Loading...
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