HomeMy WebLinkAbout20140762 All Versions_Merger Team Meeting_20091215
TIP Project R-2915 Widening of US 221 Ashe & Watauga Counties
Merger Team Meeting --- Concurrence Point 2a
Tuesday, December 15, 2009, at 1:00 p.m. --- Board Room, Transportation Building
A G E N D A
- INTRODUCTION AND SIGN-IN
- PURPOSE OF MEETING
- PROJECT DESCRIPTION
- PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
- MERGER TEAM CONCURRENCES TO DATE
- HYDRAULIC RECOMMENDATIONS
- DISCUSSION
- SUMMARY AND FINAL COMMENTS
NEPA/404 Merger Project Team Meeting
Concurrence Point No. 2a
Bridging Decisions
TIP No. R-2915
IMPROVEMENTS TO US 221
Ashe and Watauga Counties, North Carolina
Merger Team Meeting
December 15, 2009
i NEPA/404 MERGER CONCURRENCE POINT 2a
1 1. PURPOSE OF TODAY'S MEETING
' The purpose of today's meeting is to submit environmental information to the Merger
Team on major hydraulic crossings for the "Best Fit" alternative that has been studied in
detail. Formal concurrence on bridge locations and approximate lengths and alignment
' review for the widening improvements to US 221 will be requested at the conclusion of
this meeting.
2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The North Carolina Department of Transportation proposes to widen US 221 from its
junction with US 421 in Watauga County to the NC 88/US 221 Business intersection in
the town of Jefferson in Ashe County. The proposed improvements involve
approximately 16.1 miles of existing US 221 with a majority of the roadway located in
Ashe County and just over a mile located in Watauga County. An Environmental
Assessment (EA) and Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) will be prepared for the
project. The project location is shown in Exhibit 1.
Project R-2915 is included in the 2009-2015 State Transportation Improvement Program
(STIP) with right of way acquisition scheduled for Section A (from US 421 in Watauga
County to SR 1003 in Ashe County) for Federal Fiscal Year (FFY) 2012 and construction
for FFY 2013. The total estimated cost for the project as shown in the 2009-2015 STIP is
$97,972,000, which includes $13, 557,000 for right of way acquisition and $84,415,000
for construction.
3. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
The first NCDOT Newsletter was issued in October 2006 announcing the start of the
project study and the first project workshop. The first Citizens Informational Workshop
for the US 221 study was held on Tuesday October 24, 2006 at Ashe County High School
in West Jefferson. A second newsletter was issued in December 2007 requesting the
public's input on the draft Purpose and Need Statement.
A third newsletter was issued in early March 2009 announcing the approval from the
federal and state to study the "Best Fit" widening alternative. A second Citizens
Informational Workshop was held on Thursday March 26, 2009 at the Ashe County High
School. A local Officials Meeting was also held from 4:00pm to 5:00pm at the High
School. The purpose of the workshop was to present to the local officials and the public
the Best-fit Alignment with the proposed typical sections and to answers any questions
concerning the functional designs for the project. Approximately 220 people attended the
second workshop. The local officials and citizens in the area strongly favored widening
the existing two-lane roadway to a multi-lane divided roadway. They cited safety, traffic
' congestion, no passing zones, and a narrow roadway as reasons for improving the
existing roadway.
' 4. MERGER TEAM CONCURRENCES TO DATE
I A. Concurrence Point 1: PURPOSE AND NEED
A NEPA/404 Merger Team met and concurred on Concurrence Point 1 (CPI) at a
meeting held on January 22, 2008. The Study Area was defined and the Purpose
and Need Statement was agreed upon as follows:
'
Improve Traffic Flow for Highway System
• Existing US 221 currently experiences capacity deficiency and operates at levels
' of service D, E and F.
Additional Considerations:
' Above Average Crash Rates
• Existing crash rates and accident severity are relatively high along portions of the
project and will likely worsen if no improvements are made.
' B. Concurrence Point 2: DETAILED STUDY ALTERNATIVES CARRIED FORWARD
A NEPA/404 Merger Team met and concurred on Concurrence Point 2 (CP2) at a
meeting held on December 16, 2008. The following Best-fit Widening Alternative
and Typical Sections will be studied in detailed for the project as follows:
Best-fit Widening (For Sections 1, 3, and 7 with emphasis to the East)
Typical Section 1: Four-lane divided with 23-foot raised median and shoulder from
US 421 to US 221 Bus./NC 194 with consideration of storm
water treatment (STA. 10 + 00 to STA. 670 + 00).
Typical Section 2: Four-lane divided with 36-foot depressed median and shoulder
from US 221 Bus./NC 194 to Long Street (STA. 670 + 00 to
STA. 825 + 00).
Typical Section 3: Project Tie-In Five-lane transition section with shoulder from
Long Street to NC 881US 221 Bus. (East Main Street)
STA. 825 + 00 to STA. 845 + 00.
I
I
2
LI
I
' 5. HYDRAULIC RECOMMENDATIONS
The existing US 221 roadway is located in the Mountain province of North Carolina. The
' topography in the project study area is gently sloping in the stream valleys with steeper
areas along ridgetops. The project is located within the New River Basin and nine named
streams have been identified in the area. Seven of the streams have Best Usage
' Classification as Class Tr waters. One stream South Fork New River is Class HQW
waters and Old Fields Creek is Class ORW waters. Little Buffalo Creek is listed on the
Final 303(d) list as impaired waters for Aquatic Life due to impaired biological integrity.
The seven major drainage crossing along existing US 221 highway, include Gap Creek,
Little Gap Creek, South Fork New River, Old Fields Creek, Beaver Creek, Little Buffalo
Creek, and Naked Creek. The crossing for Gap Creek, South Fork New River, Old Fields
Creek, Beaver Creek, Naked Creek, and Naked Creek tributary are located within a
regulated FEMA study area. Therefore, the base flood, 100 year, discharge as reported in
' the FIS(NC)/FEMA Study, 37009CVOOIA, will be used to evaluate conformity of the
project to flood regulations.
1
0
Best Usage Classification and Stream Index Number
Stream Name SIN BUC Description
Sub-Basin 05-07-01
Gap Creek 10-1-23 C; Tr:+ From source to South Fork New River
Little Gap Creek 20-1-23-1 C; Tr:+ From source to a Creek
South Fork new River
10-1-(20.5)
WS-V; HOW From a point 0.4 mile upstream of Couches
Creek to a point 2.8 mile upstream of Obids
Creek
Old Field Creek 10-1-22-(0.3) C; Tr:+ From source to Call Creek
Old Field Creek 10-1-22-(0.7) C; Tr, ORW From Call Creek to South Fork New River
Beaver Creek 10-1-25 C; Tr:+ From source to South Fork New River
Cole Branch ` 10-1-25-1 C; Tr:+ From source to Beaver Creek
South Beaver Creek' 10-1-25-2 C; Tr:+ From source to Beaver Creek
Naked Creek 10-1-32 C:+ From source to South Fork New River
Sub-Basin 05-07-02
Little Buffalo Creek 10-2-20-1 C; Tr:+ Form source to Buffalo Creek
* Stream does not occur within the study area, only unnamed tributaries to these streams occur within the
study area.
Based on field investigations and preliminary hydraulic studies of the existing major
drainage structures such as bridges, box culverts and cross pipes 60" or greater in
diameter, an Hydraulics Technical Memorandum was submitted to NCDOT in March
2009 for the Best-fit Alternative. The proposed "Best Fit" widening Alternative will cross
eighteen (18) separate stream crossing as shown on Exhibit 2. The proposed structures
and impacts to streams are shown in Table 1: Stream Impacts.
I
I
Smyth
Grayson
Project
Location
Johnson
Ashe
Watauga
Avery
Miles
o s is
West
Jefferson
Baldwin
Deep Gap
VIRGINIA
NORTHCRU NA
Northern
Project
Terminus
Jefferson
Os
Southern
Project
Terminus
Wilkes
Alleghany
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT
OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION
ENAL
AO
Y IS BRANCH
Caldwell
US 221 (R-2915)
Environmental Impact Study
Ashe and Watauga Counties
Exh bit 1
PROJECT LOCATION
\p
GR
'x
GR k
PRELIMINARY PLANS
m xor um .w? mwmurnox
INCOMPLETE PLANS
YO NM N9 !pl RI• ACOYYTOM
SITE 1 & 1A
NEW 3 - 8'X 8' RCBC
EXTEND 3 - 8'x 8' RCBC
CI
JAI
50 25 0 50 100
SCALE (FO
117 N
c\j
- ? I
x ? (
k ``\ e e
SS ?
S
1
®
GR
c?
GR x
k it
PRELIMINARY PLANS SITE 1 50 25 0 50 100
m' V PoR MN9BVLTIOx
INCOMPLETE PLANS BRIDGE OPTION = 80' SCALE (FT)
?k k
11
/\ Al"
,
,
i
11
PRELIMINARY PLANS
NM w r coxrmUe
INCOMPLETE PLANS
W NM M A •/• A[pUW
,
,
i
i
,
L?\
SITE 2
EXTEND 1 - 6'X 4' RCBC
50 25 0 50 100
SCALE (FT)
U \// /I { /?^?
uJ
/
w
QJ/
N
rR-
Olys`,
PLANS SITE 3 50 25 0 50 100
PRELIMINARYRIIVLTOX
ORCON
N1 1 l
INCOMPLETE PLANS EXTEND 2 - 9'X 5' RCBC SCALE (FT)
W Nor u XI? •MUN N
Li HIX19PINI
r- , 1. . IN
/
\/ 11 /
LLJ
PRELIMINARY PLANS SITE 3 50 25 0 50 100
m x w m mrnm
INCOMPLETE PLA NS BRIDGE OPTION = 50' SCALE (F)
xor us ma TE PLA
L) c l
o;l
PRELIMINARY PLANS
m xo w n co Urno
INCOMPLETE PLANS
w w..i..mamnuw
SITE 4 2,111 ° 5O ,°°
EXTEND 2 - 42" RCP SCALE (Fr)
I ?? I 1
I
I
I
?I S, 's I
I ,
a?
1
1
I
I
PRELIMINARY PLANS SITE 5 50 25 0 50 100
p. MOB VN POq lYNflAVll10N ,1
ow"
INCOMPLETE PLANS K,W w .?COV EXTEND 2 - 42" RCP SCALE (FT)
NOS VN L
PRELIMINARY PLANS SITE SO 25, 0 50 100
INCOMPLETE PLANS EXTEND 1 - 66" RCP SCALE (FT)
xor ua ?mv
::D 0
c- -J
OV)
C U
75
I n
I cr-
00-
m
I %in
r
PRELIMINARY PLANS SITE 7 50 2,5 0 50 100
W NOf VY NA WNRRVITRI
INCOMPLETE PLANS EXTEND 2 - 8'x 7' RCBC SCALE (FT) ww"
i I
\U?
O 11
d ? ?I
06
I -
L-- J
?.ry- U)C?
0 1? DOZ.
I1 ?'? ?,? I 1 ?-
?I ? U e
`>
i \
Z_
oQ
'v I? . m
i
. k?
PRELIMINARY PLANS
Y !Ol WNTAVCMIX!
INCOMPLETE PLANS
W NM M K V • .nCOV®TpM
SITE 7
BRIDGE OPTION = 100'
50 25 0 50 100
SCALE (Fr)
ED
?7 (F
' OiSI
v/
/ M
PRELIMINARY PLANS
NM Y .oa conrtaucrox
INCOMPLETE PLANS
pp NOT VY POR R/• •LOVIl?IYM
r rte' ?/
?. 6
cr-
. Li
1 ? J
?? ? ,I f wE vLor
w /
SITE 8 50 25 0 50 100
EXTEND 3 - 12'x 10' RCBC SCALE (FT)
' OiSI
to
PRELIMINARY PLANS
m ?.. ?. CONO?.VCnW
INCOMPLETE PLANS
W N M M A/• AMUR N
;Mcy-?
ri
i Q
1 `
Ftl ? J
LLJ
JI \? v J
-
-T-SITE 8 50 25 ° 50 '°°
BRIDGE OPTION = 78' SCALE (FT)
\X?
?j
PRELIMINARY PLANS
m xm M F mt011tVCIfON
INCOMPLETE PLANS
W N = 1 R/• A?
SITE 9
BRIDGE - 205'
Q
U
V
50 25 0 50 100
SCALE (FT)
PRELIMINARY PLANS SITE 11 50 25 0 50 100
ro xor u6 ra.l rnxmlucnan
INCOMPLETE PLANS BRID
. ? 116 A./_ GE OPTION - 105' SCALE (FT)
ALVVINI0.Y
?. 0
co
? O \
\ ~ \\
? - .v
o
0
00
PRELIMINARY PLANS SITE 12 50 25 0 50 100
40 NV'! Y4 NR LVNffRVR10N
INCOMPLETE PLANS EXTEND 1 - 7'x 8' RCBC SCALE (FT)
pO NO! VLL IM l/1 AWVe11UN
i
I?
I?
,U
Q
a
a
o? cr-/
or-
1s ?-
1
PRELIMINARY PLANS 50 25 0 50 100
W Nm M roa coxenornm SITE 12
INCOMPLETE PLANS BRIDGE OPTION - 110' SCALE (FT)
I,
i
li
i
?i
'i
i
i
i
i
i
,i
i
,i
i
u
"---
PRELIMINARY PLANS SITE 13 50 25 0 50 100
av roi cownarnax
INCOMPLETE PLANS EXTEND 3 - 10'x 9' RCBC SCALE (FT)
m xor uv rat TR wmaurt
I,
i
1
I?
I?
I?
0
I?
I
I
PRELIMINARY PLANS
W xm ves nR Wxsn?rnmv
INCOMPLETE PLANS
00 NR VY 1OR R/R .1WVdTON
ill
SITE 13 SU ?5 ° 50 100
BRIDGE OPTION - 105/ SCALE (ET)
I,
I
I?
?a
I?
u
Ln
S I ; 15
1 ?
1
/ U 1
ar SIT 14 I C?7
x U I
:,2!- w
CD UI/ J
Q Q I
I I
I ?? c 1
I '
?` I ? III a
U1 ? 1 ,
PRELIMINARY PLANS SITE 14 50 25 0 50 100
LO MOB 11LL ?Ol COl3IAVCIfIX1
INCOMPLETE PLANS EXTEND 1 - 84" CMP SCALE (FT)
f0 NOS 11S 19R R/? .?COVPTON
I?
I
a
`a
,a
D
(( I
,o
PRELIMINARY PLANS
INCOMPLETE PLANS
ro xm ves oa..i. wwuwnox
i
ii
i
i
Ai SITE 1(5 L
I
? o
LSD
?10
SITE 14
till/
Ili
SITE 15 50 25 0 50 100
EXTEND 2 - 8'x 7' RCBC SCALE (FO
I
I?
?a
a
O
Cjj
,
,
PRELIMINARY PLANS
m xor oa roN ?+rravrnox
INCOMPLETE PLANS
M NO Y I Y/W AGOV N
i
C,
SITE 16
EXTEND 2 - 84" CMP
5,0 2,1 0 50 100
SCALE (FT)
,D
D
D
ID
D
iD
'D
a
D
D
D
D
i
'D
D
S
Soo
o
SITE 17
X) y
% i co.
PRELIMINARY PLANS SITE 17
W Nor w Wx m+erxvrnav
INCOMPLETE PLANS EXTEND 3 - 10'x 8' RCBC
W NM V4 rWl 4/• AWYYI'11YN
i
1
?I
50 25 0 50 100
SCALE (FT)
F
I
1
I
I
11
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
PRELIMINARY PLANS
W NM VLL TA WNARVITON
INCOMPLETE PLANS
W NO! Ne N4 0./O AWVYRMIN
SITE 17 50 25 0 50 100
BRIDGE OPTION - 112' SCALE (FT)
I
I
1
1
11
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
rS
?d
? .i
rn??
I /
SITE 18/'
\ QD \\
SITE 17
}f'
PRELIMINARY PLANS
CO HO! VS A WNf1RVtTON
INCOMPLETE PLANS
W NM VO 19R R/• .?WV?lIOII
SITE 18 50 25 0 50 100
EXTEND 2 - 60" CMP SCALE (FT)
1
.Y (
I
rL r I fL C
r • fG'
J % f7? ? . II
C. (y `, flp O
C7 ? rti
O O• ? n
? C. rr ter'.
f ?; G rp
n C - r, i
? ? ffa J ?
(4 (G j fJ^
.Z rL .+ rL
n J
7 r•, 1
a• d ?
1
fr:• ?
R r
^1
- =n
O ?
n rD
f ?
C C
rti
a
r? r'1
r r r a. g
r
N rJ- ?
r? x
O O ...J
? r
e - - G -
_
n C ` O C R W C n W ? M
(TI
: z C. C, E Cr r
L A
'.
-v o r
f r r - r. .
T z z n n n n n n
-•?
n .
r R
r
' rl
G R?
r fL rL rD - r ry ti
r
, „
L r; r rL tL PG It fL
n r n r. ? S 7 - S
r]
p\ ? y
J
N fD ry rD rL r ? fU ? fL fG tT fti fL ti t9 ry ti
' ? r r f r R
fti to !L ? ? r rp ti D G ti ti U tti ,
t r
fJ ''?
7 IJ I
i
c x x = ;, w
00 - J
'
" C. C- j, t_ x
n
r1
^?
:
r
77
x
f rp
rm
'
^
?
• It
? ? . ? ? ? n ,? ? ? ? ? ;
r r?. ? ? ?
i
n
Ti
^ v rJ - 1
4-
' 4-
r J J1 _ _
r"I
rn
rD CE
" C
c
ri
o '.N
- ry
S W
'
1 C
G ?
CL
r J x O CJ r'J 1
? w] T x i<
OC
Ix i A
(!3 yn rya (f3 E1q E!? ?!% (:/? `J'4
^ ^ O O O O ^ O ? O 5Z C C ^t
O
C j
O =
^? O C O O _
C O _
O O
C ^
X `
? O J ?
-H-
?9PA6- _ : ?- Gw? } • ?= , ? l r r( f , ? ti J \?' `•,? I ri?.
)Ce i is i 1ita? rM f i I `? ` 1 1? Irl / rl i - -\ li
,_- \ , ?.? ? ? ?i` ~ _ ? i^ I ( ? ..- I f ? - 7.0,?l•'?_ ,pit'. t,
i /'r f ///?eR I ^ P N, try ??
/ ?..? - ,/ ._ ? ?, C ?. • C if ? ,?,+ r (?? ? f ! ?f%/?, - :. ? i ?? % ur. ? r
r f?7.-r -,.-x,/-11 ? . ? ?: t? ?• /?? :?" ?? ./'? ? ?'..
41-
13
J?t
_. , /?'. S', 1 ? I ? J t „ C ve: 4_` Y.V _. ?, 1 i`_\ ? '?. i. ,r+''. .,I - ??•; S? _•i_ }
n
•?? -!i-? r? f { aur? )?(? i , r?r?l(` ~???^ Jrrn / ? ??. I a k 5?1 •Th'
` ! r^ f
01
_J`' tr 10
- ? ^;?, "? ? ,•= :; `• ` .. ?.u?% r?___ ? 9 I - It -
7-1
All,?)
t 14V
y .
Site Stream Recommended
Si
Number Name Structure 1 f'? ` ' ?? ,•? I r'?i" ?,
1 Gap Creek Culvert
lA Gap Creek Culvert
2 UT Gap Creek Culvert
3 UT Gap Creek Culvart ?? Ill ` `7 `t\",III t` 5 ?1 I' i rr. Hewed L
4 UT Gap Creek Culvert ? - Ga
5 UT Gap Creek Culvert
6 UT Gap Creek Culvert
t''n - 1 \ , j i 1
7 UT Gap Creek Culvert
?, )A{{.; , W { l % i ,?
8 Gap Creek Culvert
9 S. Fork New River Overflow Bridge
` t - + {)\' r' i i lr
S l1 ?i.r
10 S. Fork New River Bridge A-/
1 r' L? !! // ` J
11 UT S. Fork New River Culvert
12 UT Old Fields Creek Culvert Csa?. ` ` > l.h` ! i' ` I C "? r >
13 Old Fields Creek Culvert
IN-
PROJECT l r ` •:- -?` %•
AREA
l ( izt-
7
`?? ?.? ? ? q/ ?,. /? ? ? nit, '.1 ,•1 ?,q,P rid '? ; J ', ° u "°'? n I ? !•
\\ ?1 I ?..y 11Y31?11 ` 1'11 i 4^'= ;,.. ?, \ ?i
1l f V ?`
` ?' 1 l ' '?r •/ Iliif '.I -°Y? \ ` .?rx, ?/ - l ) Y)
lor
nJ 1 I rrxn_ /1r, r ' ?l ? V ;i ?[a?`
?i - 3f / f 6
Mal
f f ,
•
r ,. L
\71 I \?'; -7), 1 `?I ?? , ? Y'a?• '/ deli' Ili1 \
- D ' t i ?? 6 Jr l N /. l! 17Q 1 ! ? 1 '?•' L ^\ ? - ,` _ 1 i.,
4!V 1,
t '?,>??'' ?. ?\ 1 ., \ t _ /. , - - 'tom \?.\ ` `"• ` \\ ?•\ (.. IJ ._.
V _6
t Ir , \ \ u / t E t rl \ • , \/f, A ?er??' i 11 t n 1
\ /1?-?' --- ?,I --ti.• •,? l Ca ' Vmti: ?i/ A ! Gy' Y.}1 ?jwd-?
bloc
ffi
4r;1 I
77
r
18
-100
4'/t/
`\? i t' ?` 1\^r) - r\ j .1
17
%
Site Stream Recommended
Number Name Structure ) l/
14 UT Old Fields Creek Culvert
15 UT Old Fields Creek Culvert
16 Old Fields Creak Culvert
J
17 Beaver Creek Culvert !? ' j? \ \ J
UT Beaver Creek Culvert
18
?(Y 11/ I ?I r .l
D
Al,
PROJECT
AREA
Al.
/T i it/rr