20140285_Meeting Minutes_20050322

I tAwti sn�L -,
pROpOSED NC 24 -27 IMPROVEMENT
(From SR 1138 to t C Y the River)
Montgomery oon
TIP No. R -623
DATE: Tuesday, March 22, 2005, 10:30 AM
PLACE. Troy, NC
MEETING ATTENDEES
John Olinger, Division 8
Greg Brew, Roadway Design
Unit
Randy Henegar, Hydraulics
Bill Barrett, ONE
Elizabeth Lusk, ONE
Derrick Weaver, PD &EA
Michael Penney, PD &EA
NCDOT:
U
Agencies: Travis Wilson, NC Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC)
Gary Jordan, US Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS)
Brian Wrenn, NC Division of Water Quality (NC DWQ)
Christina Breen, NC Division of Water Quality (NC DWQ)
Felix Davila, Federal Highway Administration (FHW EPA)
Chris MilitschernEP1edmflntTriadProtection Agency (
Hanna Cockburn,
Consultants: Andrea Koch, Stantec Dvorak- GrantznStantec Consulting
PURPOSE OF MEETING: To discuss proposed hydraulic crossings for the Build Alternatives
so that agreement could be reached on Concurrence Point No. 2A.
MEETING MINUTES
following paragraphs summarize the discussion and decisions resulting from this meeting:
The foll g p lot of the Food
Michael Penney who then
The meeting was held in the field with ed �I {� a orientation
introduction by a parking and
Lion west of town. The orientation open of alternatives
turned the meeting over to Paul Koch. a r. Ks specifically eent the photographs of each stream/river
briefly discussed the materials in the
the stream and wetland impact tables, and the recommended crossings. Mr. Penney
crossing, would like to visit. The team asked to visit the
then asked the team which locations they
following crossing locations:
• B3,C3,D3,E3 (Warner Creek)
Wetland No. 22 (Impacted by Alternatives B, C, and D just west of Pekin Road)
• • B5,C5,D5,E5 (Tributaries to Little River)
• B6,C6,D6,E6 (Little River)

IYILI %V"I\ 1 L/""11 v1 IY1LL F f1YV 1'fG!"1 VVlvllvl>�1\ 1
Page 2 of 2
The team then visited each of these locations. Comments provided for each of the locations are
provided below:
B3 C3 D3 E3 Warner Creek
The proposed Build Alternatives already include bridges at these locations, which would
traverse both Warner Creek and segments of its tributaries. No changes to the proposed
structure type and size (B3,C3,D3 -- dual bridges approximately 400 feet long; E3 - dual bridges
approximately 220 feet long) were recommended by the team.
Wetland No. 22
Alternatives B, C, and D would impact this wetland, which is along the fringe of a pond, as they
approach an at -grade intersection with Pekin Road. The team discussed potential bridging at
this location. NCDOT responded that the structure would be relatively wide to accommodate
turn lanes and would only be a few feet above existing ground so that the profile could connect
with Pekin Road. This width and low elevation would shade the majority of the wetland.
The team asked if an alignment shift (Alternatives BIC, and D) to the south to potentially avoid
the wetland had been considered. NCDOT responded that the shift would impact residential
properties. (One residential property is east of Pekin Road and appears to be abandoned and
has suffered previous substantial fire damage. Two other properties, a second residence east
of Pekin Road and a farmhouse just south of the pond, are both occupied.) If Alternatives B, C,
or D become the Preferred Alternative, minimization at this location would be evaluated.
B5,C5,D5,E5 (Tributaries to Little River)
The current proposal at this location is a single 12x12 box culvert. The team requested
consideration of a second barrel to accommodate the floodplain and serve as a Wildlife passage
for small animals. NCDOT Hydraulics responded that a second barrel could be incorporated.
The team agreed that the concurrence form will include a commitment that a second barrel (and
the final sizing for both barrels) will be evaluated and discussed during the concurrence Point
4B meeting.
B6,C6,D6,E6 (Little River)
The current proposal at this location is to evaluate the existing two -lane bridge and add a
second two -lane bridge on the north side with a length of 305 feet. The bridge length will need
to accommodate a 25 -foot passage on the west side of the river for the Town of Troy's
proposed greenway. NCDOT Roadway Design and Division 8 requested evaluation
(development of cost estimates) for widening the existing bridge deck to 34 -feet with pavement
rehabilitation and replacement of the bridge rails. The Merger Team offered no other
comments.
Minutes as recorded by:
Paul R. Koch, PE, AICP
Project Manager
cc: All attendees
File

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636 -3726
February 26, 2007
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Project Development and Environmental Analysis
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699 -1548
Dear Dr. Thorpe:
This letter is in response to your February 6, 2007 Ietter which requested comments from the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) on the Federal Environmental Assessment (EA) for the
proposed NC 24127 Troy Bypass in Montgomery County, North Carolina (TIP No. R- 0623).
These comments are provided in accordance with provisions of the Fish and Wildlife
Coordination Act (16 U.S.C. 661 -667d) and section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (16 U.S.C. 1531- 1543).
Four new - location alternatives are under consideration — Alternatives B, C, D and E. For an
approximately six mile long road, the wetland impacts are small, ranging from 0.5 to 0.8 acres.
Stream impacts range from 3,092 to 4,021 linear feet. Upland forest impacts are significant, with
direct losses ranging from 79 to 104 acres. Also, remaining forest wildlife habitat will be
negatively affected by fragmentation.
There are five federally listed species listed for Montgomery County — eastern cougar (Puma
concolor couguar), bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), red- cockaded woodpecker (Picoides
borealis), smooth coneflower (Echinacea laevigata) and Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus
schweinitzii). The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) has determined that
the proposed project will have no effect on the eastern cougar, bald eagle, red - cockaded
woodpecker and smooth coneflower. Based on all available information, the Service concurs
with this determination.
During plant surveys conducted in September and October 2003, a total of 1,324 stems of the
federally endangered Schweinitz's sunflower were observed within the northeastern portion of
the project study area. One stem was observed within Alternative B, and many more stems were
observed just outside of Alternatives B and C. Since the plant surveys are now over three years
old, and due to the proximity of the known occurrences to all the alternatives, Schweinitz's
sunflower could possibly occur within any of the alternatives. New plant surveys are necessary;
however, the Service is willing to continue towards selecting a Least Environmentally Damaging
Practicable Alternative ( LEDPA) prior to obtaining new survey data. Once the LEDPA is

selected, new surveys should be conducted to determipe the affect, if any, on the species. A
formal section 7 consultation will be required if t'lere is.an adverse effect to the species.
NCDOT should consult with the Service on the Proper timing. of any now surveys.
The Service does not have a preferred alternative atthis time. We will defer that decision until
Concurrence Point 3 in the combined NEPkSection 404 Merger Process. We will also continue
to provide input throughout the process.
The Service believes that this EA adequately addresses the existing fish and wildlife resources,
the waters and wetlands of the United States, and the potential impacts of this proposed project
on these resources. The Service appreciates the opportunity to review this project. If you have
any questions regarding our response, please contact Mr. Gary Jordan at [phone], ext. 32.
Sincerely,
Q
Pete Benjamin
Field Supervisor
cc: Chris Militscher, USEPA, Raleigh, NC
Travis Wilson, NCWRC, Creedmoor, NC
Polly Lespinasse, NCDWQ, Mooresville, NC
Richard Spencer, USACE, Raleigh, NC
John Sullivan, FHWA, Raleigh, NC