19960145 Ver 1_Complete File_19960213

Jy M SfA1[ p?
M O ?-'A
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TPANSPORTATION
JAMEs B. HUNT JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
February 1, 1996
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
6512 Falls of the Neuse Road
Suite 105
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615
ATTENTION: Mr. Mike Smith:
Chief, Northern Section
Dear Sir:
RECEi'v
FEB 1 17 1996
ENVlRONMENI AL ,1X;1LNCE,S
GARLAND B. GARRETT JR.
SECRETARY

1 3
l .,
Subject: Craven County, Widen US 17 (Clarendon Blvd.), Federal Aid Project
F-75-3(27), State Project No. 8.1171001, TIP No. U-2556.
Please find enclosed three copies of the project planning report for the above
referenced project. The proposed improvements include widening US 17 (Clarendon
Blvd.) to a six lane divided facility from SR 1278 (Trent Rd) to US 17 Business (Meuse
Blvd.) in New Bern. The widening will be done on the outside of the existing roadway.
As you know, US 17 at this location is heavily developed, therefore, impacts to
jurisdictional areas are minimal. The project will not involve any impacts to wetlands,
however, culverts at Wilson Creek and a tributary of Wilson Creek will be extended.
Impacts to surfaces waters resulting from this work are anticipated to be less than 0.10
acres.
The project is being processed by the Federal Highway Administration as a
"Categorical Exclusion" in accordance with 23 CFR 771.115(b). Therefore, we do not
anticipate requesting an individual permit but propose to proceed under a Nationwide
Permit in accordance with 33 CFR 330 Appendix A (B-23). The provisions of Section
330.4 and Appendix A (C) of these regulations will be followed in the construction of the
project.
We anticipate that 401 General Certification No. 2745 (Categorical Exclusion) will
apply to this project, and are providing one copy of the CE document to the North
Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources, Division of
Environmental Management, for their review.
?r
??r

If you have any questions or need additional information, please call Mr. Scott P.
Gottfried at 733-3141.
Sincerely,
?CLti
H. Franklin Vick, PE, Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
HFV/spg
cc: w/attachment
Wilmington District COE Office
Mr. John Dorney, NCDEHNR, DEM
Mr. Kelly Barger, PE, Program Development Branch
Mr. Don Morton, PE, Highway Design Branch
Mr. A. L. Hankins, PE, Hydraulics Unit
Mr. John L. Smith Jr., PE, Structure Design Unit
Mr. Tom Shearin, PE, Roadway Design Unit
Mr. G. R. Shirley, Jr., PE, Division 2 Engineer
US 17 (Clarendon Boulevard)
From SR 1278 (Trent Road) to US 70 Business (Neuse Boulevard)
New Bern
Craven County
Federal Aid Project F-75-3(27)
State Project No. 8.1171001
TIP Project U-2556

CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
DATE H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
r Planning and Environmental Branch
Cry _? ? ? 7'-? ? L(.?C1.??-l•' ??'", ?--'
DATE Nicholas L. Graf, P. E.
Division Administrator, FHWA
US 17 (Clarendon Boulevard)
From SR 1278 (Trent Road) to US 70 Business (Neuse Boulevard)
New Bern
Craven County
Federal Aid Project F-75-3(27)
State Project No. 8.1171001
TIP Project U-2556
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
August, 1995
Documentation Prepared in Planning and Environmental Branch By:
&Uv4A4( -3. -Mc 4A=__
Edward B. McFalls
Project Planning Engineer
,p 0
W s Stroud
Pro ect Planning Unit Head 6976
. 1iy
Lubin V. Prevatt, P. E., Assistant Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
I. Special Project Commitments ...............................
II. Need for the Proposed Project ............................. 2
A. General Description of Project ....................... 2
B. Project Status ....................................... 2
C. Purpose of the Proposed Project ...................... 2
D. Existing Conditions .................................. 3
1. Length of Roadway Section Studied ............... 2
2. Route Classification ............................ 3
3. Existing Typical Section ........................ 3
4. Existing Right of Way ........................... 3
5. Speed Limits .................................... 3
6. Access Control .................................. 3
7. Structures ...................................... 3
8. Traffic Data... .. ......................... 4
9. Horizontal and Vertical Curvature ............... 4
10. Intersecting Roads .............................. 4
11. Sidewalks.... ................................ 6
12. Railroad Crossings .............................. 6
13. School Bus Data ................................. 7
E. Capacity Analysis .................................... 7
F. Accident Analysis .................................... 8
G. Project Terminals .................................... 9
H. Thoroughfare Plan......... ............ .......... 9
I. Benefits to the State, Region, and Community......... 9
III. Description of the Proposed Action ........................ 9
A. Widening of US 17 .................................... 9
B. Widening of the US 70 Entrance Ramps at the
US 70/US 17 Interchange ......................... 11
C. Traffic Signal System ................................ 11
D. Structures ........................................... 12
E. Design Speed ......................................... 12
F. Access Control ....................................... 12
G. Intersection Improvements ............................ 12
H. Median Openings ...................................... 14
I. Right of Way ......................................... 14
J. Utilities.. . .. ............................ 14
K. Changes in the State Highway System .................. 14
L. Bikeways ............................................. 14
M. Sidewalk ............................................. 15
N. Cost Estimates ....................................... 15
0. Other Proposed Highway Improvements in the Area...... 15
P. Anticipated Design Exceptions ........................ 16
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
PAGE
IV. Alternatives to the Proposed Action ....................... 16
A. Recommended Improvements........ .... .......... 16
B. Widening Using a Shoulder and Ditch Typical Section.. 16
C. Widening Using a Curb and Gutter Typical Section..... 17
D. Postponement of the Proposed Action .................. 17
E. "Do Nothing" Alternative....... ................... 17
F. Alternative Modes of Transportation .................. 17
V. Social, Economic, and Environmental Effects ............... 18
A. Social Effects ....................................... 18
1. Land Use ........................................ 18
a. Status of Local Planning Activities........ 18
b. Existing Land Use .......................... 18
C. Future Land Use ............................ 18
d. Coastal Area Management Act
Consistency Determination .................. 19
2. Neighborhood Characteristics .................... 19
3. Relocatees ...................................... 19
4. Public Facilities.. ........................... 19
5. Historic and Cultural Resources ................. 20
a. Architectural / Historical Resources....... 20
b. Archaeological Resources ................... 21
6. Section 4(f) Resources .......................... 21
B. Economic Effects ..................................... 22
C. Environmental Effects ................................ 22
1. Biotic Resources ................................ 22
a. Terrestrial Communities .................... 22
b. Aquatic Communities ........................ 23
C. Summary of Anticipated Impacts to
Biotic Resources ........................... 24
2. Soils and Topography ............................ 25
3. Water Resources ................................. 26
a. Waters Impacted and Characteristics........ 26
b. Best Usage Classification .................. 27
C. Water Quality.. ....................... 27
d. Summary of Anticipated Impacts to
Water Resources ............................ 27
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
PAGE
4. Jurisdictional Issues ........................... 28
a. Surface Waters of the United States........ 28
b. Rare and Protected Species ................. 28
5. Flood Hazard Evaluation ......................... 34
6. Farmland..... ... ... .......... ............. 35
7. Highway Traffic Noise / Construction
Noise Analysis. ... ......................... 35
8. Air Quality Analysis ... ......................... 35
9. Stream Modification .... ......................... 36
10. Hazardous Materials .... ......................... 36
VII. Public Coordination ....................................... 36
VIII. Conclusion ................................................ 36
TABLES
TABLE 1 - Levels of Service for Intersections on US 17......... 7
TABLE 2 - Accident Rate Summary... ............................ 8
TABLE 3 - Construction and Right of Way Costs .................. 15
TABLE 4 - Anticipated Impacts to Biotic Communities............ 24
TABLE 5 - Soils in the Project Area ............................ 26
TABLE 6 - Federally Protected Species for Craven County........ 29
TABLE 7 - Federal Candidate Species for Craven County.......... 34
MAPS AND FIGURES
Figure 1 - Vicinity Map
Figure 2 - Aerial Mosaic (Proposed Improvements)
Figure 3 - Traffic Data (1996)
Figure 4 - Traffic Data (2016)
Figure 5 - New Bern Thoroughfare Plan
Figure 6 - Proposed Typical Sections
Figure 7 - Other TIP Projects in the Area
Figure 8 - 100-Year Floodplain: Wilson Creek
Figure 9 - 100-Year Floodplain: Unnamed Stream
Figure 10 - 100-Year Floodplain: Unnamed Stream
APPENDICES
Appendix A - Coordination
US 17 (Clarendon Boulevard)
From SR 1278 (Trent Road) to US 70 Business (Neuse Boulevard)
New Bern
Craven County
Federal Aid Project F-75-3(27)
State Project No. 8.1171001
TIP Project U-2556
1. SPECIAL PROJECT COMMITMENTS
A. A construction moratorium on in-water construction activities at the
Wilson Creek crossing will be observed during the spawning months of
the anadromous fish species present (February through May) to avoid
hindering spawning efforts and larval survival. In addition, design
and installation methods that minimize stream impediments will be
considered.
B. The proposed project will require a Section 401 Water Quality General
Certification from the Division of Environmental Management (DEM)
prior to Section 404 authorization by the United States Army Corps of
Engineers.
C. The proposed project falls under the jurisdiction of the United
States Army Corps of Engineers (COE) and is likely to be authorized
by provisions of Nationwide Permit (NWP) 33 CFR 330.5 (a) (23).
D. In accordance with the Federal Consistency requirements of Section
307 of the Coastal Area Management Act of 1972, as amended, the
proposed project has been reviewed for consistency with the North
Carolina Coastal Management Program. Based upon this review, it has
been determined that the project is consistent with that program and
a CAMA permit is not required.
E. Access to Speight Park from Simmons Street will be maintained during
project construction and no new right of way or easements will be
purchased from the park; therefore, the proposed widening project is
not anticipated to impact the park. Any design changes which affect
the park will have to be evaluated to ensure that the requirements of
Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966 are met.
F. Two North Carolina Bicycling Highway routes follow US 70 Business in
the vicinity of the proposed project. Bicycle safety elements will
t be will be considered in traffic control and signal plans.
G. No hazardous materials involvement is anticipated, however, an
investigation of hazardous materials along the proposed project will
be completed before right of way is purchased.
II. NEED FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT
A. General Description of Project
The North Carolina Department of Transportation proposes improvements
to US 17 (Clarendon Boulevard) from SR 1278 (Trent Road) to US 70 Business
/ NC 55 (Neuse Boulevard) in New Bern, Craven County. The proposed
project is approximately 3.0 miles (4.7 km) in length. A vicinity map is
included as Figure 1.
US 17 is a north-south route, although it runs in an east-west
direction in the project area. Travel directions on US 17 and
intersecting roadways are referred to assuming US 17 runs north-south and
intersecting roadways run east-west. Other features in this report;
however, will be described based on their actual geographic orientations.
The proposed improvements include widening US 17 from SR 1278 to
US 70 Business / NC 55 to a six-lane divided facility. The proposed
widening will be done on the outside of the existing travelways using
shoulder and ditch and curb and gutter typical sections. In addition to
the proposed widening, the project calls for the installation of a closed
loop traffic signal system. This system will coordinate sixteen traffic
signals which will be located on the 3.8 mile (6.1 km) segment of US 17
that extends from 0.8 mile (1.3 km) west of SR 1278 to US 70 Business /
NC 55 following completion of the subject project. The proposed
improvements are described in more detail in Section III. of this report.
The proposed project is anticipated to require additional right of
way and easements in some locations; however, no businesses or residences
are anticipated to be relocated. The limits of the proposed right of way
are shown on Figure 2.
Although some additional right of way will be required, the proposed
project is not anticipated to result in any significant impacts to the
human or natural environment and is considered to be a "categorical
exclusion" as defined by the Federal Highway Administration's
environmental guidelines (23 CFR 771.117).
B. Project Status
The proposed project is included in the North Carolina Department of
Transportation's 1996-2002 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). The
TIP includes $4,350,000 for construction in fiscal year 1996. No funding
for right of way is included in the TIP.
Construction and right of way estimates were updated during the
planning process. The current right of way cost for the proposed project
is $810,000. The construction cost estimate is $6,500,000. The total
estimated cost of the proposed project is $7,310,000, which is $2,960,000
over the amount appropriated in the TIP.
C. Purpose of the Proposed Project
The purpose of the proposed project is to improve the traffic
carrying capacity and safety of US 17 (Clarendon Boulevard) and enhance
the facility's performance as a principal urban arterial.
3
D.
Existing Conditions
1. Length of Roadway Section Studied
The studied section of US 17 (Clarendon Boulevard) extends from
0.2 mile (0.3 km) west of SR 1278 (Trent Road) to just east of US 70
Business / NC 55 (Neuse Boulevard), a distance of 3.0 miles (4.7 km).
2. Route Classification
Between SR 1278 (Trent Road) and US 70 Business / NC 55, US 17
(Clarendon Boulevard) is an urban principal arterial. In the New
Bern Thoroughfare Plan, adopted by the North Carolina Department of
Transportation in August, 1992, US 17 is classified as a major
thoroughfare (see Figure 5).
3. Existing Typical Section
The existing roadway is a four-lane facility with two 24-foot
(7.3 m) wide travelways divided by a 30-foot (9.2 m) wide depressed,
grassed median. Typically, the facility has 10-foot (3.1 m) wide
outside and median shoulders. The inside and outside paved shoulder
widths vary from 0 to 4 feet (1.2 m) along the project length.
4. Existing Right of Way
The existing right of way on US 17 between SR 1278 and
US 70 Business is 200 feet (61.0 m) wide and is symmetrical about the
centerline of the median. West of SR 1278, US 17 has a 150-foot
(45.7m) wide right of way.
5. Speed Limits
The existing speed limit along this section of US 17 varies from
35 mph (56 km/h) to 45 mph (72 km/h). Most of the project is highly
developed with a 35 mph (56 km/h) speed limit. The speed limit
increases to 55 mph (89 km/h) west of the proposed project.
6. Access Control
This section of US 17 has no control of access, except at the
US 70 interchange. The interchange at US 70 has full control of
access.
7. Structures
Two bridges, which carry US 70 over US 17, are located within
the project limits. These bridges are single span bridges with
110 ft (33.5 m) of horizontal clearance. The bridge carrying the
eastbound lanes of US 70 over US 17 (Bridge Number 75) was
constructed in 1977, has a sufficiency rating of 97.0, and has an
estimated remaining life of 38 years. The minimum vertical clearance
of the structure is 16 feet 3 inches (4.95 m). The bridge carrying
r
4
the westbound lanes of US 70 over US 17 (Bridge Number 76) was also
constructed in 1977. This bridge has a sufficiency rating of 97.0
and an estimated remaining life of 38 years. The minimum vertical
clearance of the structure 16 feet 2 inches (4.93 m).
Two reinforced concrete box culverts are located along the
project. A double 8'X 8' (2.4 m X 2.4 m) reinforced concrete box
culvert is located at Wilson Creek, which is approximately 0.4 mile
(0.67 km) west of NC 43 (Glenburnie Road). A single barrel 8'X 7'
(2.4 m X 2.1 m) reinforced concrete box culvert is located at an
unnamed tributary approximately 240 feet (73.2 m) east of Eighth
Street.
8. Traffic Data
In 1996, the anticipated construction year, the average daily
traffic volumes along the studied section of US 17 are anticipated to
vary from 19,000 vehicles per day (just west of the intersection of
US 17 and US 70 Business) to 33,800 vehicles per day (just west of
the US 70 interchange). In 2016, the average daily traffic volumes
at these locations are anticipated to be 29,400 vehicles per day and
57,000 vehicles per day, respectively. Five percent of the vehicles
on US 17 are trucks (2% TTST and 3% Duals). Projected traffic
volumes for the project for the years 1996 and 2016 are shown in
Figure 3 and Figure 4, respectively.
9. Horizontal and Vertical Curvature
Both the horizontal and vertical alignments of US 17 (Clarendon
Boulevard) provide adequate sight distance. Except for horizontal
curves at each end of the project, the segment of US 17 being studied
is a tangent section.
10. Intersecting Roads
A diamond type interchange is provided at the junction of US 70
and US 17. All other intersections along the proposed project are
at-grade.
Fifteen intersections along the proposed project are currently
signalized. These signalized intersections are listed below:
Ben D. Quinn Elementary School
SR 1214/SR 1388 (South Entrance to New Bern High)
SR 1388 (North Entrance to New Bern High School)
SR 1278 (Trent Road)
NC 43 (Glenburnie Road)
Commerce Way
Red Robin Lane
Twin Rivers Mall / Wal-Mart
US 70 eastbound ramp
US 70 westbound ramp
Berne Square / Hampton Inn
Pinetree Drive
SR 1215 (Simmons Street)
Jefferson Avenue / Degraffenreid Avenue
US 70 Business / NC 55 (Neuse Boulevard)
5
An additional signal is anticipated to be installed at the
western Twin Rivers Mall entrance by the time the project is
constructed. The remainder of intersecting streets and driveways
along the project are stop-sign controlled.
The lane configurations of each of the major intersections
between SR 1278 (Trent Road) and US 70 Business (Neuse Boulevard) are
summarized below. Please note that the intersecting roadways are
assumed to run east-west.
SR 1278 Trent Road
At this intersection, northbound US 17 has two through lanes and
a free-flowing right turning lane onto SR 1278 (Trent Road). Two
through lanes and single left turning lane are located on southbound
US 17. SR 1278 (Trent Road) has a right turning lane and a left
turning lane.
NC 43 (Glenburnie Road
At this intersection, all four approaches have one through-right
lane, one through lane, and a left turning lane.
Commerce War
At this intersection, both northbound and southbound US 17 have
one through lane, one through-right lane, and a left turning lane.
Eastbound Commerce Way has one left turning lane, one through lane,
and one right turning lane. Westbound Commerce Way has only one lane
which serves both through and turning traffic.
Red Robin Lane
At this intersection, northbound US 17 has one through lane, one
through-right lane, and one left turning lane. Southbound US 17 has
two through lanes and a left turning lane. Red Robin Lane has one
lane entering the intersection which serves both left and right
turning traffic.
Twin Rivers Mall / Wal-Mart
At the eastern intersection, both northbound and southbound US
17 have two through lanes, a right turning lane, and a left turning
lane. The eastbound approach (Twin Rivers) has a left turning lane,
a through lane, and a right turning lane. The westbound approach
(Wal-Mart) has a through-left lane and a right turning lane.
US 70 Eastbound Ramps
At this intersection, northbound US 17 has two through lanes and
a right turning lane. Southbound US 17 has two through lane and a
left turning lane. The eastbound ramp has one exclusive left turning
lane and one lane for all traffic movements.
6
US 70 Westbound Ramps
At this intersection, southbound US 17 has two through lanes and
a right turning lane. Northbound US 17 has two through lanes and a
left turning lane. The westbound ramp has one exclusive left turning
lane and one lane for all traffic movements.
Berne Square / Hampton Inn
At this intersection, southbound US 17 has two through lanes and
a right turning lane. Northbound US 17 has two through lanes and a
left turning lane. The eastbound approach (Berne Square) has one
through-right lane and one left turning lane. The westbound approach
(Hampton Inn) has one lane which serves all traffic movements.
Pinetree Drive
At this intersection, northbound US 17 has two through lanes and
a left turning lane. Southbound US 17 has a through-right lane, a
through lane, and a left turning lane which serves businesses'
driveways located across from Pinetree Drive.
SR 1215 Simmons Street
At this intersection, both northbound and southbound US 17 have
two through lanes, a left turning lane, and a right turning lane.
Both the westbound and eastbound approaches have a through-right lane
and a left turning lane.
Jefferson Avenue / Degraffenreid Avenue
At this intersection, both northbound and southbound US 17 have
one left turning lane, one through-right lane, and one through lane.
The eastbound approach has one through-right lane and a left turning
lane. The westbound approach has one lane which serves all traffic
movements.
US 70 Business / NC 55 Neuse Boulevard)
At this intersection, northbound US 17 has two through lanes and
a short left turning lane. Southbound US 17 has two through lanes
and two lanes which provide a free-flow movement to allow traffic to
continue on US 70 Business and NC 55. Eastbound US 70 Business has
one shared left and right lane and one exclusive left turning lane.
11. Sidewalks
No sidewalks are located along the proposed project.
12. Railroad Crossings
No railroad crossings are located along the proposed project.
Railroad tracks which once served the Seaboard Coastline Railroad and
crossed US 17 just east of Commerce Way have been removed. Adjacent
to the existing right of way along US 17, land which once served the
Seaboard Coastline Railroad has been sold to private businesses.
Thus, a railroad agreement is not anticipated to be needed for this
project.
13. School Bus Data
Several schools are located in the vicinity of the proposed
project. As a result, school bus traffic on US 17 between Trent Road
and US 70 Business is heavy. Thirty-four school buses use all or part
of this section of US 17 in both their morning and afternoon routes.
E. Capacity Analysis
The traffic carrying capacity of a roadway is described with a level
of service rating, a qualitative measure of the roadway's operational
conditions and how these conditions are perceived by motorists. Level of
service is determined using conditions such as speed, travel time, freedom
to maneuver, traffic interruptions, convenience, and safety. Six levels
of service are defined and are assigned letter designations from A to F.
Level of service A represents the best operating conditions, and level of
service F represents the worst operating conditions.
Using the traffic data described in Section I.C.B. of this report and
included as Figure 3 and Figure 4, capacity analyses for the years 1996
and 2016 were done for each major intersection along the proposed project.
These capacity analyses were done using both existing and proposed
intersection configurations. Proposed intersection improvements are
presented in Section III.G. of this report. Table 1 presents the results
of these analyses.
Table 1.
INTERSECTION
Levels of Service for Intersections on US 17
EXISTING CONDITIONS PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
1996 2016 1996 2016
SR 1278 B
NC 43 E
Commerce Way B
Red Robin Lane B
Twin Rivers Mall / E
Wal-Mart
US 70 Eastbound Ramp F
US 70 Westbound Ramp F
Berne Square / E
Hampton Inn
Pinetree Drive E
SR 1215 E
Jefferson Avenue / D
Degraffenreid
US 70 Business / B
NC 55
C B B
F D D
D B C
E B D
F D D
F D D
F D D
F D D
F D D
F D D
F D D
F B D
8
The proposed closed loop traffic signal system will further enhance
the traffic carrying capacity of US 17. With the proposed system,
platoons of cars will be able to travel along this segment of US 17 with
fewer signal-related delays.
F. Accident Analysis
An accident study for US 17, Clarendon Boulevard, was conducted for
the time period from September 1, 1990 through August 31, 1993. A summary
of the accident rates and number of accidents which occurred on US 17
between SR 1278 (Trent Road) and NC 55 / US 70 Business (Neuse Boulevard)
is presented in Table 2.
Table 2. Accident Rate Summary
Urban Urban
US 17 US Routes Primary Routes
Number of 346 n/a n/a
Accidents
Number of 0 n/a n/a
Fatal Accidents
Total Accident 571 219.0 239.9
Rate (ACC/100MVM)*
Fatal Accident 0 0.6 0.5
Rate (ACC/100MVM)
Non-Fatal Injury 279 92.7 101.1
Accident Rate
(ACC/100MVM)
* ACC/100MVM = Accidents per 100 million vehicle miles
The total accident rate for the studied section of US 17 is over
twice as high as the statewide average for urban US routes and the
statewide average for urban primary routes. No fatalities were reported
between September 1, 1990 and August 31, 1993; however, many of the
accidents which occurred involved injuries. The non-fatal injury accident
rate for the subject section of US 17 is over three times the statewide
average for non-fatal injury accidents on urban US routes.
Of the accidents occurring on US 17 between SR 1278 (Trent Road) and
NC 55 / US 70 Business (Neuse Boulevard), forty-seven percent were
rear-end accidents associated with slowing or stopped vehicles. The next
most frequent type of accident was the angle accident (seventeen percent).
Increased highway capacity through the addition of two more through
lanes (one in each direction) as well as the coordination of the traffic
signals along the project should help lower the accident rates. However,
the number of accidents may still remain high because of high traffic
volumes on US 17, the density of development in the area, and the high
number intersecting roads and driveways.
G. Project Terminals
The western project terminal of the proposed project has been defined
as the intersection of US 17 and SR 1278 (Trent Road). The proposed
widening of US 17 will begin where the existing lane that carries
northbound US 17 traffic to SR 1278 diverges from the existing northbound
lanes of US 17 (approximately 1100 feet (335 m) west of the existing
median opening at SR 1278). West of the proposed project, US 17 is a
four-lane divided facility with two 24-foot (7.3 m) pavements and a
30-foot (9.1 m) depressed, grassed median.
The eastern terminal of the proposed project is approximately 381
feet (116 m) east of the intersection of US 17 and the eastbound lanes of
US 70 Business / NC 55. East of the proposed project US 17 is a five lane
curb and gutter facility with 68 feet (20.7 m) between its curb faces.
In order for the proposed closed loop traffic signal system to
function properly, three signals that are located west of the western
project terminal will be incorporated into the proposed system. The
westernmost of these signals is located at the entrance to the Ben D.
Quinn Elementary School, which is approximately 1.3 km (0.8 mile) west of
the SR 1278 intersection. The other two signals are located at SR 1214 /
SR 1388, the western entrance to New Bern High School, and SR 1388, the
eastern entrance to New Bern High School.
H. Thoroughfare Plan
This section of US 17 is shown as a major thoroughfare on the New
Bern Thoroughfare Plan. The New Bern Thoroughfare Plan, adopted by the
North Carolina Department of Transportation in August, 1992, is included
in this report as Figure 5.
I. Benefits to the State, Region, and Community
The proposed improvements to US 17 (Clarendon Boulevard) will benefit
the region and local community by providing safer and more efficient
travel through the area. The increased capacity of the facility will make
homes, businesses, and schools more accessible to local traffic. Regional
traffic travelling to and from New Bern along the US 17 corridor will also
benefit from the increased capacity of the roadway.
III. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION
A. Widening of US 17
US 17 (Clarendon Boulevard) will be widened to a six-lane divided
facility from approximately 0.2 mile (0.3 km) west of SR 1278 (Trent Road)
to approximately 380 feet (116 m) east of Clarendon Boulevard's (US 17)
10
intersection with the eastbound lanes of US 70 Business / NC 55. A
combination of two typical sections (shoulder and ditch and curb and
gutter) will be used to construct the facility. The typical sections for
the proposed project are shown in Figure 6.
Both the shoulder and ditch sections and curb and gutter sections
include a 30-foot (9.15 m) grassed median. The existing depressed,
grassed median will be retained in the following locations: from 900 feet
(274m) west of SR 1278 (Trent Road) to 1100 feet (335m) east of SR 1278,
from 150 feet (46m) east of Meadows Street to Eighth Street, and from the
entrance to Grover C. Fields Middle School to US 70 Business/NC 55. A
raised, grassed median will be provided along the remainder of the
project. At intersections which require single left turn lanes, an
18-foot grassed median will be provided. At intersections which require
double left turn lanes, a 6-foot monolithic island will be constructed.
Intersection improvements are described in more detail in Section III.G.
of this report.
The shoulder and ditch typical section (see Figure 6) will be used at
the following locations: on both sides of US 17 from SR 1278 (Trent Road)
to the right-in and right-out access to Rivertowne Square; on the north
side of US 17 between Pinetree Drive and SR 1215 (Simmons Street), between
Meadows Street and Eighth Street, and from 300 feet east of Degraffenreid
Avenue to US 70 Business / NC 55 (Neuse Boulevard); and on the south side
of US 17 from 400 feet west of the Berne Square / Hampton Inn entrances
to the US 70 Business / NC 55 intersection. Locations where the shoulder
and ditch typical section is proposed are shown in Figure 2.
Curb and gutter will be utilized on the north side of US 17 from the
right-in and right-out access at Rivertowne Square to Pinetree Drive,
between Simmons Street and Meadows Street, and from west of Eighth Street
to Degraffenreid Avenue. Curb and gutter will be used on the south side
of US 17 from the right-in right out access at Rivertowne Square to
approximately 400 feet west of the Berne Square / Hampton Inn
intersection. Locations where curb and gutter is proposed are shown in
Figure 2.
The proposed shoulder and ditch typical section will collect runoff
from adjacent properties and provide storage for runoff until it can
travel to creeks and other outfalls. The shoulder and ditch typical
section will also help reduce the number of pipes and drop inlets required
along the project. Siltation problems that are associated with drainage
pipes with shallow grades will be eliminated in areas where the shoulder
and ditch typical section is used. The shoulder and ditch typical section
will also help filter impurities out of stormwater runoff before the
runoff reaches streams.
The proposed curb and gutter typical section will be used in densely
developed areas. The use of the curb and gutter typical section in these
areas will minimize impacts to adjacent properties, as well as minimize
right of way costs.
11
B. Widening of the US 70 Entrance Ramps at the US 70 / US 17 Interchange
Both the eastbound and westbound US 70 entrance ramps at the US 70 /
US 17 interchange will be widened. The proposed widening is necessary to
accommodate the double left turning lanes on US 17 proposed at the ramp
terminals. The proposed double left turning lanes will serve traffic
moving from northbound US 17 to the westbound US 70 entrance ramp and
traffic moving from southbound US 17 to the eastbound US 70 entrance ramp.
The eastbound US 70 entrance ramp will be widened to have two 12-foot
(3.6 m) lanes; this ramp will taper back down to its existing 16-foot
(4.9 m) width approximately 800 feet (244 m) south of its intersection
with US 17. The westbound US 70 entrance ramp will also be widened to
have two 12-foot (3.6 m) lanes; this ramp will taper back down to its
existing 16-foot (4.9 m) width approximately 800 feet (244 m) north of its
intersection with US 17.
C. Traffic Si nal System
A closed loop traffic signal system is proposed for US 17. This
traffic signal system will coordinate the sixteen traffic signals proposed
along the project to allow traffic to proceed through the area with fewer
delays. The signals to be incorporated into the closed loop system are
located at the US 17 intersections listed below:
Ben D. Quinn Elementary School
SR 1214/SR 1388 (West Entrance to New Bern High School)
SR 1388 (East Entrance to New Bern High School)
SR 1278 (Trent Road)
NC 43 (Glenburnie Road)
Commerce Way
Red Robin Lane
Twin Rivers Mall / Wal-Mart (eastern entrances)
Twin Rivers Mall (western entrance)
US 70 eastbound ramps
US 70 westbound ramps
Berne Square / Hampton Inn
Pinetree Drive
SR 1215 (Simmons Street)
Jefferson Avenue / Degraffenreid Avenue
US 70 Business / NC 55 (Neuse Boulevard)
These signal locations are shown on Figure 2. Proposed improvements
to these intersections are described in Section III.G. of this report.
The signals at Ben D. Quinn Elementary School, SR 1214 / SR 1388 (the
west entrance to New Bern High School), and SR 1388 (the east entrance to
New Bern High School) are located west of SR 1278 (Trent Road), the
western project terminal. In order for the closed loop traffic signal
system to operate effectively, these three signals must be incorporated.
The proposed cost of the closed loop traffic signal system, $840,000, is
included in the construction cost estimate for the project presented in
Section III.N. of this report.
12
D. Structures
No new structures are proposed; however, two reinforced concrete box
culverts will need to be extended as a part of the project. The double
8'X 8' (2.4 m X 2.4 m) box culvert at Wilson Creek, which is approximately
0.4 mile (0.67 km) west of NC 43 (Glenburnie Road) will need to be
extended a length of 20 feet (6.1 m) on both sides of US 17. The single
barrel 8'X 7' (2.4 m X 2.1 m) box culvert located at an unnamed tributary,
which passes under US 17 approximately 240 feet (73.2 m) east of Eighth
Street, will be extended 15 feet (4.6 m) on both sides of the US 17.
The existing vertical clearances of the bridges that carry US 70 over
US 17 will be maintained.
E. Design Speed
The design speed for the proposed facility is 50 mph.
F. Access Control
No additional control of access is proposed for this section of
US 17.
G. Intersection Improvements
In addition to the signal improvements described in Section III.C. of
this report (closed loop traffic signal system) and the additional through
lanes proposed along US 17, the following intersection improvements are
proposed. Please note that the intersecting roadways are assumed to run
east-west.
1. US 17 / SR 1278 (Trent Road
The existing right turning movement from northbound US 17 to
Trent Road will be placed under signal control. An exclusive right
turning lane on northbound US 17 is proposed. Two left turning lanes
and one right turning lane will be provided on westbound Trent Road
in place of the existing configuration of one left turning lane and
one right turning lane.
2. US 17 / NC 43 (Glenburnie Road
Dual left turning lanes are proposed on northbound US 17,
eastbound NC 43, and westbound NC 43. An exclusive right turning
lane on southbound US 17 is also proposed. The existing median
opening located approximately 750 feet (229 m) west of NC 43 will be
shifted approximately 500 feet (152 m) to the west in order to
improve operations at the NC 43 intersection.
3. US 17 / Commerce Way
An exclusive left turning lane is proposed on westbound Commerce
Way. Closing the median opening which is located approximately 250
feet (76.2 m) east of Commerce Way is also proposed.
13
4. US 17 / Red Robin Lane
The left turning lane on southbound US 17 will be extended to
provide 425 feet (130 m) of full storage for left turning traffic.
Closing the median opening located approximately 330 feet (100.6 m)
east of Red Robin Lane is also proposed.
5. US 17 / Twin Rivers Mall / Wal-Mart (two entrances)
Dual left turning lanes on southbound and northbound US 17 are
proposed at the eastern entrance to Twin Rivers Mall/Wal-Mart.
Exclusive right turning lanes are proposed on southbound US 17 at
both entrances to the Twin Rivers Mall. A right turning lane is also
proposed on northbound US 17 at the eastern Wal-Mart shopping center
entrance. At the western entrance to Twin Rivers Mall the median
opening will be extended to allow for the left turns along both
directions of US 17.
6. US 17 / US 70 Interchange Ramp Terminals
Dual left turning lanes are proposed on southbound US 17 at the
eastbound US 70 entrance ramp. An exclusive right turning lane is
proposed on northbound US 17 at the eastbound US 70 entrance ramp.
The eastbound US 70 exit ramp will be widened to have two left turn
lanes and one through-right lane.
Dual left turning lanes are proposed on northbound US 17 at the
westbound US 70 entrance ramp. An exclusive right turning lane is
proposed on southbound US 17 at the westbound US 70 entrance ramp.
The westbound US 70 exit ramp will be widened to have two left
turning lanes and on through-right lane.
7. US 17 / Hampton Inn Entrance
A left turning lane is proposed on southbound US 17 at the
entrance to the Hampton Inn.
8. US 17 / SR 1215 (Simmons Street
An island is proposed on Simmons Street to prohibit left turns
onto Grace Avenue. Dual left turning lanes are proposed on
northbound US 17. Closing the existing median opening located
approximately 700 feet (213 m) west of Simmons Street is also
proposed.
9. US 17 / Meadows Street
Closing the median opening at Meadows Street is proposed.
10. US 17 / Grover C. Fields Middle School
An exclusive right turning lane is proposed on southbound US 17
at the entrance to Grover C. Fields Middle School.
14
11. US 17 / Degraffenreid Avenue
An island along Degraffenreid Avenue is proposed to prevent left
turns from Degraffenreid Avenue onto Tatum Drive.
12. US 17 / US 70 Business / NC 55
A right turn lane and dual left turn lanes are proposed on
eastbound US 70 Business / NC 55. The free-flowing right turning
lanes on westbound US 70 Business / NC 55 will be retained.
H. Median Openings
Several existing median openings along the proposed project will be
modified. The existing median opening located approximately 750 feet
(229 m) west of NC 43 will be shifted approximately 500 feet (152 m) to
the west in order to improve operations at the NC 43 intersection. The
median opening at the western entrance to the Twin Rivers Mall will be
widened to accommodate all traffic movement. The median openings at the
following locations will be closed: approximately 330 feet (100.6 m) east
of Red Robin Lane, approximately 700 feet (213 m) west of Simmons Street,
and at Meadows Street. Closing additional median openings will be
investigated during the final design phase of the project.
I. Right of Way
The majority of the proposed improvements are anticipated to be
contained within the existing 200-foot (61 m) right of way. The
anticipated limits of the proposed right of way are shown on Figure 2.
Temporary construction and drainage easements are also anticipated to be
needed to construct the project. The right of way estimate for the
recommended improvements (see Section III.N. of this report) reflects the
cost of the proposed right of way and easements.
No businesses or residences are anticipated to be relocated as a
result of the proposed improvements.
J. Utilities
The proposed project is anticipated to have high utility conflicts.
Water, sewer, gas, telephone, and power lines are located along the
project.
K. Changes in the State Highway System
No changes in the State Highway System are proposed as a part of this
project.
L. Bikeways
Two North Carolina Bicycling Highways routes, Ports of Call and
Ocracoke Option, follow US 70 Business in the vicinity of the proposed
project. Since bicycle traffic is anticipated at the intersection of US
17 and US 70 Business, bicycle safety elements will be considered in
traffic control and signal plans.
15
M. Sidewalk
No sidewalks are proposed along the project.
N. Cost Estimates
The estimated construction and right of way costs of the proposed
improvements are presented below.
Table 3. Construction and Right of Way Costs
Contract Cost $ 5,672,000
Engineering and Contingencies $ 828,000
Total Construction Cost $ 6,500,000
Right of Way $ 810,000
Total Project Cost $ 7,310,000
In comparison, the 1996-2002 Transportation Improvement Program
includes $4,350,000 for construction of the project.
0. Other Proposed Highway Improvements in the area
1. TIP Project R-2301
Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) Project R-2301, which
is shown in Figure 7, calls for the construction of a US 17 bypass of
New Bern. TIP Project R-2301 will tie into existing US 17 west of
the segment of US 17 that will be improved under TIP Project U-2556.
The alignment shown in Figure 7 is only the conceptual alignment
included in the TIP. Right of way acquisition is scheduled to begin
in fiscal year 1998, and construction is scheduled to begin in fiscal
year 2000.
2. TIP Project B-2531
TIP Project B-2531, which is shown in Figure 7, calls for the
replacement of the US 17 / NC 55 bridge over the Neuse River. This
project is located east of the segment of US 17 to be improved under
TIP Project U-2556. Right of way for TIP Project B-2531 has been
purchased. The project has been advertised for construction bids and
the bid opening for the project is anticipated to be held in
September of 1995.
16
TIP Project B-2532
TIP Project B-2532,
rehabilitation of the US
The proposed project is
1996-2002 TIP.
which is shown in Figure 7, calls for the
70 Business bridge over the Trent River.
shown as an identified future need in the
P. Anticipated Design Exceptions
No design exceptions are anticipated to be included in this project.
IV. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION
A. Recommended Improvements
The recommended improvements to US 17 (Clarendon Boulevard) include
widening the roadway to a six-lane divided facility from SR 1278 (Trent
Road) to US 70 Business / NC 55. The proposed facility will have a 30-foot
grassed median, except in locations where left turning lanes are required.
A combination of shoulder and ditch sections and curb and gutter sections
will be utilized in order to minimize the amount of drainage maintenance
needed, while at the same time minimizing right of way damages and costs.
The existing depressed median will be retained at locations detailed in
Section III. A. A raised median will be provided along the remainder of
the project.
Additional intersection improvements and the installation of a closed
loop traffic signal system are also proposed as a part of the project.
The intersection improvements are described in detail in Section III.G. of
this report. The closed loop traffic signal system is described in
Section III.C. Also, as described in Section III B., the entrance ramps
at the US 70 / US 17 interchange will widened to accommodate two lanes of
traffic and the exit ramps will be widened to have two left turning lanes
and a shared lane for through and right-turning traffic.
B. Widening Using a Shoulder and Ditch Typical Section
Widening US 17 Clarendon Boulevard to a six-lane divided facility
using only a shoulder and ditch typical section was considered. Like the
recommended improvement, this alternative would provide a six-lane
facility with a 30-foot wide grassed median. Runoff from adjacent
properties would be collected in the facility's ditches. Once in the
ditches, the runoff could be stored until it could travel to nearby creeks
and other outfalls. The shoulder and ditch typical section also requires
fewer drop inlets and pipes; thus, siltation problems that are associated
with drainage pipes with shallow grades would be avoided. The shoulder
and ditch typical section also helps to filter impurities out of
stormwater runoff before the runoff reaches local streams.
This alternative would also include the proposed closed loop traffic
signal system and intersection and interchange improvements noted in
Section IV.A.
17
Widening US 17 using the shoulder and ditch typical section
exclusively does not minimize right of way impacts along the project. In
highly developed areas, the construction of the shoulder and ditch typical
section would result in higher right of way impacts. Therefore, this
alternative is not recommended. A shoulder and ditch facility with a
narrower 18-foot wide median was also considered in order to lessen right
of way impacts. This median width would not provide a safe area for
traffic turning left onto the facility or enough room for U-turning trucks
and buses. Thus, the narrower median was abandoned so as not to
jeopardize motorist safety.
C. Widening Using a Curb and Gutter Typical Section
Widening US 17 Clarendon Boulevard to a six-lane divided facility
using only a curb and gutter typical section with a 30-foot wide grassed
median was considered. This alternative would also include the proposed
closed loop traffic signal system and intersection and interchange
improvements noted earlier in Section D.A. This typical section would
minimize right of way impacts. However, the construction of a curb and
gutter facility would result in a high number of drop inlets and pipes.
Also, shallow pipe grades, resulting from the flat terrain in the project
area, would cause siltation and drainage problems. This alternative would
require the greatest amount of drainage maintenance of the three studied
design alternatives. For these reasons, this alternative is not
recommended.
D. Postponement of the Proposed Action
The existing facility is anticipated to operate at level of service D
in 1996 and at level of service F in 2016. If the proposed project is
delayed, the anticipated traffic volumes will soon exceed the traffic
carrying capacity of the facility, causing increasing delays to motorists.
The proposed project is needed now to enhance the safety and traffic
carrying capacity of the facility.
E. "Do Nothing" Alternative
The "do nothing" alternative is not considered to be prudent.
Without the proposed improvements, the facility is anticipated to operate
at level of service D in the year 1996 and level of service F in the year
2016. The proposed widening and closed loop signal system are needed to
alleviate congestion and reduce the number of delays experienced by
motorist travelling through the area. Without the proposed improvements,
the level of service and safety of the facility will continue to degrade.
F. Alternative Modes of Transportation
Bus service is provided in New Bern by the Craven Area Rural Transit
System. This system utilizes large passenger vans to transport people
throughout Craven, Pamlico, and Jones Counties. Much of the ridership is
made up of subscribers to the system; however, the system is open to the
general public. The US 17 corridor is frequently used by the Craven Area
Rural Transit System. The service makes several stops along US 17
including Twin Rivers Mall, the Wal-Mart shopping center, and Berne
Square.
18
The services provided by the Craven Area Rural Transit System are
continuing to grow; however, the automobile is still the primary mode of
transportation in the area since trip origination and destinations are
widely dispersed along the US 17 corridor and throughout the area.
V. SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
A. Social Effects
1. Land Use
a. Status of Local Planning Activities
The proposed improvement is located within the municipal
limits of the City of New Bern. The city maintains an active
land planning program, based largely on the policies described
in the city's Coastal Area Management Act Land Use Plan which is
updated every five years. The plan's most recent update was
adopted in 1992. The city also enforces a zoning ordinance and
subdivision regulations within the project area.
b. Existing Land Use
US 17 (Clarendon Boulevard) provides access to a wide range
of land use types within the project limits. Much of the area
can be characterized as "strip commercial" with a range of
retailers such as discount stores, fast food restaurants, gas
stations, and automotive stores fronting the roadway. Two
shopping centers, the Twin Rivers Mall and Rivertowne Square,
are located immediately west of US 70 on either side of US 17.
Berne Square is located on the north side of US 17, east of
US 70. Banks, motels, and other services are also located along
the roadway.
C. Future Land Use
According to the CAMA Land Use Plan Update, the project
area east of Trent Road is classified as Developed. This
classification applies to urbanized areas where little
undeveloped land remains. Areas designated as Developed contain
a mix of land uses, generally with moderate to high densities.
The land west of SR 1278 (Trent Road) to the city limits is
classified as an Urban Transition area. This describes an area
where urban development is underway and is expected to continue
through the next decade. Some vacant land remains available for
development in this area.
The plan also discusses several transportation issues,
including the impact of continued strip commercial development
on arterials, including US 17. While the plan recognizes that
this development will deteriorate the capacity of US 17, it does
not specify actions which will alleviate the problem. In fact,
much of the land is zoned for highway commercial development.
19
d. Coastal Area Management Act Consistency Determination
In accordance with the Federal Consistency requirements of
Section 307 of the Coastal Area Management Act of 1972, as
amended, the proposed project has been reviewed for consistency
with the North Carolina Coastal Management Program. Based upon
this review, it has been determined that the project is
consistent with that program, and a CAMA permit is not required.
2. Neighborhood Characteristics
Craven County is in the eastern section of the state and is
bounded by Carteret, Jones, Lenoir, Pitt, Beaufort, and Pamlico
Counties. Craven County has a population of 81,613. Of this
population, 58,660 persons are white and 22,953 persons are nonwhite.
The population density of Craven County is 117.34 persons per square
mile.
The section of US 17 to be widened is located in the City of New
Bern. According to he 1990 United States Census, New Bern has a
population of 17,363 persons.
Between SR 1278 (Trent Road) and SR 1215 (Simmons Street), both
sides of US 17 are dominated by commercial development.
In the vicinity of SR 1215 (Simmons Street), the development
along US 17 is predominantly residential with some office and
institutional.
East of Grover C. Fields Middle School, at the east end of the
proposed project, commercial development once again dominates the
project area.
3. Relocatees
The proposed project is not anticipated to relocate any
residences or businesses.
4. Public Facilities
Several schools and public facilities are located in the project
area. Trent Park School is located on SR 1215 (Simmons Street) north
of the proposed project. Trent Park School will not be affected by
the proposed project. Grover C. Fields Middle School is located on
the north side of US 17 just east of the SR 1215 (Simmons Street)
intersection. New Bern High School is located on SR 1388, which
intersects US 17 just west of SR 1278 (Trent Road). Ben D. Quinn
Elementary School is located on the south side of US 17 approximately
0.8 mile (1.3 km) west of SR 1278 (Trent Road).
20
Speight Park, a small city park, is located south of US 17 just
east of the SR 1215 (Simmons Street) intersection (see Figure 2,
sheet 6 of 7). The proposed widening of US 17 is not anticipated to
affect the park. Speight Park is discussed further in Section V.A.6.
of this report, which addresses Section 4(f) resources.
5. Historic and Cultural Resources
a. Architectural/Historical Resources
A survey was conducted and a report was prepared to
identify historic architectural resources located within the
project area. An area of potential effect for the project was
established and surveyed for historic architectural resources.
The survey was conducted by the North Carolina Department of
Transportation in accordance with the provisions of the Federal
Highway Administration Technical Advisory T 6640.8A (Guidance
for Preparing and Processing Environmental and Section 4(f)
Documents); the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and
Guidelines for Archaeological and Historic Preservation (48 FR
44716); 36 CFR Part 800; 36 CFR Part 60; and Phase II (Abridged)
Survey Procedures for Historic Architectural Resources by the
North Carolina Department of Transportation.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation conducted a
Phase II (Abridged) survey with the following goals: 1) to
determine the Area of Potential Effect (the geographic area or
areas within which a project may cause changes in the character
or use of historic properties), if any such properties exist; 2)
to identify all significant resources within the Area of
Potential Effect; and 3) to evaluate these resources according
to the National Register of Historic Places criteria.
The survey method consisted of a field survey and
historical background research of the project area. The field
survey was conducted by car and on foot, and all structures over
fifty years of age were photographed and keyed to a local map
and an aerial composite.
A search of files in the Raleigh State Historic
Preservation Office revealed that no properties within the Area
of Potential Effect have been surveyed. There are no properties
in the Area of Potential Effect listed in the National Register
or on the State Study List. The historical and architectural
background for the project area was provided by Richard Parsons,
a noted amateur architectural historian and an expert on the
history of Craven County, and Peter Sandbeck's The Historic
Architecture of New Bern and Craven County, Nortt Caro Fir-n-
1988), which is the pu ishe result of a recent comprehensive
survey of the county.
The intensive field survey of the Area of Potential Effect
was conducted on November 12, 1994. One property of interest,
the Fred Anders Agency Building, a former residence which has
been converted to commercial use, was found within the Area of
Potential Effect; however, the property is not considered
21
eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic
Places. Thus, no properties on the National Register of
Historic Places or eligible for listing on the National Register
of Historic Places are located within the Area of Potential
Effect. The State Historic Preservation Officer concurred with
these findings in his December 30, 1994 letter which is included
in Appendix A (see page A-1).
b. Archaeological Resources
A survey for archaeological resources was conducted by
North Carolina Department of Transportation archaeological staff
on February 16, 1994. An intensive visual inspection and a
drive-by survey of the area of potential effect of the project
were conducted.
No archaeological resources were found within the area
which will be disturbed by the widening of US 17. The area of
potential effect was found to be greatly disturbed by
commercial, industrial, and residential development along the
north and south sides of US 17 from Trent Road (SR 1278) to US
70 Business / NC 55. The area adjacent to Wilson Creek was
impacted by the presence of sewer lines on both the east and
west sides of the creek. All of the project area has been
impacted by modern development. Because of the commercial and
residential development along this section of US 17, significant
archaeological resources within the project area will not likely
be affected by the proposed widening project. The State
Historic Preservation Officer concurred with the North Carolina
Department of Transportation's and the Federal Highway
Administration's assessment that the project will not involve
any significant archaeological resources. The State Historic
Preservation Officer also concurred that no additional
archaeological investigation is needed in connection with the
project. This letter of concurrence is included on page A-2 of
Appendix A.
6. Section 4(f) Resources
Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966
requires that impacts to public parks, public recreation areas, and
historic resources be avoided or minimized whenever it is feasible
and practicable to do so.
Speight Park, a small city park (approximately 0.7 acre in
size), is located south of US 17 just east of the SR 1215 (Simmons
Street) intersection (see Figure 2, sheet 6 of 7). The proposed
widening of US 17 is not anticipated to affect the park. No right of
way or easements will be purchased from the park, and the existing
highway drainage system adjacent to the park will be retained.
Moreover, access to the park, which is provided via Simmons Street,
will be maintained throughout the construction of the proposed
project. Since Speight Park will not be impacted by the proposed
project, a Section 4(f) evaluation is not required. Any design.
22
changes which affect the park will have to be evaluated to ensure
that the requirements of Section 4(f) of the Department of
Transportation Act of 1966 are met.
B. Economic Effects
North Carolina Preliminary Civilian Labor Force Estimates for
November 1993 indicated that Craven County had 32,700 people in its labor
force. Of this total, 31,400 persons were employed. Thus, 1660 persons,
or 5.1 percent of the labor force, were unemployed.
The existing traffic along US 17 from Trent Road to US 70 Business
and NC 55 is constant and is usually bumper to bumper through the business
hours of the day. The proposed widening of US 17 will enhance the
economic activities in the area. The proposed widening project will help
alleviate congestion and help increase comfort, convenience, and safety
for motorists. As a result, businesses will become more accessible and
travelling the facility will become more efficient.
C. Environmental Effects
1. Biotic Resources
Biotic resources include aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems.
This section describes ecosystems encountered in the study area, as
well as the relationships between fauna and flora within these
ecosystems. Composition and distribution of biotic communities
throughout the project area are reflective of topography, hydrologic
influences, and past and present land uses in the study area.
Descriptions of the terrestrial systems are presented in the context
of plant community classifications. Dominant flora and fauna
observed, or likely to occur, in each community are described and
discussed.
Scientific nomenclature and common names (when applicable) are
provided for each animal and plant species described. Subsequent
references to the same organism will include the common name only.
a. Terrestrial Communities
Maintained roadside is the only distinct terrestrial
community identified in the project study area. This habitat is
characterized by herbaceous vegetation that is continually
disturbed (i.e. mowing), therefore suppressing natural
succession in the habitat. Adjacent habitats outside the study
area are not factored into the impact assessment. These edges
contribute more diverse cover and food sources to the maintained
community. The transitional fringes between habitats are
commonly referred to as ecotones, and few lie within the study
area. Faunal species commonly found in the habitats mentioned
are listed below. An asterisk (*) signifies those animals that
were directly observed during field investigation.
23
Maintained Roadside
This habitat is found in close association with the
proposed roadway widening project. Herbaceous vegetation is the
primary floral component, consisting of fescue (Festuca sp.),
Bermuda grass C nodon dact lon , dallis grass (Paspalum
dilatatum), foxtail grass (Setaria geniculata), morning glory
(I omoea sp.), ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia), and Diodia
virginiana.
The composition of the faunal community found in this
habitat is reflective of the early successional development of
the vegetative community. Many species utilize this habitat for
foraging, while remaining in close proximity to adjacent areas
that provide greater protective cover. Some animals which
exhibit this strategy are the hispid cotton rat (Sigmodon
hispidus), mourning dove* (Zenaida macroura), eastern
cottontail* (S lvila u_s floridanus), eastern meadowlark
(Sturnella magna), and five-lined skink (Eumeces fasciatus),
when foraging on insects and herbaceous material present in the
maintained community.
Additional species are frequently associated with this
habitat for their dependence on the prey species that forage in
the area. These predators feed on the aforementioned species as
well as other invertebrates and vertebrates attracted to the
area. Such predators include the yellow rat snake (Ela he
obsleta), red-tailed hawk (Buteo 'amaicensis), and black racer
Co u er constrictor). The roadway is in close proximity to this
habitat type, andvehicular traffic contributes to heightened
faunal mortality. When either previously mentioned or
additional animals are killed by the traffic within the study
area, a foraging opportunity results for species like the
American crow* (Corvus brachyrhynchos) and turkey vulture
(Cathartes aura).
b. Aquatic Communities
A channelized coastal plain perennial stream community
associated with Wilson Creek will be impacted by the proposed
project. Physical characteristics of the water body and
condition of the water resource reflect faunal composition of
the aquatic communities. Terrestrial communities adjacent to a
water resource also greatly influence aquatic communities.
This system is closely-related and contributes greatly to
semi-aquatic and terrestrial habitats and organisms in and
around the aquatic community. Within this aquatic system,
species of small fish like the lined topminnow* (Fundulus
lineolatus), creek chubsucker (Erimyzon oblongus), pirate perch
(Aphredoderus sayanus), and shiner (Notropis sp.) move up and
down the stream system in search of food and cover. Larger fish
range throughout the system also, preying upon aquatic
invertebrates, vertebrates, and smaller ichthyoid species. A
few of these species are redbreast sunfish* (Lepomis auritus),
bluegill* (Lepomis macrochirus), and largemouth bass
(Micropterus salmoides).
24
Wilson Creek supports anadromous fish migrations. The
anadromous species found to utilize this water body are blueback
herring (Alosa aestivalis) and alewife (Alosa pseudoharangus).
Semi-aquatic organisms depend highly upon this habitat for
survival. The southern leopard frog* (Rana s henoce hala),
pickerel frog (Rana palustris), snapping turtle* (Che y ra
serpentina), and redbelly water snake (Nerodia erxthro ag ster)
forage in this habitat on each other as well as fish, insects,
and small terrestrial prey.
C. Summary of Anticipated Impacts to Biotic Resources
Construction of the subject project will have various
impacts on the biotic resources described previously. Any
construction related activities near this resource will have the
potential to impact biological functions. This section
quantifies and qualifies impacts to the natural resources in
terms of area impacted and ecosystems affected. Temporary and
permanent impacts are considered here as well.
Modification of the existing Wilson Creek crossing is
likely to impact the anadromous fish population in the stream
system. A construction moratorium on in-water construction
activities at the Wilson Creek crossing will be observed during
the spawning months of the anadromous fish species present
(February through May) to avoid hindering spawning efforts and
larval survival. In addition, design and installation methods
that minimize impediments to the species and stream will be
considered. This thorough investigation is needed because
construction-related practices may deter fish from migrating
upstream because of physical disturbances, reduction of water
clarity, and changes in water flow. The eggs and newly
developed larvae are sensitive to changes in water quality, a
result of construction.
Calculated impacts in the project vicinity reflect the
abundance of the maintained community present in the study area.
Project construction will result in clearing and degradation of
portions of this community. Table 4 summarizes potential
quantitative losses to these biotic communities which will
result from project construction.
Table 4. Anticipated Impacts to Biotic Communities
COMMUNITY
Maintained Roadside
Coastal Plain Stream
TOTAL IMPACTS
IMPACTED AREA
54.7 (22.2)
0.01 (0.004)
54.71 (22.204)
Note: Values cited are in acres (hectares).
25
The roadside community is currently disturbed; as a result,
there exists a relatively low biological diversity. There will
be an initial stress placed upon the species of this community
during construction. However, long term negative impacts should
be minimal due to the large influence man has already exercised
on this habitat type. Moreover, the majority of faunal species
that compose this community are edge-adapted species which
proliferate in disturbed edge habitats. Most habitats in the
vicinity are highly modified; thus, the detrimental effects
posed by the proposed road widening will be minimal.
The coastal plain stream habitat associated with Wilson
Creek will be affected by sedimentation, runoff of roadway
deposits (i.e. rubber, oil, and debris), and increased velocity
of runoff. The proposed extension of the culvert at the stream
crossing will cause an initial increase in sedimentation by
construction equipment and/or materials. These impacts may be
short term in scope. However, the possibility for obstruction
of the existing culvert could vary stream velocity, causing
increased turbidity and suspended sediment levels as a product
of a disturbed substrate, especially at times of high flow.
These impacts could potentially last for an extended period of
time, seriously harming populations of aquatic and semi-aquatic
organisms which are extremely sensitive to high sediment loads
and introduced toxins from construction. The proposed
improvement could cause the loss of many stream-related
organisms previously mentioned. Therefore, stringent adherence
to the North Carolina Department of Transportation's Best
Management Practices is required to minimize impacts to surface
waters.
2. Soils and Topography
Craven County lies in the coastal plain physiographic province.
The topography of Craven County is characterized by nearly level
terrain with associated broad, bottomland floodplains. The elevation
of in the study area ranges from 20 feet (6 m) to 5 feet (1.6 m)
above mean sea level. The dominant land use in the area is
commercial and industrial development that is punctuated by
occasional forest stands. Table 5 provides an inventory of specific
soil types which occur in the project area.
26
Table 5. Soils in the Project Area
MAPPING UNIT SYMBOL % SLOPE HYDRIC CLASS
Altavista-Urban complex AcA 0 -2 -
Arapahoe fine sandy loam Ap - A
Autryville loamy sand AuB 0 -6 -
Bragg soils BrB 0 -8 -
Goldsboro loamy fine sand GoA 0 -2 -
Leon sand Ln - A
Torhunta-Urban complex Tc - A
Urban land Ur - -
NOTE: A denotes hydric soi s or soils having y ric soils
as a major component.
Although three hydric soils are known to exist along this
corridor, they compose less than 5 percent of the proposed project
area. The dominant soils found in the project area are those that
are well drained and of sandy texture which are common in the Coastal
Plain Tertiary system. The River Bend geological formation is the
parent material within the project area, consisting primarily of
limestone.
3. Water Resources
This section contains information concerning water resources
likely to be impacted by the project. Water resource information
encompasses physical aspects of the resource, its relationship to
major water systems, Best Usage Standards, and water quality of the
resources. Probable impacts to these water bodies are also discussed,
as are means to minimize impacts.
a. Waters Impacted and Characteristics
The proposed road widening will traverse Wilson Creek, a
tributary of the Trent River. The headwaters of Wilson Creek
are located 2.2 km (1.4 miles) and 1.4 km (0.9 mile) north of
the proposed project. These headwaters are approximately 4.5 km
(2.8 miles) and 3.5 km (2.2 miles), respectively, north of
Wilson Creek's confluence with the Trent River, still within
Craven County.
Wilson Creek was approximately 3.0 m (10 feet) wide and
0.9 m (3 feet) deep and well beneath stream bank capacity at the
time of the sight investigation. The substrate consisted of
sand and associated organic accumulation. The water was clear
and slow moving and had no odor.
27
b. Best Usage Classifications
Streams have been assigned a best usage classification by
the Division of Environmental Management. Wilson Creek has a
classification of "C Sw NSW" throughout its entire course. The
"C" portion of this classification denotes that the primary use
of the water resource is that of aquatic life propagation and
survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation, and
agriculture. "Sw" denotes the water resource as a swamp water,
which has low velocities and natural characteristics different
from adjacent streams. The "NSW" classification denotes that the
waters are nutrient sensitive and require limitations on
nutrient inputs. Neither High Quality Waters (HQW), WS-I or
WS-II Water Supplies, nor Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW)
occur within 1.6 km (1 mile) of the project study area.
C. Water Quality
The Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN) is
managed by the Division of Environmental Management and is part
of an ongoing ambient water quality monitoring program which
addresses long term trends in water quality. The program
assesses water quality by sampling for selected benthic
macroinvertebrate organisms at fixed monitoring sites. Some
macroinvertebrates are sensitive to subtle changes in water
quality; thus, the species richness and overall biomass can be
interpreted as indicators of water quality. No BMAN data has
been gathered for Wilson Creek; however, data has been collected
throughout the Trent River Basin with fair-good ratings.
Point source dischargers located throughout North Carolina
are permitted through the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) program. Any discharger is required
to register for a permit. No permitted dischargers are listed
for Wilson Creek.
d. Summary of Anticipated Impacts to Water Resources
Sedimentation and erosion control precautions should be
implemented to prevent potential sediment deposition into the
water resource. The removal of bank vegetation associated with
a stream can raise water temperatures by eliminating shading.
The loss of stream vegetation, both aquatic and terrestrial, can
lead to heightened water temperatures. Sedimentation and
substrate disturbance occurring during construction can
significantly reduce water clarity. Sediment deposition into
the stream causes turbidity which inhibits light penetration and
depresses aquatic vegetative growth. Furthermore,
channelization and flow changes may also occur as a result of
construction, modifying the hydrology of the water resource.
28
4. Jurisdictional Issues
a. Surface Waters of the United States
No jurisdictional wetlands are found in the project area;
however, surface waters are encountered. Wilson Creek falls
under the broad category of "Waters of the United States," as
defined in Section 33 of the Code of Federal Register (CFR) Part
328.3. Any action that either proposes or has the potential to
place fill into these waters, falls under the jurisdiction of
the United States Army Corps of Engineers (COE) under Section
404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344).
Permits
Impacts to jurisdictional surface waters are anticipated
due to the close proximity of Wilson Creek to the proposed
widening. This project will require a 401 Water Quality General
Certification from the North Carolina Division of Environmental
Management (DEM) prior to the approval of Section 404
authorization. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act requires that
the state issue or deny water certification for any federally
permitted or licensed activity that may result in a discharge to
the Waters of the United States. This water body falls under
the jurisdiction of the United States Army Corps of Engineers
(COE) and is likely to be authorized by provisions of Nationwide
Permit (NWP) 33 CFR 330.5 (a) (23). This permit authorizes
activities undertaken, assisted, authorized, regulated, funded,
or financed, in whole or in part, by another federal agency or
department that are categorically excluded from documentation
because they will neither individually nor cumulatively have a
significant environmental effect. Final permit decisions are
left to the Army Corps of Engineers (COE).
Minimization
Wilson Creek is already traversed by US 17 and culverted,
lessening its natural characteristics as a habitat and water
resource. Widening of the existing roadway on the outer edges
will lead to further modification of the stream system. In
order to minimize impacts to water resources in the study area,
NCDOT's Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface
Waters and Sedimentation Guidelines will be followed during
project construction.
b. Rare and Protected Species
Some populations of fauna and flora have been in or are in
the process of decline, either due to natural forces or their
inability to coexist with man. Federal law, under the
provisions of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended,
requires that any action likely to adversely affect a species
classified as federally-protected be subject to review by the
United States Fish and Wildlife Service. Other species may
receive additional protection under separate state laws.
29
Federally Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classifications of
Endangered (E), Threatened (T), Proposed Endangered (PE), and
Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under provisions of
section 7 and section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973,
as amended. Table 6 lists the federally protected species
listed by the Fish and Wildlife Service for Craven County as of
March 28, 1995.
Table 6. Federally Protected Species for Craven County
SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME STATUS
Caretta caretta loggerhead sea turtle T
Chelonia mydas green sea turtle T
Haliaeetus leucocephalus bald eagle E
Lepidochelys kempi Kemp's Ridley sea turtle E
Picoides borealis red-cockaded woodpecker E
Aeschynomene virginica sensitive joint-vetch T
"E" denotes Endangered (a species that is threatened with extinction
throughout all or a significant portion of its range).
"T" denotes Threatened (a species that is likely to become an endangered
species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant
portion of its range.
"*" No specimen from Craven County found in the past 20 years
(1973-1993).
Caretta caretta (loggerhead sea turtle) T
Animal Family: Cheloniidae
Date Listed: 7/28/78
Distribution in N.C.: Beaufort, Bertie,
Brunswick, Camden, Carteret, Chowan, Craven,
Currituck, Dare, Hyde, New Hanover, Onslow, Pamlico,
Pasquotank, Pender, Perquimans, Tyrrell, and
Washington Counties.
Loggerhead turtles can be distinguished from other sea
turtles by their unique reddish-brown color. The loggerhead is
characterized by a large head and blunt jaws. They have five or
more costal plates with the first touching the nuchal and three
to four bridge scutes.
The loggerhead nests on suitable beaches from Ocracoke
Inlet, North Carolina through Florida. Loggerhead turtles also
sometimes nest on suitable beaches along the Gulf States. There
are also major nesting grounds on the eastern coast of
Australia. Loggerheads live worldwide in temperate to
30
subtropical waters. Loggerheads nest nocturnally between May
and September on isolated beaches that are characterized by
fine-grained sediments. They are mainly carnivorous, feeding on
small marine animals.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Due to the inland location of the project and the absence
of finely textured beaches, this species' habitat, it can be
concluded that this project will have no adverse effect on the
loggerhead sea turtle.
Chelonia mydas (green sea turtle) T
Animal Family: Cheloniidae
Date Listed: 7/28/78
Distribution in N.C.: Beaufort, Bertie,
Brunswick, Camden, Carteret, Chowan, Craven,
Currituck, Dare, Hyde, New Hanover, Onslow, Pamlico,
Pasquotank, Pender, Perquimans, Tyrrell, and
Washington Counties.
The distinguishing factors found in the green sea turtle
are the single clawed flippers and a single pair of elongated
scales between the eyes. The green sea turtle has a small head
and a strong, serrate lower jaw.
The green sea turtle is found in temperate and tropical
oceans and seas. Nesting in North America is limited to small
communities on the east coast of Florida requiring beaches with
minimal disturbances and a sloping platform for nesting (they do
not nest in North Carolina). The green sea turtle can be found
in shallow waters. They are attracted to lagoons, reefs, bays,
Mangrove swamps, and inlets where an abundance of marine grasses
can be found. Marine grasses are the principle food source of
the green sea turtle.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Due to the inland location of the project and the absence
of undisturbed beaches, this species' habitat, it can be
concluded that this project will not adversely affect the green
sea turtle.
Haliaeetus leucoce halus (bald eagle) E
An al Famil?y: Accipitridae
Date Listed: 3/11/67
Distribution in N.C.: Anson, Beaufort,
Brunswick, Carteret, Chatham, Chowan, Craven, Dare,
Durham, Guilford, Hyde, Montgomery, New Hanover,
Northampton, Perquimans, Richmond, Stanly, Vance,
Wake, amd Washington Counties.
31
Adult bald eagles can be identified by their large white
head and short white tail. The body plumage is dark-brown to
chocolate brown in color. In flight, bald eagles can be
identified by their flat wing soar.
Eagle nests are found in close proximity to water (within a
half mile) in locations that have a clear flight path to the
water, are in the largest living trees in an area, and have an
open view of the surrounding land. Human disturbance can cause
an eagle to abandon an otherwise suitable habitat. The breeding
season for the bald eagle begins in December or January. Fish
are the major food source for bald eagles. Other sources
include coots, herons, and wounded ducks. Food sources may be
live or carrion.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
The absence of tall trees that are accessible (within a
half mile) to open water shows that no suitable habitat exists
within the project area. Moreover, high levels of human activity
exist within the project area making the site more unsuitable
for bald eagles.
Lepidochelys kem ii (Kemp's ridley sea turtle) E
Animal Family: Cheloniidae
Date Listed: 1212170
Distribution in N.C.: Beaufort, Bertie, Brunswick, Camden,
Carteret, Chowan, Craven, Currituck, Dare, Hyde, New
Hanover, Onslow, Pamlico, Pasquotank, Pender,
Perquimans, Tyrrell, and Washington Counties.
Kemp's ridley sea turtle is the smallest of the sea turtles
that visit North Carolina's coast. These turtles have a
triangular shaped head and a hooked beak with large crushing
surfaces. It has a heart-shaped carapace that is nearly as wide
as it is long, with the first of five costal plates touching the
nuchal plates. Adult Kemp's ridley sea turtles have white or
yellow plastrons with a gray and olive green carapace. The head
and flippers are gray.
Kemp's ridley sea turtles live in shallow coastal and
estuarine waters, in association with red mangrove trees. A
majority of this sea turtle's nesting occurs in a 24 km (14.9
mile) stretch of beach between Barra del Tordo and Ostioal in
the state of Tamaulipas, Mexico. This turtle is an infrequent
visitor to the North Carolina coast and usually does not nest
here. Kemp's sea turtle can lay eggs as many as three times
during the April to June breeding season. Kemp's ridley sea
turtles prefer beach sections that are backed up by extensive
swamps or large bodies of open water having seasonal narrow
ocean connections and a well defined elevated dune area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
32
Due to the inland location and absence of estuarine beaches
associated with large swamps or open water, this species'
habitat, it can be determined that the proposed project will
have no adverse effect on the Kemp's ridley sea turtle.
Picoides borealis (red-cockaded woodpecker) E
Animal Family: Picidae
Date Listed: 10/13/70
Distribution in N.C.: Anson, Beaufort, Bertie, Bladen,
Brunswick, Camden, Carteret, Chatham, Columbus,
Craven, Cumberland, Dare, Duplin, Forsyth, Gates,
Halifax, Harnett, Hertford, Hoke, Hyde, Johnston,
Jones, Lee, Lenoir, Montgomery, Moore, Nash, New
Hanover, Northampton, Onslow, Orange, Pamlico, Pender,
Perquimans, Pitt, Richmond, Robeson, Sampson,
Scotland, Tyrrell, Wake, Wayne, and Wilson Counties.
The adult red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW) has a plumage that
is entirely black and white, except for small red streaks on the
sides of the nape in the male. The back of the RCW is black and
white with horizontal stripes. The breast and underside of this
woodpecker are white with streaked flanks. The RCW has a large
white cheek patch surrounded by the black cap, nape, and throat.
The red-cockaded woodpecker uses open old growth stands of
southern pines, particularly longleaf pine (Pinus palustris),
for foraging and nesting habitat. A forested stand must contain
at least 50 percent pine, lack a thick understory, and be
contiguous with other stands to be appropriate habitat for the
red-cockaded woodpecker. These birds nest exclusively in living
pine trees that are > 60 years old and are contiguous with pine
stands at least 30 years of age. The foraging range of the
red-cockaded woodpecker is up to 200 hectares (500 acres). This
foraging area must be contiguous with suitable nesting sites.
The red-cockaded woodpeckers usually nest in trees that are
infected with the fungus that causes red-heart disease.
Cavities are located in colonies from 3.6 m (12 feet) to 30.3 m
(100 feet) above the ground and average 9.1 m (30 feet) to
15.7 m (50 feet) high. They can be identified by a large
incrustation of running sap that surrounds the tree. The
red-cockaded woodpecker lays its eggs in April, May, and June;
the eggs hatch approximately 38 days later.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Nesting habitat, southern yellow pine trees of 60 years or
older, is not found in the project area. Homogeneous southern
pine stands of about 30 years or more are also not present, thus
excluding suitable foraging habitat. Habitat requirements for
the red-cockaded woodpecker are absent in the project area.
33
Aeschynomene virginica (Sensitive joint vetch) T
Plant Family: Fabaceae
Federally Listed: October, 1991
Flowers Present: late July - August
Distribution in N.C.: Beaufort, Craven, and Hyde Counties.
Sensitive joint-vetch is an annual legume. This legume has
single stems that may branch near the top. The leaves are
even-pinnate, with entire, gland-dotted leaflets. The flowers
are irregular and legume-like. The yellow, red-streaked flowers
grow in racemes. Fruits are produced from late July to early
October. Fruits turn dark brown when ripe.
The sensitive joint-vetch is found in river banks, swamps,
and freshwater tidal marshes, close enough to the ocean to be
influenced by tidal fluctuations and far enough upstream to live
in fresh or only slightly brackish water. Soil disturbance is
important in getting seeds planted and away from birds and
insects. Some observations suggest that seedlings may only
germinate in disturbed soils and/or plant material that has been
deposited on the bank. Full sun and bare substrates are thought
to significantly enhance germination.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Although habitat suitable for Aeschynomene virginica exists
in the project area, no specimens were identified after a plant
by plant survey was conducted. Moreover, sensitive joint-vetch
has not been found in Craven County in the last 20 years.
Federal Candidate and State Listed Species
There are 15 federal candidate (C2) species listed for
Craven County. Federal candidate species are not afforded
federal protection 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. Candidate 2 species are defined as organisms which
are vulnerable to extinction although no sufficient data
currently exist to warrant a listing of Endangered, Threatened,
Proposed Endangered, or Proposed Threatened. Organisms which are
listed as Endangered (E), Threatened (T), or Special Concern
(SC) by the North Carolina Heritage Program list of Rare Plant
and Animal species are afforded state protection under the State
Endangered Species Act and the North Carolina Plant Protection
and Conservation Act of 1979.
Table 7 lists federal candidate species, the species state
status (whether or not the species is afforded state
protection), and the existence of suitable habitat for each
species in the study area. This species list is provided for
information purposes since the status of these species may be
upgraded in the future.
34
Table 7.
SCIENTIFIC NAME
Federal Candidate Species for Craven County
COMMON NAME HABITAT STATUS
Aimophila aestivalis Bachman's sparrow NO SC
Laterallus jamicensis Black rail NO --
Procambarus plumimanus Croatan crayfish YES --
Pyreferra ceromatica Ceromatic noctuid UNKNOWN --
moth
Asplenium heteroresiliens Wagner's spleenwort NO E
Carex chapmanii Chapman's sedge NO --
Dionaea muscipula Venus flytrap NO C-SC
Minuartia godfreyi Godfrey's sandwort NO E
Myriophyllum laxum Loose watermilfoil NO T
Oxypolis ternata Savanna cowbane NO --
Solidago pulchra Carolina goldenrod NO E
Solidago verna Spring-flowering NO E
goldenrod
Tofielia glabra Smooth bog-asphodel NO --
Litsea aestivalis Pondspice NO --
Sporobolus teretifolius Wireleaf dropseed NO T
Surveys for these species were not conducted during the site
visit, nor were any of these species observed. A review of the
database of the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program rare species
and unique habitats revealed no records of North Carolina rare and/or
protected species in or near the project study area.
5. Flood Hazard Evaluation
Craven County and the City of New Bern are participants in the
National Flood Insurance Regular Program. The proposed project
crosses Wilson Creek and two unnamed streams. The crossings at
Wilson Creek and the unnamed stream located just east of US 70
Business are in flood hazard zones. The Wilson Creek crossing is
included in a detailed flood study. The limits of the 100-year
floodplain and floodway for Wilson Creek are shown on Figure 8. The
approximate limits of the 100-year floodplain of the unnamed stream
located just east of US 70 Business are shown in Figure 10. The
floodplain areas at each of these crossings are in urban areas
adjacent to residential and business properties, but the immediate
floodplain areas are undeveloped. No buildings in the vicinity of
the stream crossings appear to have floor elevations below the
100-year flood level. The stream located just east of the US 70 / US
17 interchange is not in a flood hazard zone. The approximate limits
of the 100-year floodplain of this unnamed stream are shown in Figure
9. The proposed widening of US 17 and culvert extensions will not
have an adverse impact on the existing floodplain areas and will not
increase existing flood hazards.
35
6. Farmland
The Farmland Protection Policy Act of 1981 requires all federal
agencies to consider the impact of land acquisition and construction
projects on prime and important farmland soils. These soils are
designated by the United States Soil Conservation Service based on a
number of factors, including crop yield and the level of expenditure
of energy and other resources.
Land in urbanized areas, or land which has been committed to
urban development by the local governing body, is exempt from the
requirements of the Farmland Protection Policy Act. Since the
proposed improvement is located in an urbanized area where additional
development is anticipated, no further consideration of potential
impacts to farmland is required.
7. Highway Traffic Noise/Construction Noise Analysis
The project proposes to widen the existing four-lane divided
facility to a six-lane divided facility. A "worst case" scenario was
used to determine traffic noise impacts for the design year 2016.
Twenty-three residences and six businesses are anticipated to be
impacted by highway traffic noise as a result of the project. If the
project is not built, nineteen residences and five businesses will be
impacted by highway traffic noise by the year 2016. For the design
year, the exterior noise increase for the receptors in the immediate
project area is expected to range from 2 to 7 dBA for the build
alternative, and from 2 to 6 dBA for the no-build alternative.
Generally, a 3 dBa increase is considered to be a barely perceptible
change in noise level, and a 5 dBA increase is readily noticeable.
Noise mitigation measures were considered, and none were determined
to be feasible, reasonable, or cost-effective.
This evaluation completes the assessment requirements for
highway traffic noise (23 CFR Part 772) and for air quality (1990
CAAA and NEPA), and no additional reports are required. Noise levels
could increase during construction, but this increase will be
temporary.
8. Air Quality Analysis
This project is located in Craven County, which has been
determined to be in compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards. 40 CFR Part 51 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 area.
Air quality was evaluated for the years 1996 and 2016. The
highest predicted carbon monoxide concentration level for the various
alternatives was the no build alternative for the years 1996 and
2016. The predicted carbon monoxide concentration level is 3.6 parts
per million for the no-build alternative in 2016. Comparison of the
predicted carbon monoxide concentrations with the National Ambient
Air Quality Standards indicates no violations of the standard.
36
If vegetation is disposed of by burning, all burning shall be
done in accordance with applicable local laws and regulations of the
North Carolina State Implementation Plan for air quality in
compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520. This evaluation completes the
assessment requirements for air quality (1990 CAAA and NEPA), and no
additional reports are required.
9. Stream Modification
Minor channel improvements may be necessary at inlet and outlet
ends of the culverts described in Section III.D., but no significant
channel improvements or realignments are anticipated as a part of the
proposed project.
10. Hazardous Materials
No hazardous materials involvement is anticipated; however, an
investigation of hazardous materials along the proposed project will
be completed before right of way is purchased.
VII. PUBLIC COORDINATION
Upon the completion of this document, a public hearing will be
scheduled to provide more information on the proposed project to local
citizens and to gather additional input.
VIII. CONCLUSION
The proposed widening of US 17 to six lanes and the installation of
the closed loop signal system will improve operations along the facility.
The proposed widening project is anticipated to require additional right
of way in some locations; however, no businesses or residences are
anticipated to be relocated. Although some additional right of way will
be required, the proposed project is not anticipated to result in any
significant impacts to the human or natural environment and is considered
to be a "categorical exclusion", as defined by the Federal Highway
Administration's environmental guidelines (23 CFR 771.117).
EBM/tp
I 32I OLI 3'HW 5'0 =,,I 3TdOS 3.LVWIX02iddV
955Z-n.L03fONd dI.L
AlNnOD N3AVNJ
(ONVA3'inou 3Sf13N) S53NISna OL Sn Ol
(AVON 1N311) SLZI NS WONd
NN36 M3N
Li Sn
dVW A. LKIOIA
LNVILL zoo<N
d?
HJNVN9'iV1N3WNOZi1AN3 UNV ONWNV'id p
SAVMH91H AO NOIS1A34 b
NOIIV1NOdswiqu
dO.1N3WlHVd34 VNIrIOUVO HIVON ?Y
aY
M1tlON io
I ,
o T?
bFTi ft 6? iIl
yo o..l'Li,' 1iT lC . 'f
?0' 4 + 60' g f iT
??1101 o a_..n r FdR i0
RCi
Tar
-izFt 3
o"mm

a
N_
•` ?V1 I
/' rt
430 ayn
JZI Mylro ? a e.I Ioa??l
6 NOI11
)i o rJ I t eu67
g as si I `
uuleo NVIV
\afe0 Al
• \ i

•at u 4 1°
0(? \
/ ? i t S !C
3 U. Apo o.o Syy
uiMt 6
I NA
? 'uotArO ?? 0
fnw3 \
INAw /03 sI
oropa?urA
\ 5 s'`
61
of \
C? `

414 Fr.
30
r4- t -

lp"P I.-
4
altr

?V
i-
mot.
I
i

a

t ulo
l?
'f
lip-
rM?
ra 7
vo?

•
A
U z U) H
0EA 0H 3 Wt'S H
UH) UU) UHi w W 4 O N H
:D En ?c zV z x O ow
H H H H H H A
H EH-1
3 rz 3 a
C7
x 0 0 fnn
w? wN H w 8a o
m 2 U1 H [H !!) a A EI
P04 LD op 0 FC (zl
z H
wz w W w u O
OF 00
1
/
00
t
00
00
i

P Appp".
400,
E -4 w
U to
48 z
k ZU zH 3
?` r H W H U W 7+ a m O
U1 (n f1n w a o H
`? • ??a c?? H w ow w
r14 u
eF} `??
00,
Ln P4
?t Ix (4
u .. F ?W W WH H Hal
?? - - y °, u1 u1 r [-4 ul
l
1 00
- U
U) P4 0 C'
_4 Ej
Z a a W a W U
f ?' = w
i
/ I '4
- w /
H / I (HOC) 1
1 >_ a
P, 00
_ I
00
U) o
U)
duo
olaw
P4 i'
,1 a a
PL
- = , 0 3NII HO.LVvy
i
G
r
c?
r ?-
t

?atM

IF
;. 3
"?f;/f •
,or
M
•

C
J
x
? Y
r
U
n
O N ^
%n ° Y•
N U ?'
z „
^
j•:
iX
b
? n
m
O
Q
V
? N
O Iy f.
r
O N
c
CL
n
N
r ,v
n °
n
Q _ _ 3Nt, IIJS YYt
? d t„
A
o n tr
N
b / N
? t w
"
w N
fJ ? 4 L`v
0. w
r•N.

v
ww-t ti t r -• "
n F N
?1 t
N N
I? A

? ? f1t
n N
n o,
A O1
A tw

N? N A N
N i w

N

N
*
I
N ? --?
? L
OI

•
'} t ^ Y
e`
4
W
o ? -Uo
C7 e
0 L7

W V[ uC
<o0a
ozo pV
[
?
' ? 1 /
?
?
1
.
['?
J GU 14
Q?O ?1?
F?-
f
1-aoCw?U
K ?-? IgWNqE,? =1?r? up
P
N
.
?P
U
W
- wz °?
o
1
`l O
Ull
\,?fs . oce4P-? C?

Q aw w o t?

A 4 -?
to ?s htr -'
.- ° b N ~
° n
n
.. N
NZ ? .
r
^1 t^
m
o ^ n
r
? f n n b - b b
1 Y
^ f O
•-? n
Y `
M
U) 1 ?f
(
L+
91
r o
. E
b 4) t r
J
A ?
to et ko r,
n
n
10

? tn• N
r
Y?
n
N fY
?
,N o n pn

? on tl.. n1 to
-i e, n
?
P

0
tiO1VYl
3t111
r tJ
O t+ - 1
O p ?
O
r P

m o Iv o G
t'
_ A r B
q ? O

o
o ?' ^
o
o
o
"
o
o
"
o
"
o
o
Ln
o
0
o
M
o a w b b " .O " " b " b w ul b .O w "
?? ?
t H
i+
o o
u
0
0
0
o
rl
o
ol
r V ,W Q A H A A r/ O A ri A A W O. r1 A r1
tN
to E

n?N rn F
F
S
0
4 -?
U
W
AI I
[0
H
.i
N
rl
rl
u)
ri
N
H
N
N
M
rl
N
M
fl t rl Q
0
w
-'
-
-
-
-
---
--
--
--
--
O ,^? w H
eM V1 1'1 O O .-1 O r4 M O r1 O rl rl ry O rl N
^ lL ?
1 EI
N C ?

co ul w
N
N
Y
O
P
Y
O
o
N
O
b
Y
O
(O
e
O
Y D N ?^ C N Q U 00 o r/ N w N co a co A N n N rl Y "
O p n lo n b O O r C E4 r1 N
o cc
U CC -? ?J *it r -- a vi N. o El W w N O w O b

z v Q
N n It
N b
"
N N
p
M N
v w o
rl N v
h o
; b o
N co
M
n N
O a
FHC rl r
/ r
i
N y IC o
N ? Q D
b
O O
t p ?? N b
N
W M
H A
to
r4
b
f4
N
b
o
O
N
co
b
b
N
h
.- l7 q A

f= rl r1 V Y o

N
r
I
A
ri
M
m
o
rl
rl
.o
M
r1
Y
N
"
N

n N
to f
N ?a
~
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
° n r' eYV ? a T4 a vJ
N Q a F4 N a
tr' rr a Q PG u a O O
M no N
W
H

A

W

H
Pi
W
P
N
EA
to

7W

U

Ir:

tV n'

.- 1

N
O

a
r
1
N
n

M
n

N

M
a

w
o

a

o a

H

i
N

R
o
F
?y'

o

ILL
a is S

Q ~ n

t (7 ? ?
C7 rl rl H Y T
7:
Q r W
H .-1
O a
U ^ H
i .? A
•1 .-1
N r
Q N
W
N
z
U
l a
]
Ey
N
W
Q a
P
b .1
p r
U) - -- - - /
T4
z
E4
It
W
Q
a
[Q
"
Y)
U ?
A
i
Vl .-.
M
Ext N
N N7
Pi
N C,
aw
O
41 Earl
x
a to
D N
e
off 0
N H
?
A H
b
• C
rA+ °a
W
H
O
z
41
x
O
Ij
M
O d
n m
Y a
H \
0 N
O o
A
to O
NO
Mx
ro t9
Y E4
IJ •W
VIII
H ti
M
w N
I ti
N
In ?
u
Y I]
... In
Y
J
x
0
N
w
H
0
O
M
v
H
x
t•7
34
J q
o to

J

I I'll
N UJ
1'

J

7 O
fG

Y

Y
T

Y?
Y a
fn

o

\

x
(? N o
t7 M

0

M

M
M M
H

0

H
:A

N JC
M

Y

0
27

Lf)
H In
?7

N

Y

/n N
H

i
M
11
I

ti
9 Q
N

J

O A I
In

s1
O

UJ
" 0
0

K
M
h1

0
11 x
0

A

W N
,N

r

N
J

m N
'F1

r

W
u

Y m
7.1

r

N
Y

b

M

f0
7
H
M
0
M o
M 0
t
In
H
Iq
h
xl
?J
t7 33
Y
K
J]
N In U M
N
U
J N
A
N

m Y
W
co

w m

N
r
o r
O
a
W
m W
Y
N
•?
N
Y
O. N
O
m
A
A
Y
N

m b 0

u H
W

-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- •
- Q
o
- - -
W
W
m N
N
O

(D Y
U
O
V
A

N
Y
O Y
O
m
?
N W
N
O• Y
O
N
N
O r
m
m
U1
O
Y
N

m 1'
?
? M

N Y
Jn
J
o A
N
A
1'
(A N
J
o Y
W
A

O?
N
o r
b
N
m
O o,
O
O r
m
A
N
A u
N
o
m
A
N
N
/'
N o 0
r o
!n
N

Ij
N 1' O N Y Y O Y O W Y O r O O W N X
H

W
N
Y
W
N
N
Y
N
Y
Jn
Y
r
N
r
r
m Q
p! k
c

m
r
o
?
r
1'
?
m
m
?o
r
0
?
m
Y
0
?o
m
r
0
r
o UP
tq x
C

H
In P m m P m In In m In oI m 'A X
In o 0 o 0 to o o L. o o In 0 o o In o 0 0
0
N .N.
O N ? N _
? 4 Ir,. N

77 r N ? w
u o
i1 d
+? r w
V
u ? ?? w V

n
I vd Io ? w7 u
M J•?? w
d
y
H
A
u a. ? y 1 ? y
i 1
q q
K ? u u

H
4 N

w w
V w p
a
p

Z
q
J. u
N
r co
? 14 jp
?-
-
u ]]
n
H ? J7 ? w ?
?•'r w1 ?
r ? O O tJ
1
N ...N
4
Q ?'? Nut o
N q

t
o. N
1
1
k ? ?

In
M a Lu
w l1 + ~ N o
•
r
14
w u ?-w
N
a
O ~ w
+? No
l
N
+ N -r tl
3
3 r
4 w
o
P
0
o U
lp
r aL? nR
t
+ ,V u
a
? N

J
`
O
7 1? d u u
?7 u ?r T
MATCH LINE ` ,? -1 u N a•

i u 9 P J N
N ?^ P N
wd tw +
N d ? 'i
w w ?
u N ? u

wtl rw ? ?
r N pN
N \ s
? u
w
3?
J
`'
+ V V r ~p q ?N LV w V
J
N
N UI

co s

v ±? _

--o' p

4
w

?

O .

w 0
A w
N
1 1
r r
?
V
V N
p N
D
n
N N A Fr J.
r-
q ?, -.J1 N ? N
N1 V
t w
nd?fn
?R

N
o p ?
? odd/

of ?
x i 1
w O
b(l ln?
n
o?N,: ^ 0

c-
mz °3Fv
?n?-w_
C?tn
r-
Ins
...-{{{ (7
?0q

?ty
1
!
7l
U
.00 p
ny 7CJ
lHO

tb
y
0;v
{ C) -0
Mop
th7' Vi
m
V
a >
^y'• n' b
o
l 4
z
u

?
l
1 A
G
a, 0"
'1
J-. n1
n
rn_
+ q

S U
?-
4
w _
u + J ?1t
N
• N? N ?
w
od 4 0
A
N u 4 Lp
4 4
4J
?e
4 ?J A
N ?tl
4
O ?? N
b
N? U
w
d t^
v ?
J• N
N ?, L +
d?? ro
4 r'
N p
N d ? N
N N
a q ?.
?
O U
N
N
O [?
qjd`? • N
~_ a ee ?l
ro t?
O N
a N N
a u
N d tw
w
b ?
n
K
O 0
1
6
+- N a
o O{
K
O N
a
0
o ?
V Iy
O ,
V q•
Q
CL
U
%A Z C
N In
?- V
y o Ln OV
IJ.
N
n
N 1
u
- m
J Y
e d
r
J
0
O
O J
0
r
? u w
O
a `7r 'i
w
N
N l N •o
0
N
1 f

N N
V w N to
w O O ?? N
J d L
"?
?
?
-P
V1
w qtr'
N ~ v N
V ?, ? d

Ud t N

w N C
a J. Ja
L r V
d ? O
N
t 1

7
w
O I
y.. 1
?? 4 O
y O O
A
0 0
- - • -um w rc A7$,OO I -

o

a 0
EM
IM
EM

® 13
0
13
13

©

?

?1
i

O z
F ?.

w
z
o
?•
a
" ?
w a a

[s.
C LL, EW o
rti
vii

a w o
(z o
Iz

U

Q o o

E" z a4

N

w
w
o
o u
U3
E-
A e

G
-, cw •- w

o"0 a°? n
flW
rr ??
.
g-0
43 z
,n G? f ?]s ?oCi
I
H
O 'j o f ° • °E9? U
P4 ,?}t J
E,? J • ? ©? ? W I t ?..
? ? ? . ` BOO ; • •,
tN,
It N0W -` ,cy, N
'?.? Q,? ??_ Edo •'?? .?,, ?- ° 0 :t? y• ' ^?. ,t ,r ?
• ® , I •?? ? fit H
. • ?:.
Q# P4
-U,- E-1
sy„ y
40, 41
.
w UH ?j
A C= C7 C= 0 =2 p C3 t? C? 0
r
' N
ni
o
? o
N
N
V
? C
M .?
M
M _
M
v
O0 ?o
a ?
•O N
^ ?.
10
?o
•o
0
1
Z,
C
U
W
W
d
Q-?
Uz
HQ
uQ
Q?
x
L
10
00 N ?
U
L+l
M
M
00 `?
1.
ni
d
7
Ic

..C?z
a - `? to
Z
o
°?ey7 C
???c
z?CSSS
U >
o?
=1
2w
u ?;? ?
U •yLj?FN
=5u LLLLL?..... c
?Q

O
0. z
V
N? "Z?
y
Z F• z??''?°•
a
c•. W
N h
?CV?
On

JH' NOS`

0 SO Cl.

0
?
te
S
r
Cl. O
s
?
i o
J
U
V)

?Sl
z w
O Q

U
W -?
c
0.7
¢
U z

w Q
W

U
.1
I
'Cl 9 ?p
o U t
00 > o
d?
w N
z
0
N ? N
r-? u
a W ?,
13
? a
N - N
UQ
a?
q
u
Ul
---- - Q--- -
zQ ? ?
7-7
w?5
1-3
O
N
n 'O 1
? t
O N L
i
i
? I.
?o
e
0
>

o
?Z ? c7
cc3? '?

U
t-' o
Z?C? t
? 60
j
,,Nzz
?
c o ?

?? c?
o
??, r
y
U y
? V ? O

r z U
D .+
?3
N
o
Z ?
A ry
?
N N
V7 O p

Q? •.. NOV Ft °n
ur s
Z`
a O

2 /O
V)

0
Z N
0
o `4
N
U
W .?
UQ
ya.. ?
E-Q
w? .
W
?Q
Q?
U
/.i11
car-
L

1r
P`
o-1
ld?
•.wo r
• ?Bo f
7 ^?\
?Y IM) o,t \ I_v 7 TiJ An - .ar
'o' er 1 Kit Swamp C% INSET
. •.o w c,
ULL
.) 1111 /
• 14•• `??t V 10
• • ?,, V 1311 1
na . f OdP Ra.
i •
LM A'.LtSE
1.111 ?? tO ti
lin RIVER ``\\+-'I7-' ?i.e ILK
? 11 i1i
TIP PROJECT B-2531
?.p•: 4i ?,// '{\\???? ? FIBS
J!21 C''`? 17?L v f _0++7/ , ) 1 ; .. ?,: 'lP?GtTo"
i TIP PROJECT U-2556
- p 1

CRC
! r,? 11.7 e t 1 .f 3! \^ ..._?' Comp 11.
7s - to ) ?• Comfort A
.::'S " ?; `+t? / A°ryAu.,yr 1'
lli?L„// ?s, r S •p. NEW 8
.. :.?..,.• r? '? 1.2 s\ ror. usv - o u
r
t n r.s Cart. c.)y
N?morr 1?71y •0 ?? •D ? v ror. 2.937 /
:oror• 1211. )o W ha n R?`?iIQ /
76
LIU
.?`? Ills 's Q ' a?R,
Cn k TIP PROJECT R-2301 0 5+..,,or,r•r+oa
/? / / r n..moe
, 27. ® rw.1.1
Nar ! TIP PROJECT B-2532
a? r , , `} .,?1 non
lu1 r ? r t .. 1111 e
• t .0 , V. - u _.. X711
UUL
1221 -A .
o ,2n t A It LEND , _ ? - ;•? .;:?_,. Ri.
7 POr IA+3 {\ ?p C•?F ,111 !
' U14- um 19001 Y 2.u1
'c: IUL
\ -... - `; - rye
n
C O U N T Y -
.o
OF p0aih O _-
'?9
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
o z DIVISION OFHIGHWAYS
c° PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL BRANCH
IL??TOP T11,µ5Qp
OTHER TIP PROJECTS IN THE AREA
US 17
NEW BERN
FROM SR 1278 (TRENT ROAD)
TO US 70 BUSINESS (NEUSE BOULEVARD)
CRAVEN COUNTY
TIP PROJECT U•2556
(NO SCALE) FIGURE 7
. '% --. - '\ y_......

N
p
.? p
al LAVENHAM RD ? o
9 tr
WILSON CREEK 1 QJ a?ouTH ROAD
.sva.
N
COAST LINE
RAILROAD
7
?vZ
` ti f -f, 440 p
pal
aS ;
Sq 127
us Hwy 1,=1
I BEGIN PROJECT I
'OWN OF RIVERBEND
-RATERRITORIAL LIMITS
LEGEND
THE 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN
' THE 500-YEAR FLOODPLAIN
LIMITS OF THE 100-YEAR FLOODWAY
P?
?? F NoaTH o
A
?? Gy NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT' OF
' TRANSPORTATION
o z DIV151ON OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL BRANCH
9 P
P?
OF TAANS?
100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN: WILSON CREEK
US 17
NEW BERN
FROM SR 1276 (TRENT ROAD)
TO US 70 BUSINESS (NEUSE BOULEVARD)
CRAVEN COUNTY
TIP PROJECT U-2356
APPROXIMATE SCALE F'= 1000' FIGURE 3
4
VWMVIIVHJ
3381S H1j13 FIFTH
W
W
N
$1%TH
O
O
3 E
W
J
W 6
U
IVId 1VIN0?00 LU
z
O
N
NOSa3dj3r
Y SEVENTH
w STE`MART
r
N BOULEVARD
? o
J_
Y?
O u1
J S
? ENJ?
P?
S'
W
7
W W
7 7
W Q r
w I I
NoRTh
R
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
- z D"ION OF HIGHWAYS
c° PLANNING AND ENVD20NMENTAL BRANCH
s0?' ?1
ZY/ .
MEAD ,
100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN
(Unnamed stream located:
north of US 70 Business)
US 17
NEW BERN
FROM SR 1278 (TRENT ROAD)
TO US 70 BUSINESS (NEUSE BOULEVARD)
CRAVEN COUNTY
TIP PROJECT U-2556
ATE SCALE 1" = 1000'
FIGURE 9

--?L: - '09 \ COAST n(\'J C=Of
_-? \?, i(•"': ?,. •?.<,' ?'- -._ .__. --3i0 -__ 311 s=s? n
(ASKi
=? 3OJ J ?20 -I BS ( L J.?r??.?%=W \?r? ?/ // ! 121
'I 20 ?,? ? ?? \.. >• .\ ±\??_=. -o •i/• __GeRN `'°'?'?J /' t ?:,
Ile,
`\ia \ •,??il -1,. /':. (\l\ /.( ??. r' ?A', 1Y? Jaen ew )1
ill '? ? • 1 //, • ? %' " . i ? / l ..I i': • _
?? _-_1-? 6 \` N •• / ' END PROJECT ?7=
26
x2 New B STRE
ern UNNAMED
? ? p ?? ,, 11 ? ? ? •?i, A ? C
? 309 25 / r- ? r NV • ? ?= . ' ?.
1 4
y t
_ ,y - ` 21 x I?I a
' c? :•I;,11 t'1 r: x21 ,?5y ?\?\ \ ?,? • \`\ L•,._J Z _,
:AV
i . ; • New Bern
6 y \ ry=• 1148 :•' _ -aisi?
ACS -, Ratio Tow
• ARD '
44103 10
•
? a ? • •i, , ,`?• n • Yid -
• a• " O II 4 'i?•. d• -_? I / t.. \.!7-J-1Jt
1 Q? 'i . I: • h• \\4 • • 1 4,s• r? Y 'T7 1:
.. Y. _ ^` ` it
- JI 1 •?Stg I.r, !? :I: .?i. ..R• ° - ?-.:? III.... ? •I: ih-+t0'," .?i'.IL. ••?•/ -
BEGIN PROJECT o?<'? / `!?j ;? ?' • u ?(. x7F
o. L?ern • - ' 4
Ip(r4 .-? 14 J' lcry - - ' 1-.1•: -- ;-
Ili ,C-
V
/I = •/ _ - -y `5/ ) 1216 ' • . =r a?\ r `. _ e
-sr
t • '•``._ is ._ .; (6 ?L .
Trent oods 1 9 ,
y
• F-.1 °G NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
Sy ` w 11 • I •? TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
ont "F
ub ?p PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL BRANCH
.s . • -- 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN z.
p dt $ .eLlgF t (Umamed Stream locates just north of US 70)
RENT?t Piling,• p.,` • - ?/ pEMBR US 17
F ?. NEW BERN
-->? LEGEND FROM SR 1278 (TRENT ROAD) 1;iE `e??y TO US 70 BUSINESS (NEUSE BOULEVARD)
CRAVEN COUNTY
® THE 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN' TB' PROJECT U-2556
N !'l
•?'? J ???%? is ??iAat ?-
\ _?? APPROXIMATE SCALE P = 2000' FIGURE 10
HPPENDIAX A
COORDINATION

North Carolina Department of Cultural Reso
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
December 30, 1994
Nicholas L. Graf.
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: US 17 from Trent Road (SR 1278) to US 70
Business/NC 55, New Bern, Craven County, U-
2556, Federal-aid No. F-75-3(27), State No.
8.1171001,. ER 95-7968
Dear Mr. Graf:
Divisio
E I V?
d2? MC
JAN 0 3 1915 _
J
Z
???RON1J??'
Thank you for your letter of November 29, 1994, transmitting the historic
structures survey report by Scott Owen concerning the above project.
The following property was determined not eligible for listing in- the National
Register of Historic Places:
Fred Anders Agency Building (#1)
In general the report meets our office's guidelines and those of the Secretary of
the Interior.
The above comments are made pursuant to 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 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
Sinr,\ ly,
" David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
cc: 1/1I. F. Vick
B. Church
109 East Jones Street - Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807
.. _ .. _ '..
A-1
ASIA
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resource
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor ??
Betty Ray McCain, secretary
Division
.V. -. William
July 6, 1994
' Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Widening of US 17 from Trent Road (SR 1278) to
US 70 Business/NC 55, Federal-aid F-75-3(27),
State 8.1171001, U-2556, ER 92-7757, ER 94-
9089, Craven County

Dear Mr. Graf:
i
DIVISION OF
0 J,
HIGHWAYS
'dyes and H'-
Thank you for your letter of June 7, 1994, transmitting the archaeological survey
report by Anna L. Gray concerning the above project.
During the course of the survey no archaeological sites were located within the
project area. Ms. Gray has recommended that no further archaeological
investigation be conducted in connection with this project. We concur with this
recommendation since this project will not involve significant archaeological
resources.
The above comments are made pursuant to 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 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
Sincerely,
avid Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
cc: '-H. F. Vick
T. Padgett
109-East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807
T ?
H

N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DATE
TRANSMITTAL SLIP
TO: REF. NO. OR ROOM, BLDG.
XAF3
G
L
-R *b C'4"g - bEM
I (-
A
A
_
FROM: REF. NO. OR ROOM, BLDG.
GE>ptc McFgc?S n?-E
ACTION
? NOTE AND FILE ? PER 9UR CONVERSATION
? NOTE AND RETURN TO ME ? PER YOUR REQUEST
? RETURN WITH MORE DETAILS ? FOR YOUR APPROVAL
? NOTE AND SEE ME ABOUT THIS ? FOR YOUR INFORMATION
? PLEASE ANSWER ? FOR YOUR COMMENTS
? PREPARE REPLY FOR MY SIGNATURE ? SIGNATURE
? TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION ? INVESTIGATE AND REPORT
COMMENTS:

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA L
DEPARTMENT OF TPANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT, JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GovrlkNOR P.O. BOX 25201, RAITIGI I. N.C. 27611-5201
December 15, 1993
W ,??
'&r 4t-
MEMORANDUM TO: Mr. Eric Galamb
DEM - DEHNR, 6th Floor /
FROM:' H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
IJ Planning and Environmental Branch c
SUBJECT: Meeting to discuss the widening of US 17 from Trent Road
(SR 1278) to US 70 Business, New Bern, Craven County,
TIP Project U-2556, State Project 8.1171001, Federal Aid
Project F-75-3(27)
A scoping meeting for TIP Project U-2556 was held on February 11, 1992.
At that meeting, those present agreed that the Planning and Environmental
Branch should consult with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) about
changing the proposed environmental document from a Federal Environmental
Assessment to a Categorical Exclusion. This change in documentation resulted
in the postponement of planning and environmental studies.
Now, in order to assure that all desired improvements are incorporated
into this project and are addressed in the proposed Categorical Exclusion, a
meeting has been scheduled for January 5, 1994 at 10:00 A. M. in the Planning
and Environmental Branch Conference Room (Room 434). At this meeting, the
widening alternatives discussed in the previous scoping meeting and other
proposed improvements to be included in the project will be reviewed.
Attached for your review and comments are updated scoping sheets for the
subject project and the minutes of the scoping meeting held on February 11,
1992. Please provide us with your comments at the meeting or mail them to us
prior to the meeting date.
4
Thank for you for your assistance in our planning process. If there are
any questions about the meeting or the scoping sheets, please call Eddie
McFalls, Project Planning Engineer, at [phone].
EM/plr
Attachments
p61 c - 2-

/
"J"
Nil N d V1
i if=r, 161993
GROUP
Y SECTION
R. SAMUEL. HUNT I I I
S1CRIII-ARY
c2 ?C.f - 2
J r

e(va )

y std ?? ????. ?? .
??ds d/s ?? ? r
2 ?r'i?:/' C????
?? ? ?? ?

PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
Date 12/15/93
Revision Date
Project Development Stage
Programming
Planning X
Design _
TIP # U-2556
Project # 8.1171001
F.A. Project # F-75-3(27)
Division 2
County Craven
Route US 17
Functional Classification Urban Principal Arterial
Length 2.7 miles
Purpose of Project: To construct additional travel_ lanes and
improve intersections in order to increase the capacity and
safety of US 17.
Description of project (including specific limits) and major
elements of work: Widen the existing four-lane divided ro?:tdway
to a six lane divided facility from Trent: Road (SR 1278) to the
US 17/US 70 Business-NC 55 intersection. The tw(-) alternatives
under consideration are as follows:
1. six-lane divided shoulder section - the roadway would.
be widened six feet to the outside of each d.irect.i.on's
travel.way and six feet into each side of the median. A
16-foot raised median would be constiuct'ed; a 4-foot
island would be used at turning lanes.
2. Six-lane divided curb and gutter section - t:lir- roadwIly
would be widened twelve feet to the out.; i.dF of. fach
direction's travelway. A 30-foot grassed median would
remain. Any necessary turning lance, would be
constructed in the median. A 16-foot raised median
would be used at single left turning lanes. A 4-foot
raised island would be used where double lofts are
warranted.
Page 2
PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
Type of environmental document to be prepared: A Categorical
Exclusion is proposed for this widening project.. This document
is scheduled for completion in Ate? l- 1994.
Project Schedule
BEGIN END
Planning FFY 94 FFY 94
Design FFY 94 FFY 94
Right of Way FFY 95 FFY 96
Construction FFY 96 FFY 98
will there be special funding participation by municipality,
developers, or other? Yes No X
if yes, by whom and amount: ( $ ) , or _ („ )
How and when will this be paid?
Features of Proposed Facility
Type of Facility: Six-lane divided major thoroughfare
Type of Access Control: Full Partial None X
Type of Roadway: Either a six-lane divided slioulde.r section or a
six-lane divided curb and gutter section will be constructed.
Interchanges 1 Grade Separations Stream Crossings 1.,
Typical Section of Existing Roadway: A four-lane facility
consisting of two 24-foot travelways divided by a ;0-f.oot
depressed grass median with 10-foot grassed shoulders.
Typical Section of Proposed Roadway: A six-lane divided
facility; see the alternatives listed in the description of t:he
project.
Traffic: Current vpd Design Year vpd
% Trucks o DHV
Design Standards Applicable: AASHTO X 3R
--
Design speed: 50 MPH
Preliminary Pavement Design:

Page 3
PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
Current Cost Estimates:
ALTERNATIVE 1: 6-lane shoulder section, 16-foot raised
median
Construction Cost (including engineering
and contingencies). . . . . . . . . . . $ 5,101,000
Right of Way Cost (including rel., util.,
and acquisition). . . . . . . . . . . . $ 180,000 **
Force Account Items. . . . . . . . . . . . $
Preliminary Engineering. . . . . . . . . . $ 100,000
Total Cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 5,381,000
**
ALTERNATIVE 2: 6-lane curb and gutter, 30-foot grassed
median
Construction Cost (including engineering
and contingencies). . . . . . . . . . . $ 4,175,000
Right of Way Cost (including rel., util.,
and.acquisition). . . . . . . . . . . . $ 180,000 **
Force Account Items. . . . . . . . . . . . $
Preliminary Engineering. . . . . . . . . . $ 100,000
Total Cost.
$ 4,455,000 **
TIP Cost Estimate:
Construction .
Right of. Way
Total Cost .
$ 4,350,000
$ 180,000
$ 4,530,000
List any special features, such as railroad involvement, which
could affect cost or schedule of project:
Some interest has been shown in a closed loop system for the
traffic signals on US 17 in the project vicinity.
** The right of way cost listed is a preliminary cost found in
the 1994-2000 T.I.P. Additional right of way will have tc)
be purchased for either alternative in order to accomodate
drainage structures. Because of its wider median,
Alternative 2 will require more right of way than
Alternative 1.
Page 4
PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
Preliminary Cost Estimates
ALTERNATIVE 1: 6-1ane shoulder section, 16-foot raised median
ITEMS REQUIRED ( ) COMMENTS COST
Estimated Costs of Improvements:
Pavement
Surface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 1,315,910
Base . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Milling & Recycling . . . . . . . . . . $
Turnouts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Shoulders: Paved. . . . . . . . . . . . $
Earth . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Earthwork . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 476 , 800
Subsurface Items: . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Subgrade and Stabilization. . . . . . . . . $ 193,970
Drainage (List any special items) . . . . . $ 472,000
Sub-Drainage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Structures: Width x Length
Bridge Rehabilitation x $
New Bridge x _ $
Widen Bridge _ x _ $
Remove Bridge x $
New Culverts: Size Length . . . $
Fill. Ht.
Culvert Extension . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Retaining Walls: Type Ave. Ht. $
Skew
Noise Walls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Any Other Misc. Structures. . . . . . . . $
Concrete Curb & Gutter. . . . . . . . . . . $ 218,225
Concrete Sidewalk . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Guardrail . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Fencing: W.W._ and/or C. L. $
Erosion Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 48,000
- Landscape . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
_ Lighting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Traffic Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 177,000
- Signing: ---New . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
-- Upgrading. . . . . . . . . . . $
_ Traffic Signals: 1 New . . . . . . . . . $ 60,000
_ Revised . . . . . . . $ 480,000
_ RR Signals: New . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Revised . . . . . . . . . . $
With or Without Arms. . . . $
If 3R: Drainage Safety Enhancement. $
_ Roadside Safety Enhancement. $
Realignment for Safety Upgrade $
_ Pavement Markings: Paint Thermo x $ 821_600
Markers x
Page 5
PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
Delineators . . $
other . . $ 880,995
CONTRACT COST (Subtotal): $ 4,405,500
Contingencies & Engineering . . . . . . . . . . $ 695,500
PE Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 100 , 000
Force Account . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Subtotal: $ 5,201,000
Right of way:
Will Contain within Exist Right of Way: Yes No x
Existing Right of Way Width: 200 ft
** New Right of Way Needed: Width____ Est. Cost $ 180,000 **
Easements: Type Width Est. Cost $
Utilities: $
Right of Way Subtotal: $ 180,000
Total Estimated Cost (Includes R/W): $ 5,381,000
** TIP Estimate for R/W
Page 6
PROJECT SLOPING SHEET
Preliminary Cost Estimates
ALTERNATIVE 2: 6-lane curb and gutter, 30-foot grassed median
ITEMS REQUIRED ( ) COMMENTS COST
Estimated Costs of Improvements: - - J
Pavement
Surface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 997 470
Base . . . $
Milling & Recycling . . . . . . . . . . $ y_
Turnouts. .
Shoulders: Paved. . . . . . . . . . . .
-
-- --
Earth . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Earthwork . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ _203,200
Subsurface Items: . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ _
Subgj_-ade and Stabilization. . . . . . . . . 181,790
Drainage (List any special items) . . . . . 35?} 000
- ----
Sub-Drainage. . . . . . .
Structures : Width X Length
Bridge Rehabilitation X
New Bridge x $

Widen Bridge x -
$ -----_--
_
Remove Bridge x
New Culverts: Size Length
Fill Ht.
__
Culvert Extension . . . . .
$

- J
Retaining Walls: Type Ave. Ht.
---- --- - -------------
Skew
Noise Walls . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Any Other Misc. Structures. . . . . . . . $
_ Concrete Curb & Gutter. . . . . . . . . . . $ 280,8_00
Concrete Sidewalk . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
--
-- Guardrail . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S - -- --
- Fencing: W.W. and/or C. L. _ $
- Erosion Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 61,500
Landscape . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ - --
----
- Lighting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , $ - --
Traffic Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :? _ 177,000
- Signing: New. . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
--
Upgrading . . . . . . . . . . . - - ----

Traffic Signals: 1 New . . . . . . . . .
$ -
60,000
8 Revised . . . . . . . $ 480,000
RR Signals: New . . . . . . . . . . . . $
-
- --- -
Revised . . . . . . . . . . -
With or Without Arms. . . . $
- If 3R: Drainage Safety Enhancement. . . $
Roadside safety Enhancement. . . $
Realignment for Safety Upgrade $ _
Pavement Markings: Paint Thermo x $ 82,600
Markers x
Page 7
PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
Delineators . . $
Other . . $ 720,140
CONTRACT COST (Subtotal): $ 3,598,500
Contingencies & Engineering . . . . . . . . . . $ 576,500
PE Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 100 , 000
Force Account . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ _
Subtotal: $ 4,275,000
Right of Way:
Will Contain within Exist Right of Way: Yes No X_
Existing Right of Way Width: 200 ft
** New Right of Way Needed: Width _ Est. Cost $ 180,000 **
Easements: Type Width Est. Cost $
Utilities: $
Right of Way Subtotal: $ 180,000
Total Estimated Cost (Includes R/W): 4,455,000
** TIP Estimate for R/W
Prepared By: cl,z Ad E ?ti? Date:
Page 8
PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
The above scoping has been reviewed and approved* by:
Highway Design
Roadway
Structure
Design Services
Geotechnical
Hydraulics
Loc. & Surveys
Photogrammetry
Prel. Est. Engr.
Planning & Environ.
Right of Way
R/W Utilities
Traffic Engineering
Project Management
County Manager
City/Municipality
Others
INIT. DATE
Board of Tran. Member
Mgr. Program & Policy
Chief Engineer-Precons
Chief Engineer-Oper
Secondary Roads off.
Construction Branch
Roadside Environmental
Maintenance Branch
Bridge Maintenance
Statewide Planning
Division Engineer
Bicycle Coordinator
Program Development
FHWA
Dept. of Cult. Res.
Dept. of EH & NR
INIT. DATE
Scope Sheet for local officials will be sent to Division
Engineer for handling.
Comments or Remarks:
*If you are not in agreement with proposed project or scoping,
note your proposed revisions in Comments or Remarks section and
initial and date after comments.
TA7-t
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P.O. BOX 25201
RALEIGH 27611-5201
JAMES G. MARTIN
GOVERNOR
THOMAS J.HARRELSON February 19, 1992
SECRETARY
MEMORANDUM TO: File ''II
FROM: T. A. Hart
Project Engineer
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
WILLIAM G. MARLEY, JR., P.E.
STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR
SUBJECT: Scoping Meeting, New Bern, from Trent Road (SR 1278) to
US 70 Business, U-2556, Craven County, State Project
#8.1171001, F.A. # F-75-3(27)
A scoping meeting was held on February 11, 1992 in the Planning and
Research Conference Room (RM 470) of the Highway Building to discuss the
above referenced project. The following people were in attendance:
Danny Rogers
Jack Matthews
Monif Bazzaire
Norm Miller
Munther K. Mahbooba
W. L. Oglesby
Eileen Fuchs
Duane Mann
Rick Blackwood
Ed Latham
David B. Foster
Leo R. Johnson
Debbie Barbour
Jay Bennett
Don Sellers
Frank Vick
David Chang
Teresa Hart
Program Development
Photogrammetry
TEB. Signals and Geometrics
Structure Design
TEB. Signals and Geometrics
Traffic Control
Traffic Control
Planning and Environmental
Statewide Planning
Division 2 Construction Engineer
DEHNR-Highway Environmental Evaluation
Location and Surveys
Roadway Design
Roadway Design
Right-of-Way
Planning and Environmental
Hydraulics
Planning and Environmental
After opening the meeting with a brief description of the proposed
project the following points were discussed:
1. The current project schedule was discussed and based on the proposed
improvements it was recommended that I discuss with the Federal
Highway Administration the possibility of changing the proposed
An Equal Opportunity/At(irmative Action Employer
February 19, 1992
Page 2
document from a FEA to a CE. Also, it is proposed that the due date
is to be changed to 1995 if FHWA agrees to change the document to a
CE.
2. The section of track that the project crosses which is shown on the
aerial has been removed.
3. No historic structures or sites have been identified, but a search of
the area is recommended by SHPO's office because the project is
located in a historically rich area in terms of archaeology.
4. Statewide indicated the City of New Bern would prefer a grass median
if possible.
5. It was decided that the previously scheduled Informational Workshop
for February 27, 1992 be cancelled until a later date.
6. It was the consensus of the group that consideration be given to
improvements at the interchange. Roadway will look at any design
improvements that may need to be incorporated into this project.
7. The division indicated that they were opposed to a five lane cross
section; however, they prefer a shoulder section for the project.
8. Roadway Design is to study two alternatives for the proposed project:
a. Six lane divided facility with a 18-foot median, widening 6 feet
on both the left and right sides. A 4-foot island is proposed at
turn lanes.
b. Six lane divided curb and gutter facility with widening to the
outside only.
9. Landscaping is also to be considered based on the proposed cross
section.
10. The existing right-of-way is 200 feet. This is to be confirmed by the
Right-of-Way Branch with a right-of-way abstract. Existing
right-of-way for the intersecting Y lines will also need to be
verified.
11. The northern terminus of the project will possibly need to be
redesigned in order to accommodate the proposed six lanes. This is to
be investigated by roadway.
12. Pro signs to synchronize and do away with some signals is to be:
°c"M red. Traffic Engineering will develop alternatives and submit
for consideration.
13. The closing of some median openings should also be investigated.
14. Dave Foster indicated that the area was heavily developed, but waters
were not extremely sensitive. No Natural Heritage Problems.
February 19, 1992
Page 3
15. Drainage should also be considered if curb and gutter is recommended
due to the intense development. It was noted however, that curb and
gutter is preferred in highly urbanized areas. A water main and sewer
line is located at the beginning of the project.
T !9
1 , (' l? , II 7 t
t , ` Vanceboro 1 `
> \\ ,•? \ _? L.. -fy/? .Jfor"amwell
-r \sy ' `
1
- S \. I ?,.Bnul Ca Yton ?I`
?o-.C iR v. , E AskmN
-- --- -
`y 'e'er,-' ``..... •?-? /C
[uscarora 'L - -?? -
1,111 rid,et.
-+ Nbw Bern 1 ?°' ??'
B6C'd'6Tr'eh6_? s? c
?' 1
;. woods
1
/ Rr rdsle V
.A`TAN Vrostan 'A Atilt
i Rirq '"?ra)ch
u: tl
0-v ~?, ' CAS _
/ TIONr 5 1
orih
c,ver OL air v _I°we
a tick
L-r' -
` ry / G 1
?` :. ` tinulhs, ?
141,
.X. i'll
NE
70 ??? F"4 ° •?. and.
`s11f? POP
Ia17
j2QQ
? +- FIFO
d .?
,t 70
Ia 1 9 \ ?:.;j:f:uJ
]A 017a
7 FM eti
1774. (liutl
9 127. 1 0. I ? o.1s 17' o? Pembroke /?..
SFAaOAaD 11 b 17 DS I]oJ
ii71 t > o .09 } o`' x•01 ?:::
:•i?: .::. w' 1791 1719 u ]I 1]01 .77 .I,'o 1i17.
.35
,14
.10 J I' s G !` lal, ?lalS 55 17x9 "vrw,:`?:i q•.. •:
1 1? L ','.V,,.'•? a /? r670 n _ ?. --_ ti V•W;•Wy
07'1199
.e 171e".. 00_5
i b 1772 ''• ? ?4 ?'
_
r? d
4 17 A- \773. kr 1793 1]DI /v J, 170- .ad
!37.7 y / -'707 lave` .177!
i77? / i? 1779- C, /_i .?• . oy ?'? . 6
1741
< .-, v .... rave '? 1771 1767-
y
.27 JAIL .o 1312- 47 I370
!711 1j a" Z? NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
1310 .1 .$o Y 9 TRANSPORTATION
,:I, DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS 1200 777
•s. w9 .? 7a? <
TRENT PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
<-,ry?us9 BRANCH
NEW BERN, NC 17
FROM TRENT ROAD (SR 1278)
TO US 70 BUS.
CRAVEN COUNTY
U-2556
Fir, 1
cr
t
I

r

?N

I I

- Ll J

11 ?
?I

n
of
S
Az-
c' C
1-5
I_ ? ? I I? ?. f O Q.
I ill 4 d
i
^? I _.?. N I i ? T N
N ?'z
January 5, 1994
1
Discussion of TIP Project U-2556
I. Background
A. Scoping meeting held on February 11, 1992
B. Public Officials Meeting held on January 10, 1992
II. Schedule
A. Complete CE APR 94
Send to R/W MAR 95
Let Contract AUG 96
B. Document Type / Schedule
III. other projects in the New Bern area
A. R-2301
1. US 17, New Bern Bypass
2. Schedule R 96 C 97
B. B-2531
1. Replace US 70-NC 55 bridge over Neuse River
2. Schedule R 95 C 96
IV. Discussion of alternatives
A. Alternative 1
1. Six-lane divided shoulder section
2. Symmetrical widening
3. Requires R/W
4. Possible 4(f) involvement with Speight Park
B. Alternative 2
1. six-lane curb and gutter section with grassed median
2. Widening on the outside only
3. R/W for sight triangles only
C. Median widths
D. Landscaping
V. Drainage Concerns
A. Maintenance
B. Outfalls
C. Subgrade
VI. Other Improvements
A. Possible elimination of median openings
B. Possible closed loop traffic signal system
.,
iv ` 43 I1 17,
r
4 5 Vtnctboro \
For nwell
0 Ernul Ctyton
1 ?
vsr R 9 akin
.S:
ove
4 City
i
LYtOtfof 4
70 +
\ fl {8A
pup lad
,_? YWW t at City
•8
t
1
/
rose ,
ALAN Vro tn
/ IL np '? l 1 CA, A
7? .
?TION s s ? `i
S Lill t 3 orth
/ ?n OLa la_v ock _ Flow..
I'm
? •::.Smlthi...,
141, *41
/ ?k
i
ff•P .0 ? Shol.
/ 70 hI ?tS
17
1717 11`
f 120q
c
< ? N y
::. kROAD
??:?.: ?•,? - FAY
70
.. sI7M ??•?? 4 ]4 1
1779 e 1 4y!
1271 .1 .1817' o? Pembroke
SEABOARD 04
V'- 1199 .22 is, .. p?: ?G 11!! .53 1724 0 ?•"'`t?::;;`::;
.14 .73.;::r 0- 5
'\ .':.';•;?... ??:::%? ?i`. 1370 °
1221 ?::>;?j:;;:;:',;:;"'.: ?.::?...:j::•v'"'????,'?`:?.07 1 1 1 p':Q ?'? J307
wvu
i O 177 :::: is ? :;?• ?? ?• 4?.. ,;.
1774 J?7 1 /p
1241 ye ?...<: `%:.%:• '?? 4:::v 8291 $ ,7fe
? s
IOLI ? b J313
.27? v
.4S 1]78
?... 1 „ 10 - NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT
TRANSPORTATION
1310 .1 °? r. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
1217 0 •?,AV`??? ,
'?'? 1 o 1 4 1200 ;w
PLANNING AND FNVIRONMENTA
TRENT
...
r.
?,u std BRANCH
NEW BERN, NC 17
FROM TRENT ROAD (SR 1278)
TO US 70 BUS.
CRAVEN COUNTY
U-2556
. sir ?
- It
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

TRANSMITTAL SLIP DATE

TO: REF. NO. OR ROOM, BLDG.
CrZ.I C. CUAL.4'v r-?i bem-bENN'
FROM REP. NO. OR ROOM, BLDG.
?
?
EDN c- Mc BLS r-Y1r2U
N 'VA(-
ACT ION
? NOTE AND FILE ? PER 9UR CONVERSATION
? NOTE AND RETURN TO ME ? PER YOUR REQUEST
? RETURN WITH MORE DETAILS ? FOR YOUR APPROVAL
? NOTE AND SEE ME ABOUT THIS ? FOR YOUR INFORMATION
? PLEASE ANSWER ? FOR YOUR COMMENTS
? PREPARE REPLY FOR MY SIGNATURE ? SIGNATURE
? TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION ? INVESTIGATE AND REPORT
COMMENTtl:

JAN 2 7 1994 '

WETLANDS
WATER MLI .
i
RO P
St ION J

STATE OF NORTH CAROH NA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT, lR. DIVISION OF HIGI IWAYS
GUVI'RNOR P.O. WX 25201. RALFIGH. N.C. 27611-5201
January 21, 1994
MEMORANDUM TO: Mr. Eric Galamb
DEM - DEHNR, 6th Floor
FROM: Eddie McFalls
Project Planning Engineer
R. SAMUEI, I IUN-L I I I
SIICRI IARY
SUBJECT: Meeting to discuss the widening of US 17 from Trent Rd.
(SR 1278) to US 70 Business, New Bern, Craven County,
State Project 8.1171001, Federal Aid Project F-75-3(27),
TIP Project U-2556
On January 5, 1994, a meeting was held in the Planning and
Environmental Conference Room to discuss T.I.P. Project U-2556. The
following people were in attendance:
John Wadsworth
Robin Stancil
David Cox
Eric Galamb
Rick Shirley, P.E.
Ed Latham
John Permar, P.E.
Danny Rogers
Don Sellers
Jay Bennett, P.E.
Rekha Patel
Kenneth Milam, P.E.
Wendi Oglesby
Andy Brown
Wilson Stroud
Eddie McFalls
Federal Highway Administration
NCDCR-SHPO
NCWRC
NCDEHNR-DEM
Division 2
Division 2
Traffic Engineering
Program Development
Right of Way
Roadway Design
Roadway Design
Traffic Engineering
Traffic Engineering
Traffic Engineering
Planning and Environmental
Planning and Environmental
The meeting was opened with a discussion of the history of TIP Project
U-2556. A scoping meeting and a meeting with the public officials of New
Bern were held in February, 1992 and January, 1992, respectively. At the
scoping meeting, a decision was made to consult with the Federal Highway
Administration about changing the proposed document from an environmental
assessment to a categorical exclusion. At both meetings, drainage problems,
utility impacts, and the type of facility to be constructed were the subjects
of most of the discussion.
9
January 21, 1994
Page 2
The current schedule for the project was discussed. TIP Project U-2556
is scheduled for right of way in March, 1995 and construction in August,
1996. The present completion date for the proposed categorical exclusion is
April of 1994. A schedule change, however, will be requested to change the
categorical exclusion's completion date to August of 1994 so that
environmental studies can be completed. Although it will allow less time for
the preparation of right of way plans, this schedule change is not
anticipated to affect the right of way and construction schedules.
Next, Jay Bennett of Roadway Design described the two alternatives
presently being studied. Under Alternative 1, a six-lane shoulder/ditch
facility with a 16-foot raised, grassed median would be constructed. The
roadway would be widened six feet to the outside of each direction's
travelway and six feet into each side of the median. Alternative 2 calls for
the construction of a six-lane curb and gutter facility with a 30-foot
grassed median. The roadway would be widened twelve feet to the outside of
each direction's travelway.
After the alternatives were presented, several arguments were made for
and against each of them. During the discussion, Division stated that they
prefer Alternative 1, the shoulder/ditch facility. However, a decision on
what type of facility to construct was postponed until more detailed right of
way and construction cost estimates are available. Each topic addressed at
the meeting is described in described in detail below.
Draina e
The first issue discussed was how the facility will be drained. Few
outfalls exist along this section of US 17. Most of the runoff presently
drains to Wilson Creek and a creek just south of the US 70 Bypass. Pipes in
a curb and gutter system would have to have shallow grades. Thus,
Alternative 2, the curb and gutter alternative, would require large pipes to
store the runoff. Moreover, if curb and gutter is used, water from adjacent
properties will have to be accommodated with drop inlets. It is anticipated
that the large pipes for the curb and gutter system would drive the
construction cost of Alternative 2 higher than the $4,175,000 estimate
presented at the scoping meeting.
In Alternative 1, US 17 would be drained using open ditches. Runoff
would be stored in the ditches until it could drain to an outfall. Open
ditches would accommodate runoff from adjacent properties and would provide
some filtration of the runoff before it reached area creeks. Also, the
ditches would allow for some percolation of the stored water.
Right of Way
Because it is densely developed, any right of way needed along US 17
will be expensive. Of the alternatives discussed in the scoping meeting,
Alternative 1 with its open ditches appears to require the most right of way
(Please note that the scoping sheet incorrectly states that Alternative 2
requires more right of way). The typical section for Alternative 1 presented
at the meeting, however, showed 6:1 sideslopes. Division commented that
steeper sideslopes would minimize the right of way required and that they
January 21, 1994
Page 3
would prefer sideslopes no shallower than 4:1. Also, Division suggested that
the backslopes of the ditches be maintained by adjacent property owners.
Enough right of way could be purchased to protect the integrity of the ditch,
but right of way would not have to be purchased to contain the entire
backslope.
Alternative 2, using curb and gutter, would likely require less right of
way. Thus, numerous right of way claims would be avoided. Some right of
way, however, would be required for drop inlets to accommodate runoff from
adjacent properties.
John Wadsworth stated that a categorical exclusion could be written for
this project. The right of way required for either alternative will not
involve any relocatees and would be considered minor. Because of the number
of businesses and residences involved, however, a public hearing will likely
be needed the project. Since a public hearing is anticipated, a citizen
informational workshop will not be held.
Median Widths
Alternative 2 provides a wider median than Alternative 1. The greater
distance between opposing traffic enhances the facility's safety. Also, the
wider median protects turning vehicles more effectively.
UtilityImpacts
Either alternative will have high utility impacts. Also, both
alternatives will have utilities under the widened roadway.
Environmental Concerns
Eric Galamb stated that this area is in a nutrient sensitive basin.
Thus, alternatives that provide filtration of runoff and minimize impacts to
streams are preferable.
Robin Stancil stated that if no buildings over fifty years of age are
found, then no additional architectural resource studies need to be
conducted. Moreover, since the area is highly developed, archaeological
surveys will not be needed unless historical research reveals potential
sites.
City parks in the vicinity of US 17, such as Speight Park, will have to
be avoided if possible. Adjustments to either of the alternatives could be
made in these specific areas to minimize or eliminate effects. Use of these
parks would require a Section 4 (f) Evaluation.
Intersections/Interchanges
The US 70 Bypass interchange with US 17 will be modified to accommodate
double left turns for traffic moving from US 17 to US 70 Bypass.
The intersection of US 17 with US 70 Business/NC 55 will be studied for
modification once traffic forecasts are received.
` January 21, 1994
Page 4
Traffic
A closed loop traffic signal system will not be implemented as a part of
TIP Project U-2556.
Because of the heavy traffic volumes, night work should be considered as
an option for this project.
Attached are updated scoping sheets which include updated cost estimates
for traffic control and pavement markings.
EBM/plr
Attachments
PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
Date 12/15/93
Revision Date 1/21/94
Project Development Stage
Programming
Planning X
Design
TIP # U-2556
Project # 8.1171001
F.A. Project # F-75-3(27)
Division 2
County Craven
Route US 17
Functional Classification Urban Principal Arterial
Length 2.7 miles
Purpose of Project: To construct additional travel lanes and
improve intersections in order to increase the capacity and
safety of US 17.
Description of project (including specific limits) and major
elements of work: Widen the existing four-lane divided roadway
to a six lane divided facility from Trent Road (SR 1278) to the
US 17/US 70 Business-NC 55 intersection. The two alternatives
under consideration are as follows:
1. six-lane divided shoulder section - the roadway would
be widened six feet to the outside of each direction's
travelway and six feet into each side of the median. A
16-foot raised median would be constructed; a 4-foot
island would be used at turning lanes.
2. Six-lane divided curb and gutter section - the roadway
would be widened twelve feet to the outside of each
direction's travelway. A 30-foot grassed median would
remain. Any necessary turning lanes would be
constructed in the median. A 16-foot raised median
would be used at single left turning lanes. A 4-foot
raised island would be used where double lefts are
warranted.
Page 2
PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
Type of environmental document to be prepared: A Categorical
Exclusion is proposed for this widening project. This document
is scheduled for completion in August, 1994.
Project Schedule
BEGIN END
Planning FFY 94 FFY 94
Design FFY 94 FFY 94
Right of Way FFY 95 FFY 96
Construction FFY 96 FFY 98
Will there be special funding participation by municipality,
developers, or other? Yes No _X
If yes, by whom and amount: ($)
How and when will this be paid?
Features of Proposed Facility
or (%)
Type of Facility: Six-lane divided major thoroughfare
Type of Access Control: Full Partial None _X
Type of Roadway: Either a six-lane divided shoulder section or a
six-lane divided curb and gutter section will be constructed.
Interchanges 1 Grade Separations Stream Crossings 1
Typical Section of Existing Roadway: A four-lane facility
consisting of two 24-foot travelways divided by a 30-foot
depressed grass median with 10-foot grassed shoulders.
Typical Section of Proposed Roadway: A six-lane divided
facility; see the alternatives listed in the description of the
project.
Traffic: Current vpd Design Year vpd
% Trucks a DHV
Design Standards Applicable: AASHTO X_ 3R
Design Speed: 5_ MPH
Preliminary Pavement Design:
Page 3
PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
Current Cost Estimates:
ALTERNATIVE 1: 6-lane shoulder section, 16-foot raised
median
Construction Cost (including engineering
and contingencies). . . . . . . . . .
Right of Way Cost (including rel., util.,
and acquisition). . . . . . . . . . .
Force Account Items. . . . . . . . . . .
Preliminary Engineering. . . . . . . . .
Total Cost.
. $ 5,244,400
$ 180,000 **
$ 100,000
$ 5,524,400 **
ALTERNATIVE 2: 6-lane curb and gutter, 30-foot grassed
median
Construction Cost (including engineering
and contingencies). . . . . . . . . . . $ 4,295,400
Right of Way Cost (including rel., util.,
and acquisition). . . . . . . . . . . . $ 180,000 **
Force Account Items. . . . . . . . . . . . $
Preliminary Engineering .. . . . . . . . . $ 100,000
Total Cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 4,575,400 **
TIP Cost Estimate:
Construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 4,350,000
Right of Way . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 180 , 000
Total Cost
. . . . . . $ 4,530,000
List any special features, such as railroad involvement, which
could affect cost or schedule of project:
Some interest has been shown in a closed loop system for the
traffic signals on US 17 in the project vicinity.
** The right of way cost listed is a preliminary cost found in
the 1994-2000 T.I.P. Additional right of way will have to
be purchased for either alternative in order to accomodate
drainage structures. Because of its ditches, Alternative 1
will likely require more right of way than Alternative 2.
Page 4
PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
Preliminary Cost Estimates
ALTERNATIVE 1: 6-lane shoulder section, 16-foot raised median
ITEMS REQUIRED ( ) COMMENTS COST
Estimated Costs of Improvements:
Pavement
Surface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 1,315,910
Base. . . $
Milling & Recycling . . . . . . . . . . $
Turnouts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Shoulders: Paved. . . . . . . . . . . . $
Earth . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Earthwork . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 476 , 800
Subsurface Items: . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Subgrade and Stabilization. . . . . . . . . $ 193,970
Drainage (List any special items) 8 472,000
Sub-Drainage. . . . . . . . $
Structures: Width x Length
Bridge Rehabilitation X $
New Bridge X $
Widen Bridge x $
Remove Bridge X $
New Culverts: Size Length $
Fill Ht.
Culvert Extension . . . . . . $
Retaining Walls: Type Ave. Ht. $
Skew
Noise Walls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Any Other Misc. Structures. . . . . . . . $
Concrete Curb & Gutter. . . . . . . . . . . $ 218,225
Concrete Sidewalk . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Guardrail . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Fencing: W.W. and/or C.L. $
Erosion control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 48,000
Landscape . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Lighting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Traffic Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 350,000*
Signing: New . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Upgrading. . . . . . . . . . . $
Traffic Signals: 1 New . . . . . . . . . $ 60,000
8 Revised . . . . . . . $ 480,000
RR Signals: New . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Revised . . . . . . . . . . $
With or Without Arms. . . . $
If 3R: Drainage Safety Enhancement. $
Roadside Safety Enhancement. $
Realignment for Safety Upgrade $
Pavement Markings: Paint Thermo x $ 53,000*
Markers x
Page 5
PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
Delineators . . $
Other . . $ 880 , 995
CONTRACT COST (Subtotal) : $ 4,548,900
Contingencies & Engineering . . . . . . . . . . $ 695,500
PE Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 100 , 000
Force Account . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Subtotal: $ 5,344,400
Right of Way:
Will Contain within Exist Right of Way: Yes No x
Existing Right of Way Width: 200 ft
** New Right of Way Needed: Width Est. Cost $ 180,000 **
Easements: Type Width Est. Cost $
Utilities: $
Right of Way Subtotal: $ 180,000
Total Estimated Cost (Includes R/W): $ 5,524,400
** TIP Estimate for R/W
Page 6
PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
Preliminary Cost Estimates
ALTERNATIVE 2. 6-lane curb and gutter, 30-foot grassed median
ITEMS REQUIRED ( ) COMMENTS COST
Estimated Costs of Improvements:
Pavement
Surface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 997 , 470
Base . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Milling & Recycling . . . . . . . . . . $
Turnouts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Shoulders: Paved. . . . . . . . . . . . $
Earth . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Earthwork . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 203 , 200
subsurface Items: . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Subgrade and Stabilization. . . . . . . . . $ 181,790
Drainage (List any special items) . . . . . $ 354,000
Sub-Drainage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Structures: Width x Length
Bridge Rehabilitation X $
New Bridge X $
Widen Bridge x $
Remove Bridge X $
New Culverts: Size Length . . . $
Fill Ht.
Culvert Extension . . . . . . . $
Retaining Walls: Type Ave. Ht. $
Skew
Noise Walls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Any Other Misc. Structures. . . . . . . . $
Concrete Curb & Gutter. . . . . . . . . . . $ 280,800
Concrete Sidewalk . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Guardrail . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Fencing: W.W. and/or C.L. $
Erosion Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 61,500
Landscape . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Lighting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Traffic Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 327.000*
Signing: New . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Upgrading. . . . . . . . . . . $
Traffic Signals: I New . . . . . . . . . $ 60,000
8 Revised . . . . . . . $ 480,000
RR Signals: New . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Revised . . . . . . . . . . $
With or Without Arms. . . . $
If 3R: Drainage Safety Enhancement. $
Roadside Safety Enhancement. $
Realignment for Safety Upgrade $
Pavement Markings: Paint Thermo x $ 53,000*
Page 7
PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
Delineators . . $
Other . . $ 720 , 140
CONTRACT COST (Subtotal) : $ 3,718,900
Contingencies & Engineering . . . . . . . . . . $ 576,500
PE Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 100 , 000
Force Account . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Subtotal: $ 4,395,400
Right of Way:
Will Contain within Exist Right of Way: Yes No x
Existing Right of Way Width: 200 ft
** New Right of Way Needed: Width Est. Cost $ 180,000 **
Easements: Type Width Est. Cost $
Utilities: $
Right of Way Subtotal: $ 180,000
Total Estimated Cost (Includes R/W): $ 4,575,400
** TIP Estimate for R/W
Prepared By: ems( ? a, fyt< 4GAL Date: 1-ZI ^9q
Page 8
PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
The above scoping has been reviewed and approved* by:
INIT. DATE
Highway Design
Roadway
Structure
Design Services
Geotechnical
Hydraulics
Loc. & Surveys
Photogrammetry
Prel. Est. Engr.
Planning & Environ.
Right of Way
R/W Utilities
Traffic Engineering
Project Management
County Manager
City/Municipality
Others
Board of Tran. Member
Mgr. Program & Policy
Chief Engineer-Precons
Chief Engineer-Oper
Secondary Roads Off.
Construction Branch
Roadside Environmental
Maintenance Branch
Bridge Maintenance
Statewide Planning
Division Engineer
Bicycle Coordinator
Program Development
FHWA
Dept. of Cult. Res.
Dept. of EH & NR
INIT. DATE
Scope Sheet for local officials will be sent to Division
Engineer for handling.
Comments or Remarks: Traffic Engineering has updated cost
estimates for traffic control and pavement markings.
*If you are not in agreement with proposed project or scoping,
note your proposed revisions in Comments or Remarks Section and
initial and date after comments.