The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20160787 Ver _Information Letter_20100315=M><, STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION BEVERLY EAVES PERDUE GOVERNOR March 12, 2010 MEMORANDUM TO: Meeting Participants FROM: John E. Richards, III, E.I. . °" Project Planning Engineer Project Development and Environmental Analysis SUBJECT: Minutes of Concurrence Points 3 and 4A Meeting For Proposed NC 125 Williamston Bypass, Martin County, WBS Element 34553.1.1, Federal- Aid Project STP-125(1), TIP Project R-3826. On February 23, 2010 a merger team meeting was held for the proposed Williamston Bypass. The purpose of the meeting was to reach concurrence point 3 and discuss concurrence point 4A. The meeting was held in the Transportation Building Board Room in Raleigh. The following representatives were in attendance: Bill. Biddlecome Ron Lucas Gary Jordan Chris Militscher Travis Wilson David Wainwright Amy Simes Eddy Davis W.M. Petit Jerry Snead KJ Kim Dewayne Sykes Gary Levering Brenda Moore Joyce Drew Saeed Mohammed Elizabeth Lusk Chris Rivenbark John Merritt Tristam Ford Beverly Goll-Yekesen MAILING ADDRESS: NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER RALEIGH NC 27699-1548 Army Corps of Engineers Federal Highway Administration US Fish and Wildlife Service US Environmental Protection Agency NC Wildlife Resource Commission NC Division of Water Quality NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources Mid-East Rural Planning Organization NCDOT Program Development Branch NCDOT Hydraulics Unit NCDOT Geotechnical Unit NCDOT Roadway Design Unit NCDOT Roadway Design Unit NCDOT Roadway Design Unit NCDOT Roadway Design Unit NCDOT Transportation Planning Branch NCDOT PDEA Natural Environment Unit NCDOT PDEA Natural Environment Unit NCDOT PDEA Natural Environment Unit NCDOT PDEA Human Environment Unit NCDOT PDEA Human Environment Unit TELEPHONE: 919-733-3141 LOCATION: FAX: 919-733-9794 TRANSPORTATION BUILDING 1 SOUTH WILMNGTON STREET WEBSITEI WWW.NCDOT.ORG RALEIGH NC EUGENE A. CONTI, JR. SECRETARY R-3826 Concurrence Point s 3 and 4A Meeting Minutes March 12, 2010 Page 2, 91,' GregThorpe, Ph.D. NCDOT PDEA Ro Hanson NCDOT PDEA '- ay Mchmis NCDOT PDEA John E. Richards NCDOT PDEA CP3 - Least Environmentally Damaginp Practicable Alternative Bill Biddlecome opened the meeting by asking everyone to introduce themselves. Jay McInnis introduced Joint Richards as the new project planning engineer for the project. John Richards gave a brief overview of project R-3826. Mr. Richards mentioned that Concurrence Points 2 and 2A were both reached in 2005. Concurrence Point 1 was reached in 2003 for purpose and need. It was also mentioned that the Environmental Assessment had been completed in April 2009 and that ' a public hearing was held in September 2009. The September 2009 public hearing was discussed by Mr. Richards. It was stated that most of the comments received were against alternative 4. It was also mentioned that. two local farm owners at the meeting had requested that Alternative 2S be reconsidered. Mr. Richards explained that it was stated at.the.public hearing that Alternative 2S was•% dropped and would not be reconsidered but that attempts to minimize impacts to the faun operation would be considered. Mr. McInnis mentioned that a typo existed in the cost summary of the impacts table in the handout provided for the meeting. Mr. Richards indicated that the costs for Alternative 1, 2n and 4 should be changed to $14.7 million, $14.5 million and $19.7 million, respectively. Mr. Richards stated that NCDOT prefers Alternative 1 because it would affect fewer homes, traffic noise receptors and wetlands of the three alternatives being considered. Mr. Richards asked for concurrence on the preferred Alternative 1. Bill Biddlecome announced that the merger team was agreeing to Alternative 1 as the preferred alternative with the understanding that there would be some modification to the alignment of Alternative 1 as an avoidance and minimization measure. Travis Wilson asked if Table 1 showed the modifications of Alternative 1. Mr. Mchmis stated that Table 1 did not show the modifications but that a comparison of the modification is presented in Table 2 of the handout. No other comments were presented and the concurrence form selecting Alternative 1 as the preferred alternative was signed and dated by the merger team. R-3826 Concurrence Points 3 and 4A Meeting Minutes March 12, 2010 Page 3 CP4A - Avoidance and Minimization of the Selected Alternative Jay McInnis discussed the current issues with Alternative 1. It was stated that the alignment of Alternative 1 had been modified as a result of comments received from local farm owners in the area. This modified alignment was presented as Alternative IA. Mr. Mehnris discussed that the alignment of Alternative 1 was only modified on the property of the two farmers. The rest of Alternative 1A alignment is the same as Altemative 1. No other property owners will be affected differently due to Alternative IA. Mr. McInnis mentioned that Alternative IA crosses Unnamed Tributary 3 (UT3) at the same location that previous alternative 2M crossed that stream. A 150-foot bridge had been suggested by the merger team at the field meeting held in November 2004. Alternative 2M was dropped from consideration; however, before the 2A concurrence form was signed. The intent of the merger team at the CP2A meeting was to span the wetland (wetland WF) surrounding the stream. Based on the current design, a bridge 190 feet long would be required to span the wetland. The impacts of the proposed structure at the stream crossing were discussed for Alternative 1 A. Mr. Mchmis indicated that at the time of the CP2A meeting, a one barrel 64oot by 10-foot culvert was recommended. Now, only a one barrel 6-foot by 5-foot culvert is recommended due to a lower actual drainage area than originally calculated. The 6-foot by 5-foot culvert would cost approximately $673,000, while a 190-foot bridge would cost approximately $1,734,000. It was stated that the costs shown on the comparison sheet were for the ultimate four-lane roadway. Only two lanes will initially be constructed for the project, so the actual cost would probably be less than shown in the comparison. Chris Militscher asked about the fill slopes near the crossing and what the grade was like. Mr. McInnis stated that the area near the stream and in the wetland is depressed. Gary Jordan stated that he was not comfortable with selecting either structure because it had been a while since he last visited the site. Mr. Mchmis stated that pictures of the site had been taken and asked if it would help to look through them. Bill Biddlecome stated that he had visited the site recently and indicated that there is a major blockage downstream of the site. The merger team then viewed pictures taken of the crossing site and the existing pipes and culverts downstream of the site. Chris Militscher asked whether the site has been rated by NCWAM and if not what the rating would be and what the water classification of the stream was. It was stated that NCWAM rating was not known, but that the stream is listed as class C. R-3826 Concurrence Points 3 and 4A Meeting Minutes March 12, 2010 Page 4 It was stated that a bridge would not be justified but that stricter side slopes would be required to reach concurrence on Alternative 1 A for avoidance and minimization. Mr. McInnis stated that the concurrence form for avoidance and minimization will include a provision to explore steeper side slopes than typical at the stream crossing UT3. Chris Militscher asked what type of crossing would be provided where the right of way expands north of the existing CSX rail line. It was mentioned that an at grade rail crossing would be provided. is Travis Wilson mentioned that there is an access road to the Roanoke River Game Land on existing NC 125 near the end of Alternative 1 A and asked if there would be any impact to the access road. Mr. McInnis stated that there would not be any impact to the existing access road. Concurrence for avoidance and minimization (CP4A) was reached for the project., The merger team agreed to the following avoidance and minimization measures: • 3:1 side slopes will be constructed in jurisdictional areas. NCDOT will also investigate the use of side slopes steeper than ,3:1. at the UT 3 crossing. • The proposed horizontal alignment will cross wetland WM at its narrowest point. • Horizontal alignment shift (Alternative 1A) will be utilized to avoid or minimize i a jurisdictional impacts. - Measures to avoid or minimize residential or business relocations: Revised - ,.alignment for Alternative 1 (Alternative, l A) only involves changes in the alignment on two farms. The revised alignment will not affect any other properties and will not require the relocation of any more homes or businesses than Alternative 1: - • Measures to avoid or minimize other human resource impacts: Revised alignment for Alternative 1 (Alternative 1 A) will reduce impacts of the proposed bypass on two farms. Alternative IA will affect approximately five acres less land being actively farmed than Alternative 1. The meeting was adjourned. Copies of the concurrence forms are attached to this memorandum. Section 404/NEPA Interagency Agreement Concurrence Point 3 Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative Proiect Title: NC 125 Williamston Bypass, Martin County, TIP Project R-3826, Federal-Aid Project STP-125(1), State project 8.81090501, WBS Element 34533. 1.1 Proiect Description: The project will construct a NC 125 bypass of Williamston, mostly on new location. The proposed two-lane roadway will be constructed on multi-lane right of way. For all bypass alternatives, existing NC 125 will be widened between SR 1182 and US 64A. Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative: The alternative marked with a check below has been selected by the merger team as the least environmentally damaging practicable alternative (LEDPA) for the proposed NC 125 Williamston Bypass. Alternatives with a line drawn through the alternative name have been dropped from further consideration. [yJ Alternative 1 wiative ?N ?kh?ttdttoe$ - The merger team has.unconditionally concurred on this date.of February 23, 2010 on the. LEDPA for the NC 125 Williamston Bypass, as shown on'the attached figure and described above. NG7JGIl? .??z?/•o .. NC007. - FDEAs Page 1 of 2 Section 404/NEPA Interagency Agreement Concurrence Point 4A Avoidance and Minimization Measures Project Title: NC 125 Williamston Bypass, Martin County, TIP Project R-3826, Federal-Aid Project STP-125(1); State Project 8.81090501, WBS Element 34533. 1.1 Proiect Description: The project will construct a NC 125 bypass of Williamston, mostly on new location. The proposed two-lane roadway will be constructed on multi-lane right of way. For all bypass alternatives, existing NC 125 will be widened between SR 1182 and US 64A. 404 Avoidance and Minimization Measures In an effort to avoid and minimize impacts to jurisdictional wefland? urid streams" associated with the LEDPA (Alternative 1), NCDOT has proposed to implement one or more of the following measures: (?Prr t'?tian ?' l? v 1 side slopes in jurisdictional areas. 9001 WM RP6tt i4t f t 5 'h Ol Pts ua ?7 [d?Iorizontal alignment crosses wetland WM at its narrowest point. Horizontal alignment shift (Alternative IA) to avoid or. minimize jurisdictional areas: Alternative 1 A will have slightly more wetland impacts (0.02 acre), but will completely avoid the following wetland sites affected by Alternative 1: WL (0.02 acre) WG (0.39 acre) Alternative IA will have overall less stream impacts (174 feet less) and will avoid the following streams affected by Alternative 1: UT I (112 feet) UT 5 (233 feet) a>^bsstlla, Other Measures to Avoid and Minimize Impacts to the Human and Natural Environment NCDOT has also documented the following measures to avoid and minimize impacts to the human and natural environment associated with the LEDPA, as appropriate: dMeasures to avoid or minimize residential or business relocations: Revised alignment for Alternative 1 (Alternative IA) only involves changes in the alignment on two farms. The revised alignment will not affect any other properties and will not require the relocation of any more homes or businesses than Alternative 1. Measures to avoid or minimize other human resource impacts: Revised alignment for Alternative 1 (Alternative 1 A) will reduce impacts of the proposed bypass on two farms. Alternative IA will affect approximately five acres less land being actively farmed than Alternative 1. Page 2 of 2 The merger team has unconditionally concurred on this date of February 23, 2010 on the above listed avoidance and minimization measures for the NC 125 Williamston Bypass. Agency Name USFws c Li S 4C,i - ww ( . USDaI-- F-N\? Nc-0oi - POE-