c,
0
y"" U
O ?
U O
n? w
o v?
W
1.?.
y
a?
IL)
?
cz o
b o
U
4y-Q
0 ?
e
?
o cz
Q
0
.-. ?
w ?
O N
W) n
- N
,-? O
?
?
W a
Z U ? b
?zzaa
Q??o
? r..+
Q
°zz
?
? M
--i
W ?
?
Q 0 w o 0 0
U ?
a Z ?

? q F A o 0 0
0
C)
U
a
u
w¢c? U o 0 0
F"' rn U

?
w
? pq o 0 0
O W ?
? U ?

06 ? n

4
o
N ?r
? v F-?
?
Q? M
? O h h
N

CD
? ?
? v
z

cr
o0
tr) oo ?

o o ^
I

? D x
z
0
~ w ? [? 7
v
? ?
¢
?
cn
Q 7
? ? 'D
N G4
o NLo
c r- ? va
3? 3
z? zo
M Ua M R+
U ?
?
O
C
cn a? ?''w
--? N
?
3
?
O
?
?
?
?0
>o
? a
? w
a> ?
w
a ?
O ?
?Y
U O
w ?
?
? N
b ?
?
7 ?
cNd
?y
?
? b
a ?
?g o
? ?
? o
Y U
O pa
N ^0
'a
w ?
o Q,
?
w b
O N
'-+ (y
vN
?
? H
? O
U
wzz
aa?
¢?>
a ?
Cl) ?
O ?
z?
?z
? M
.--i
?

¢

H O? N o 0 0
U
0
?
U

?

o 0 0
?oz
?z
Q N O O O

?i
N

.-a
C) O O O

a ?
W
? ?
?
~ o 0 0
O
?
o ? o 0 0

w
?
A N v? t?

?
U ?
W)
o
?n
?
0
v
o
0
0
A

W
O
?
? o

? '
?

a

a
?
o ¢
0

w
o?
?z ;
' ?b
¢o
b
? In ? x
QQ 3 a 3 y
?
U
z ;
zx
a
E,,,i c+? Q M V
--?
.
Cv C/] [?/]
?y
?
V? ? N

¢
?
U?O?N o 0 0
a C) U
?

?
'? W '"
? z o 0 0
a,
? °
z
?
cn
¢ ?
N
O
O
O
?
U
? ?
o 0 0 0

w ? o 0 0
°
z
?
? o
? 0 0 0

?
W
? ? [- y? fV
?

V `r o 0 0
?

° o 0 0
A

O
r o

? ?
?

cn ?
z o 0

za o
?
w ?
w

a C5
Q Q ?
?°
?
W W c? C x
?
z; zx
W

-- N

¢

[-? O? N O O O

0
?
U

?

W Q
a ?
0
0
0

?
C') z
C/) W)
Q n O O O
?
N

a
O O O p
? N
a ON
W
r/I ? o 0 0
O
z

?
?
0 0 0 0 0

w ?
tn
0
?
?
U
?
° a o 0
n
?
C?
? o i
Cl)
?

O
W ? ?

Z 0
z

°
w
w
? ;
Q >cl
¢ o
?

U? ?
t?
W W c ? ? ?

Q 3° 3Y
W Z; zx
m a M
?
(4C O
Q
? En
C/] V]
Q
W N
N
z
a
?
F
?
a
?
0
O
.fl
a?
a?
?
? N
?z
?a
?
m
? .?
?
Cd U
o?
C C
Q Q
?--? N
1%0
W
?-?
?L
rn
?
0
?
?
?
?
?
?.+
Q
?
?
?
?
?
>
?
?
?
?
C
?
z
?..i
M
.-1
?
.--?
?

¢
?
U
O?N o 0 0
?
0 U
?

?
Q'? W
="
wa- o 0 0
H
rn v? U
?
¢ n o 0 0
a
? N
O O O O
?
? N

W tA O O O
0
z

x ?
?
p o 0 0 0

W ?
?
Q
?
U ?
~ ?o o ?c
a

°
v o 0 0
n
?

o o ?
?
l
a ? ? o
0
w
a' Z
>
¢ Q o

Qa

?
? °

3 CL)
3
?

F ?
M ¢ zx

?
M O
W ?p N ? ?O

C/) N

Q
Q
H x
(? O? N
O
O
O
U
C) U
?
? W Q
o 0 0
v??U
?oz
?z
?
¢ W)
n
o
0
0
:
a
U
z
?t
o
N 0 0 0
?

(S,? A O O O
°
z
x
?
?
?p o 0 0 0
W C\ r h N
?
a
U ? o 0 0
?

°
v o 0 0

0 0 ?
tn

cn Coll
o
W
z

z
E

o

o
?
Ov> ^
> ?i^
¢ cl

U z
W
Q? 3s 3?
z ; zx
W
? M Q M ?t

w ? iv V] ?

N
Ga
F ? _
O? N
O
O
O
Q O ?
?

? W
?
W4
,
'? ? ;'
o
0
0

?z
Cl)
Q ?
n
o
0
0
?
N
O O O O
a
? N

CIO ^.•
0
z

x ?
?
p a o 0 0
W O V1 v)
?

w ?
o
r-
?

°
v o 0 0
• n

?
0 ?
?

w
z ?
o ?
? F
Q
z w
0

0
Q

u
W W ?
c?
C x
QA 3s 3
?

W ?
z > zx
Q MQ m?t
C
i
W ? N
z
a
?
H
w
O
E
0
0
.n
?
? N
?z
?a
? aa
Ci F
c .?
p
u? •
cd U
>, _r_
o .?
.O .a
C C
'fl 'U
Q d
? iV
o?
?
°
?D ?
C/1 ?
? O
U
zu?b
wzz?
o
?w> z
1--1 b
?z
? M
?
?

¢
?
AFa
_
E-+ O? N
O
O
O
C)
U
?

a
?; o 0 0
Cn w) U
z
?
z
?

Q N O O O

?i
?
N
f--1
a
O O O O
?

py tA o 0 0

°
z
04 -
0 0 0 0 0
?
?

? A O M M
?
?
W ?
u l- N O?

°

v o 0 0

o
0
? ?

a
..., `° ¢
cn
? o H
° "
w
o

F ;
, ?^
¢ ?

a
¢ O
?

?
Q 30 3
z; zx
M Q m
'
D
4
LO En
LI) cn
?
N
N
z
a
Aa
H
?.
0
E
0
0
?
(U
(U
?
fV
?
.C C
? y
?
? •
Gd U
r- o
o?
P p
C C
Q Q
•-+ (V
U)
J
?
W
J
V rL
O
Z
a
W
J
?
LLI
?
U
0
LLI
?
I..L
o
?
CN?
M
M
C0
O
N7
('
CC
M
M
T

?
C\l N

C'7 ?

=

EL ?

,-
ICT
v N
Lr) N
v cq
? co
'tv m
cf) m
v
c`! = O

00 L
w Q o0 O (D I? I? rn CO rn

U = U)

cr oo 0) ? ? t0() ? d?'
'tt ?
d'
w
O ?
? O
'
.?. Q
0 c0
u cD
c?p d:
[? M
CTO U?
tp c0
C?D c0
i? c0
Lmfj
? T
?
? U
CC
o

°

?
?
°
?
T
?
?
°

O
0 N c
c ? ? c
o c
fl c
o ? c
fl
?
?
Q ?

?
Q p
?
T co
c?o n
c?o ci
w er
? Un
c?c cc
? cc
cvc co
?
?

?
? v/
_j
W
Ln O
? T
0 CO
n 00
ti ?
c?o T
ti m
CD ?
c?0
^
'
V
! w
O
? J '^
N N
? N
? OR
ti 00
ti T
? T
n T
n T
r
? T
Cf) ? r O 00 tn N O CO ?
? ? Q 0 Co O tn M G> C?? ? M
Z m co ? ? ? ? o ? ?

} O
L_ v
r ?
Z `^
J
? ?

C? f?
ln
N
T N
lA
N
T Cs?
Cfl
M
r a0
I-
C7
T N
4
N
r CO
C'7
N
T I?
r
T
T tn
O
T
T

?
O >

/
U ? D
O

Z
(0 ?
T C\J

T th
T

T N
N

r OD
N

T o0
0

T LQ
0

T
00
O)
?
O
O)
?

0 O N
? C?
? N
? CG tA
° M Q>
? O
? N
?
? () ? ?
?

c ?
n
? ? CO T

Z

T

(0
t-

? ?
O

i
V-

?
>
Q

N (D

?

J

?

M
(D

?

J

? U)

E

2

LL

>
Q

? (D

C?

J

?

J

?

p

Ll.

-
>
Q

N

C

?
J

G

J

Ln

p

L

ll'?,
>
Q (D

(6

J

C

J

LO

? U)
Z ?
U)
C
C ?

T
? t-

O C

?
z

O
(D

z

z

? C

z

a
? W
? O ?
V M Q M
? ?
? C'l)
w c0
cc M
? p
?

?
U)
W

cn
cc
cn
o
-?
CC
cn cn

0
m
cn w

°
? CL ? r N C6 ef
ui
H
0
z
U)
J
?
W
-j
VJ
O
z
a
W
J
0
?
U
?
rr
EL
?
?
m
0
Z

0 00 OC) co 00
T T r T
T _
?

C\j
N

M
?

=

^

?
o
0
?
T
00

v
Ln

v
?

v
N

?
C! = O

L
.? O ri r N c?
? 4-0
? ?
V (n ap ? ? v v
=
W
p o O
?
?

?
o
?
cq
?
O?
?
?
?
??
U) W
? O rn c?
° oo M

O
? N ? c
c ? ?
cr

Q

o

F-
a
o

°

r O?

? U?

? cq

?
ll?

?
?
?
CO)

? vJ

w

?
LO
N

c?0
00

c?o
N

c?0
00

C^O
U)
w

?
?''4
? rn
? Ci
? o
?
C T
-
?
Z ?
? Q
m
`n ?
? ?
ti ?
? ?
?

? ?
? ?
N
?
?
?
c0
?
M
?
?
0 0
U ? 0
f- h
C° rD
°° ll?
?
°°
n

? O N o
?
?

M Nt (0

Z VJ

0 r^
VJ
0 D

0 VJ

0
M U- LL LL U-
T-

? C)

Q

N

C?
? N

Q

? N

Q

?
-71
a
)
Q
?
Z ? ?
Cn ?5 '?5 i?
0 t-

? U
O
CL

z O

;

z

z

v

z 16
O
a

O

U ro

T ¢
co M
CD
T "t
vJ '^
? m
T
T o
T
? CO
T
T a

_

`i /??
?/
W ?+
LL
cn j ry
LL
cn O

- Lry
i.
cn VJ

0 ?

cn ?
?..
?
? EL ? r N M 19T
c?
U.
Q
r
? ?
c? cti cCi ? c?S ?

0
? a a a ? ?
64 a

?

a

oN
-4
z
n
n
? a ? ?n ?n o

i ? N M N .-. N

? M ? M x N
z U h
A
?
?
?
?

A
? ?
? ? x ?
L M
Q ?

?
•--I
I ? ? 0 aI ?
E'' oO ? N ? N
? Q W
p
• d' v? ?t Ud M
? --? ? U
??" ? U N N N

? ?
?
U
?.a

M

o
d-
?

o

o ?
?•
a N

o
o

?
v
r 4-4
1

?
C1 .

?
O?
0

p M
r 4 M
"--i
; ? x va o ? o o w o
o 64 o ? o 0 0

E?

> ?

oo

`n

W

?
,-,
'b

`n
o o
o
? o
o o
o

?

cn

C)? ?
U
a' Q w w w r?
--? N M d-
;
T
CL)
0)
?
Q?
()°
- -
LL J
LL D
? m
? 0
F- z
F F
H E-+ H a? E?
? CU (a
) u
? . a
(n
u
M
U U U U

?
?a

`. v1
? 0 ? ?

CA
Cd
o
o
0
0
0
0
N
z A ?
: ; ?c W.) ? o
N M N r? N
? ' z x ?

? ? M ? M x N
z H
?
oQ ?
?

x

.? ?
tn 00
Q A
?
?

0 0 0
F ? o 0 0 o
?

M
? .,-.

U
? 1 U rn ? rn° rn a o°N
0
4-4
A o o
?, v? a? rn a?
94 ,M "C M
;'""' ??+ r/] O ?' O ,.[ O (.L? O
?? O O ? O .? O p O

0-4
E-? p
>
o?o
?o
W
?
'n
o
? o
o o
o
? fi, ? ? O W O ?t- O
?m ? O

z M V M ?I M W M
x s x ?, ?, ? ?

?
?
0

oo ?x o 0 0 0
U rx Q w w w rs.,
; m 7 71

N
0)
cm
co
a-
W
?
?
?
?
H
?
?
?
?
F--i
>
T
2 O? T T T T T T T
Q O T T T T T T T T
I H
l/') IqrM"t N QO O
N = N r0) It N ln t0 QO
tc') N T T p') p^j O 00
^, O Q T T (\J
r ln ln f7 CO 6) 1? CrJ
? ? _0) LLO Lf) 0 f? tn 1- N
O O rP- r I- Qrj (p
?.
-? ?Lnooocoror?
? O ?? co C?O 0) ? M N tM
C> _ •-
N ?
r- rn r- cfl aTr co 0
? N > ? cv ao ao lqt o m co
? O = CO 'Rt N N 00 I? - T
p N ?
?
U p NOrnt?rf?tntn
y ^, > m?ooLr,ru-) v
r C7 tn N ln f- M N
? O 0 N r r N r
?? I? r O0 D ? N fD 1?
O O =M N T r1* I? N O
a
°°°°a°o
? Q ?'y0 r????ao?y.cooooo00000000000
U? Q I- M r N CO to 1- CO
N N r p') r
? U
^ a
N C? N
O
p? p ?'?a ?????? O ??ooooo000000000
? N Up ?c?r
W
Q 0
?t-- c°?0c°no°oo°mo
Q Q U y O ?? OI?? M? O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
¢ N 6 p Q T N*- '- Tco NCF)
U
c?
a?
c?u o c?i °?°?a°ov.?°.c°? °o
M r- CV CO CO A Cfl
? N, J Y ? N C\j
?
z ~
w ?
°
?--? p, .a >- aoaaooo°°oo°°o
o
? O c? ?•`-' ?r-v"r?cor`'cv
N W Y co r, tv ao r cfl (3)00
?
nA C ? ?(SfQ -?f.. ? ? .i ?
/ \ ? . ? S5 - Q -Q
? E < Qa0Qt?QC?
m
C cn ZcWr)?z'?Z??
M
a)
co
ca
a