Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20110512_Meeting Minutes_20130222DocuSign Envelope ID: 23FC5E53- 02D2- 4F82- 8C4C- 88922EED420F STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION PAT McCRORY ANTHONY J. TATA GOVERNOR SECRETARY February 20, 2013 Memorandum To: File DocuSigned by: From: Joseph Miller P.E. [A24640833AgE4M oc. A' - Project Planning Engineer . Project Development and Environmental Analysis Unit SUBJECT: January 31, 2013 NEPA /404 Merger Meeting for Proposed Widening of US 17, Beaufort/Martin Counties, TIP Project R -2511, WBS Element '15494. 1.1 A CP2 and CP2A merger meeting was held on January 31, 2013 at the Washington field office of the US Army Corps of Engineers. The following persons were in attendance: Bill Biddlecome US Army Corps of Engineers Gary Jordan US Fish and Wildlife Service David Wainwright NC Division of Water Quality Gary Ward NC Division of Water Quality Travis Wilson NC Wildlife Resources Commission Justin Oaks Mid -East Rural Planning Organization Craig Freeman NCDOT Hydraulics Unit Paul Atkinson NCDOT Hydraulics Unit Shawn Mebane NCDOT Division 1 Resident Engineer Chris Rivenbark NCDOT Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch, Office of Natural Environment Chris Manley NCDOT Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch, Office of Natural Environment Jay McInnis NCDOT Project Development and Environmental Analysis Unit Joseph Miller NCDOT Project Development and Environmental Analysis Unit DocuSign Envelope ID: 23FC5E53- 02D2- 4F82- 8C4C- 88922EED420F Office Meeting • Jay McInnis began by stating that although the merger team has reached concurrence already on Concurrence Point 2, he would like to discuss Section 4, where there are still two alternatives, and see if an alternative can be selected for that section based on the impacts of the preliminary design. He also mentioned that the merger team concurred on a "best -fit" alignment for Sections 5 and 6, but two preliminary designs were prepared. He said he wanted to present the impacts of the two preliminary designs to the merger team for their information. • Jay McInnis explained east and west side alternatives for Section 4 and the avoidance of the National Register - eligible Griffin's Hatchery. Both alternatives would affect the same amount of wetlands and streams. • A question was raised about the funding for the project. Does Section 4(f) apply to Griffin's Hatchery? Mr. McInnis explained that right of way and constriction of the project are currently state - funded, but that there has been interest in accelerating the project by using Garvey Bonds. A federal document is being prepared in order to allow flexibility in the type of funding. Because of the federal document, Section 4(f) does apply to the project. • Bill Biddlecome asked if the team was OK with the avoidance alternative for Section 4. All agreed. • Mr. McInnis explained that impacts have been calculated in Sections 5 and 6 for both east and west side widening. The merger team has already concurred on a "best fit" alignment for these sections, but it can be discussed further since the impacts of widening to either side are available. • During the discussion, a possible error was discovered in Table 1 of the handout. It appears that the number of relocatees for the two Section 5 alternatives have been reversed. Table 1 indicates that west side widening would relocate two homes while east side widening would not relocate any homes. This contradicts what is shown on Figure 2. Following the meeting, it was confirmed that the numbers on Table 1 are reversed. The east side widening alternative in Section 5 would relocate two homes while the west side widening alternative would not relocate any homes. • The consensus of the group was that NCDOT will select the "best -fit" alternative for Sections 5 and 6, as the merger team had originally concurred. Bill Biddlecome asked the group if they were in agreement with the CP2 decisions. There were no objections. Mr. Biddlecome signed the CP2 sheet and passed it around for signatures. DocuSign Envelope ID: 23FC5E53- 02D2- 4F82- 8C4C- 88922EED420F • Mr. Biddlecome mentioned a stricture at the beginning of the project that is actually apart of project R -2510. The group agreed to look at it during the field visit. • Joe Miller mentioned strictures 3 and 4. Travis Wilson commented saying as long as they're not perched, they will be fine. Field Meeting • Site 1 Questions were raised by team members about how the existing box culvert and pipe would be extended with two pipes. There were concerns regarding extending a square culvert with a round pipe. Paul Atkinson explained that it could be done. The merger team concurred with the recommendation to retain and extend 1 @ 48" RCP and 1 @ 6' x 4' RCBC with 2 @ 60" RCP. • Site 2 NCDOT proposes to replace the existing 22 -foot bridge with 3 @ 8' x 7' RCBC. Travis Wilson stated he would like to see a bridge or a pipe arch at this site. Mr. Atkinson explained that there is probably not enough cover for an arch. Mr. Wilson asked why a bridge could not be provided. Mr. Atkinson mentioned the proposed culvert will provide a larger opening than the existing bridge. Mr. McInnis explained there is not enough room to provide guardrail for the bridge approach between the end of the bridge and the nearby intersection. A bridge will require relocating the intersection and possibly taking a house. Mr. Wilson stated he would like to see a bridge at this location, but he doesn't want to take a house. Mr. Wilson and Gary Jordan asked NCDOT to look more into bridging without moving the —Y- line. If that is not possible, a large 1 barrel culvert or arch is preferred. They asked if an aluminum culvert could potentially be used at this location. There was also discussion about adding supplemental pipes. NCDOT will investigate a bridge further and the possibility of a one barrel aluminum culvert, as requested by the merger team. The merger team agreed that this could probably be resolved through e -mails without having another meeting. 3 DocuSign Envelope ID: 23FC5E53- 02D2- 4F82- 8C4C- 88922EED420F • Site 3 The merger team concurred with the recommendation to retain and extend the existing 1 @ 8'x 3' RCBC. • Stricture 4 The merger team concurred with the recommendation to retain and extend the existing 2 @ 8' x 6'. Travis Wilson asked NCDOT to consider replacing the stricture during final design due to the age of the stricture.