20151246_Environmental Assessment_20131201

Environmental Assessment – B-5121/B-5317 Page 1 of 1 Environmental Commitments
December 2013
PROJECT COMMITMENTS
Replacement of Bridge Nos. 227 & 213 on Capital Boulevard (US 70/US 401/NC 50)
At Peace Street and Wade Avenue (US 70/NC 50) and Revise the Interchanges
Wake County
WBS No. 42263.1.1
Federal-Aid Project BRNHS-0070(119)/BRSTP-0070(149)
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
All commitments developed during the project development and design phase are listed
below.
NCDOT Hydraulics Unit:
The Hydraulics Unit will coordinate with the NC Floodplain Mapping Program
(FMP), to determine status of project with regard to applicability of NCDOT’S
Memorandum of Agreement, or approval of a Conditional Letter of Map Revision
(CLOMR) and subsequent final Letter of Map Revision (LOMR).
NCDOT Division 5:
This project involves construction activities on or adjacent to FEMA-regulated
stream(s). Therefore, the Division shall submit sealed as-built construction plans to the
Hydraulics Unit upon completion of project construction, certifying that the drainage
structure(s) and roadway embankment that are located within the 100-year floodplain were
built as shown in the construction plans, both horizontally and vertically.
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317 i Environmental Assessment
December 2013
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SUMMARY .................................................................................................................... S-1
A.Type of Action ........................................................................................................S-1
B.Description of Action ..............................................................................................S-1
C.Alternatives Considered ..........................................................................................S-1
D.Summary of Environmental Effects .........................................................................S-2
E.Permits Required .....................................................................................................S-4
F.Other Highway and Non-Highway Actions..............................................................S-5
G.Coordination ...........................................................................................................S-5
H.Contact Information ................................................................................................S-6
I.DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION .............................................................. 1
A.General Description .................................................................................................... 1
B.Historical Resume and Project Status.......................................................................... 1
C.Cost Estimates ............................................................................................................ 2
II.PURPOSE AND NEED FOR PROPOSED PROJECT ............................................ 2
A.Purpose for Project ..................................................................................................... 2
B.Need for Project ......................................................................................................... 2
1.Description of Existing Conditions ........................................................................... 3
2.Transportation and Land Use Plans ........................................................................ 11
C.Traffic Operations with Project ................................................................................. 13
III.ALTERNATIVES ..................................................................................................... 14
A.No Build Alternative ................................................................................................ 14
B.Preliminary Build Alternatives ................................................................................. 14
C.Detailed Study Alternatives ...................................................................................... 16
IV.PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS ............................................................................. 18
A.Roadway Cross-Section and Alignment .................................................................... 18
B.Right of Way and Access Control ............................................................................. 20
C.Speed Limit .............................................................................................................. 20
D.Design Speed............................................................................................................ 20
E.Anticipated Design Exceptions ................................................................................. 20
F.Intersections/Interchanges ........................................................................................ 21
G.Service Roads ........................................................................................................... 22
H.Railroad Crossings ................................................................................................... 22
I.Structures ................................................................................................................. 22
J.Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities .............................................................................. 23
K.Utilities .................................................................................................................... 24
L.Landscaping ............................................................................................................. 25
M.Noise Barriers .......................................................................................................... 25
N.Work Zone, Traffic Control, and Construction Phasing ............................................ 25
V.ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF PROPOSED ACTION ................................. 25
A.Natural Resources .................................................................................................... 25
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317 ii Environmental Assessment
December 2013
1.Biotic Resources .................................................................................................... 25
2.Waters of the United States .................................................................................... 26
3.Rare and Protected Species .................................................................................... 28
4.Soils ....................................................................................................................... 29
B.Cultural Resources ................................................................................................... 29
1.Historic Architectural Resources ............................................................................ 29
2.Archaeological Resources ...................................................................................... 30
C.Section 4(f) Resources .............................................................................................. 31
D.Section 6(f) Resources .............................................................................................. 31
E.Farmland .................................................................................................................. 31
F.Social Effects ........................................................................................................... 32
1.Neighborhoods/Communities ................................................................................. 32
2.Relocation of Residences and Businesses ............................................................... 32
3.Environmental Justice ............................................................................................ 33
4.Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities ............................................................................ 33
5.Recreational Facilities ............................................................................................ 34
6.Other Public Facilities and Services ....................................................................... 34
G.Economic Effects ..................................................................................................... 34
H.Land Use .................................................................................................................. 35
1.Existing Land Use and Zoning ............................................................................... 35
2.Future Land Use ..................................................................................................... 35
3.Project Compatibility with Local Plans .................................................................. 35
I.Indirect and Cumulative Effects................................................................................ 36
1.Indirect Effects ....................................................................................................... 36
2.Cumulative Effects ................................................................................................. 36
J.Flood Hazard Evaluation .......................................................................................... 37
K.Traffic Noise Analysis .............................................................................................. 37
1.Introduction ........................................................................................................... 37
2.Traffic Noise Impacts and Noise Contours ............................................................. 37
3.Traffic Noise Abatement Measures ........................................................................ 38
L.Air Quality Analysis ................................................................................................. 38
1.Project Air Quality Effects ..................................................................................... 38
2.Attainment Status ................................................................................................... 39
3.Carbon Monoxide .................................................................................................. 39
4.Qualitative Mobile Source Air Toxic (MSAT) Analysis ......................................... 40
5.Construction Air Quality Effects ............................................................................ 42
M.Hazardous Materials ................................................................................................. 43
VI.COMMENTS AND COORDINATION .................................................................. 43
A.Public Meetings ........................................................................................................ 43
B.Local Officials Meetings .......................................................................................... 44
C.Public Hearing .......................................................................................................... 45
D.Agency Coordination................................................................................................ 45
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317 iii Environmental Assessment
December 2013
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A – Agency Comments
Appendix B – NCDOT Relocation Estimate
Appendix C – Bridge Inspection Reports
LIST OF TABLES
Table S1 – Impacts of Detailed Study Alternatives – Peace Street Interchange .................S-3
Table S2 – Impacts of Detailed Study Alternatives – Wade Avenue Interchange...............S-4
Table 1 – Cost Estimate ....................................................................................................... 2
Table 2 – LOS Criteria for Signalized Intersections ............................................................. 8
Table 3 – Existing (2011) Intersection Levels of Service and Delay (No Build) ................... 9
Table 4 – Year 2035 Projected Intersection Levels of Service and Delay (No Build).......... 10
Table 5 – Year 2035 Projected Intersection Levels of Service and Delay ........................... 14
Table 6 – Impacts of Detailed Study Alternatives – Peace Street Interchange ..................... 17
Table 7 – Impacts of Detailed Study Alternatives – Wade Avenue Interchange .................. 18
Table 8 – Bridge Lengths ................................................................................................... 22
Table 9 – Water Resources in the Study Area .................................................................... 26
Table 10 – Physical Characteristics of Water Resources in the Study Area......................... 27
Table 11 – Jurisdictional Characteristics of Wetlands in the Study Area ............................ 27
Table 12 – Federally Protected Species Listed for Wake County ........................................ 28
Table 13 – Soils in the Study Area ..................................................................................... 29
Table 14 – Historic Effects ................................................................................................ 30
Table 15 – Business Relocations ........................................................................................ 32
Table 16 – Traffic Noise Impact Summary ........................................................................ 38
Table 17 – Comparison of Model Result to Ambient Air Quality Standards for CO ........... 40
Table 18 – Comparison of Model Result to Ambient Air Quality Standards for CO ........... 40
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317 iv Environmental Assessment
December 2013
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 – Vicinity Map
Figure 2a – Alternative P-Base
Figure 2b – Alternative P5
Figure 2c – Alternative W-Base
Figure 2d – Alternative W2c
Figure 3a – Existing (2011) Average Daily Traffic Volumes – Peace Street Interchange
Figure 3b – Existing (2011) Average Daily Traffic Volumes – Wade Avenue Interchange
Figure 3c – Projected (2035) Average Daily Traffic Volumes – Peace Street Interchange
Figure 3d – Projected (2035) Average Daily Traffic Volumes – Wade Avenue Interchange
Figure 4a – Typical Sections – Peace Street Interchange
Figure 4b – Typical Sections – Wade Avenue Interchange
Figure 5 – Environmental Features
Figure 6 – Historic Resources
Figure 7 – Community Features
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317 S-1 Environmental Assessment
December 2013
SUMMARY
A.Type of Action
This Environmental Assessment (EA) has been prepared for the Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) in accordance with the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 23,
Part 771 for the purpose of evaluating the potential impacts of a proposed transportation
improvement project.
B.Description of Action
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace the bridges
and revise the interchanges at two adjacent interchanges on Capital Boulevard (US 70/US
401/NC 50) approximately 0.7 mile apart: Bridge No. 227 at Capital Boulevard/Peace Street
(Project B-5121) and Bridge No. 213 at Capital Boulevard/Wade Avenue (US 70/NC 50)
(Project B-5317). The proposed projects are included in the NCDOT 2013-2023 Draft State
Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) and are programmed for right of way
acquisition beginning in Fiscal Year (FY) 2015 and construction beginning in FY 2016.
Figure 1 shows the project vicinity. The primary purpose of Projects B-5121/B-5317 is to
replace Bridge Nos. 227 and 213 in a timely manner since they are nearing the end of their
design lives. Another desirable outcome is to improve the geometry of the interchanges.
Both bridges are deteriorating due to the age of the superstructure and substructure
components. Bridge No. 227 carrying Capital Boulevard over Peace Street (Project B-5121)
is a half-cloverleaf interchange built in 1948 with a Federal sufficiency rating of 43.9 out of
a possible 100 (as of October 2013). Bridge No. 213 carrying Wade Avenue over Capital
Boulevard (Project B-5317) is a trumpet interchange built in 1954 with a Federal sufficiency
rating of 34.1 out of a possible 100 (as of November 2011). Both bridges are classified as
“structurally deficient” due to age. Due to the cost and potential safety concerns of
continuing to maintain the current bridges, the FHWA and NCDOT have identified a need to
replace Bridge Nos. 227 and 213 through the FHWA Highway Bridge Program (HBP).
The geometry of the current interchanges is less than desirable. Potential improvements to
the geometry may include increasing the radii of the interchange loops and ramps,
lengthening the acceleration and deceleration lanes, lengthening the weave sections,
improving grades on the ramps and loops, and increasing turn bay storage lengths.
C.Alternatives Considered
Between the beginning of the project and selection of alternatives to carry forward for
detailed study, a total of 10 alternatives have been developed at the Peace Street interchange,
and nine alternatives have been developed at the Wade Avenue interchange.
Three conceptual options for the Peace Street interchange and four conceptual options for
the Wade Avenue interchange were presented at the September 2011 public meeting.
Following the meeting, functional designs of all seven alternatives were developed for the
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317 S-2 Environmental Assessment
December 2013
purpose of estimating preliminary costs and impacts. Several new alternatives were
proposed to minimize impacts to historic resources and businesses, and based on input from
the public. Two alternatives for the Peace Street interchange and four alternatives for the
Wade Avenue interchange were shown at the second public meeting in October 2012.
Following the public meeting comment period and a meeting with the State Historic
Preservation Office in January 2013, three new alternatives were considered and several
were eliminated. Preliminary designs were developed for the following four detailed study
alternatives, which were presented at the November 2013 public meeting:
Peace Street Interchange
·Alternative P-Base – half cloverleaf
·Alternative P5 – square loop/ramps
Wade Avenue Interchange
·Alternative W-Base – trumpet
·Alternative W2c – diamond/trumpet
The current detailed study alternatives are shown on Figures 2a through 2d.
D.Summary of Environmental Effects
Tables S1 and S2 present a summary of the environmental effects of the current detailed
study alternatives.
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317 S-3 Environmental Assessment
December 2013
Table S1 – Impacts of Detailed Study Alternatives – Peace Street Interchange
Impact Alternative
P-Base (Half Cloverleaf)P5 (Square Loop/Ramps)
Business
Relocations*9 12
Impact to
Business District No adverse effect
No adverse effect because although businesses
will be relocated, this alternative allows for
redevelopment in SW quadrant
Effect on
Development/
Land Use
No effect
Encourages redevelopment in SW quadrant
because of potential driveway access from loops;
City expects development in SW quadrant to be
enhanced compared with alternatives that have a
loop in the NW quadrant
Change in
Vehicular Access
Will close Johnson Street at Capital
Boulevard; will close some existing
driveways on Capital Boulevard
Will allow for driveways from loops in SW
quadrant; will close some existing driveways on
Capital Boulevard
Change in
Pedestrian Access
No change for pedestrians crossing
ramps/loops; wider sidewalks on Peace
Street
Improved access across square loop compared
with half-cloverleaf ramps/loops; wider sidewalks
on Peace Street and on square loop
Consistent with
Local Plans
Not consistent with City of Raleigh’s Capital
Boulevard Corridor Study, which
recommends a square loop design.
Consistent with LRTP and other local plans,
which do not specify interchange type.
Consistent – partially matches design in local
plan, allows City to retrofit interchange in the
future
Change in
Geometry
Slight increase in radius of ramp/loop in NW
quadrant Replaces southbound ramp/loop with square loop
Change in Traffic
Operations No change
Square loop is intended to function more slowly,
like a street rather than an interchange ramp; adds
traffic signal to northbound ramp movements
Impact to Parks Decreases size of City’s planned park in NW
quadrant
Square loop expected to have positive impact on
use of City’s planned park
Historic Properties
(Adverse Effect)
No Adverse Effect –Raleigh Cotton Mill (on
the condition adequate access is provided)
No Adverse Effect – Roundhouse**
No Adverse Effect – Raleigh Cotton Mill
No Adverse Effect – Roundhouse**
Stream Impacts Extend existing culverts for Pigeon House
Branch by 20 linear feet
Extend existing culverts for Pigeon House Branch
by 24 linear feet
FEMA
Floodplains
1.6 acres affected; no FEMA coordination
anticipated
2.0 acres affected; no FEMA
coordination anticipated
Culvert Extension 1 1
Cost Estimate (in millions)
Construction $10.8 $12.0
Right of Way $10.8 $17.7
Utility Relocation $3.8 $8.3
Total Cost
(Estimated)$25.4 $38.0
* No residential relocations are anticipated for any of the alternatives.
** The Seaboard Air Line Turntable and Raleigh & Gaston Railroad HD and Roundhouse Site
Note: There were no impacts by any of the alternatives to forested areas, community facilities, wetlands, or federally
protected species. There are no communities meeting the environmental justice criteria, and benefits and burdens resulting
from the projects are anticipated to be equitably distributed throughout the community; therefore, therefore, there are no
disproportionately high and adverse impacts to minority or low-income populations. The study area is in urbanized area as
defined by US Census urbanized area maps, so a NRCS AD-1006 farmland forms for point projects are not required.
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317 S-4 Environmental Assessment
December 2013
Table S2 – Impacts of Detailed Study Alternatives – Wade Avenue Interchange
Impact Alternative
W-Base (Trumpet)W2c (Diamond/Trumpet)
Business Relocations*1 9
Impact to Business
District No adverse effect No adverse effect
Effect on
Development/
Land Use
No effect
Diamond ramps will improve access to
businesses on east side of Capital
Boulevard
Change in Vehicular
Access No change
Retains existing trumpet ramps but adds
half-diamond ramps on the east side of
Capital, providing access to properties on
that side
Change in Pedestrian
Access No change Improved access across diamond
interchange compared with trumpet ramp
Consistent with Local
Plans
Not consistent with City of Raleigh’s
Capital Boulevard Corridor Study,
which recommends a diamond design.
Consistent with LRTP and other local
plans, which do not specify
interchange type.
Consistent – partially matches design in
local plan, allows City to retrofit
interchange and extend West Street in the
future
Change in Geometry No change Replaces flyover ramp with on/off ramps
on east side
Change in Traffic
Operations No change Convert northbound on/off ramps from
free-flow movement to signal-controlled
Impact to Parks No effect on existing or planned parks No effect on existing or planned parks
Historic Properties
(Adverse Effect)No Effects No Effects
Stream Impacts No impact Extend existing culverts for Pigeon House
Branch by 34 linear feet
FEMA Floodplains 0.2 acres; no FEMA
coordination anticipated
0.1 acres; FEMA
coordination is anticipated
Culvert Extension 0 1
Cost Estimate (in millions)
Construction $5.6 $8.2
Right of Way $0.4 $10.3
Utility Relocation $2.0 $5.1
Total Cost (Estimated)$8.0 $23.6
* No residential relocations are anticipated for any of the alternatives.
Note: There were no impacts by any of the alternatives to forested areas, community facilities, wetlands, or federally
protected species. There are no communities meeting the environmental justice criteria, and benefits and burdens resulting
from the projects are anticipated to be equitably distributed throughout the community; therefore, there are no
disproportionately high and adverse impacts to minority or low-income populations. The study area is in urbanized area as
defined by US Census urbanized area maps, so a NRCS AD-1006 farmland forms for point projects are not required.
E.Permits Required
In accordance with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, permits will be required from the
US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) for any activities that encroach into jurisdictional
wetlands or “waters of the United States.” In addition, Section 401 of the Clean Water Act
requires each state to certify that state water quality standards will not be violated for
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317 S-5 Environmental Assessment
December 2013
activities that: 1) involve issuance of a federal permit or license or 2) require discharges into
“waters of the United States.” It is not anticipated that an Individual Section 404 permit will
be required from USACE for encroachment into wetlands and water courses along the
proposed project.
F.Other Highway and Non-Highway Actions
Residential and Commercial Development Projects. There are numerous site-specific
commercial and residential development plans for individual parcels in the vicinity of the
projects that currently have either received permits or are in the application phase. Also,
William Peace University (located two blocks east of the Peace Street interchange) has
recently purchased the Seaboard development and has plans to continue to expand its
facilities.
City Development Project. The City is in the process of vacating its existing operations
center west of Capital Boulevard between Dortch and Peace Streets. At that time, the City
plans to convert the 17-acre tract, much of which is in the floodway and floodplain, into a
park with athletic facilities.
City Utility Project. The City of Raleigh plans to construct a new sewer interceptor at the
Wade Avenue interchange, which will move the sewer lines out of the Capital Boulevard
right of way. Also, the sewer lines from Wade Avenue to Peace Street are nearing capacity,
and will need to be expanded. This expansion/relocation project is expected to be completed
in 2016.
Rail Project. The proposed Southeast High Speed Rail corridor will cross Capital
Boulevard between Wade Avenue and Peace Street. This project is not currently funded.
Other Transportation and Infrastructure Projects. The Peace Street Visioning Study
(May 2011) proposed improvements to Peace Street between Glenwood Avenue and Person
Street including bicycle and pedestrian facilities on Peace Street and West Street,
redevelopment of underutilized properties, and a new transit station near the CSX bridge
over Peace Street. According to local planners, the Peace Street East portion of this project
was put on hold until NCDOT selected an alternative at the Capital Boulevard/Peace Street
interchange, but the City expects to move forward again with that project later this year. The
Capital Boulevard Corridor Study (August 2012) proposes extending West Street over
Wade Avenue, but this project is not funded.
G.Coordination
As part of the public involvement process, three public meetings and three local officials’
meetings were held. Public meetings were announced via newsletter/postcard and press
releases.
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317 S-6 Environmental Assessment
December 2013
The following federal, state and local agencies were contacted regarding the proposed
project:
·US Army Corps of Engineers
·US Environmental Protection Agency
·US Fish and Wildlife Service
·NC Division of Water Quality
·NC Division of Parks and Recreation
·National Heritage Program
·NC Wildlife Resources Commission
·State Historic Preservation Office
·Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization
·City of Raleigh
·Wake County
H.Contact Information
Contacts for this project include:
Mr. John F. Sullivan, III, P.E.
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
310 New Bern Avenue, Suite 410
Raleigh, NC 27601
[phone]
Mr. Richard W. Hancock, P.E.
Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Unit
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
[phone]
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 1 Environmental Assessment
I.DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION
A.General Description
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace the bridges
and revise the interchanges at two adjacent interchanges on Capital Boulevard (US 70/US
401/NC 50) approximately 0.7 mile apart: Bridge No. 227 at Capital Boulevard/Peace Street
(Project B-5121) and Bridge No. 213 at Capital Boulevard/Wade Avenue (US 70/NC 50)
(Project B-5317).Figure 1 shows the project vicinity.
B.Historical Resume and Project Status
The proposed projects are included in the NCDOT 2013-2023 Draft State Transportation
Improvement Program (STIP) as Projects B-5121 (Capital Boulevard/Peace Street) and B-
5317 (Capital Boulevard/Wade Avenue) and are programmed for right of way acquisition
beginning in Fiscal Year (FY) 2015 and construction beginning in FY 2016.
Originally, these two projects were on different schedules. Project B-5121 was scheduled in
the 2009-2015 STIP. Project B-5317 was added in the draft 2011-2020 STIP, originally two
years behind Project B-5121. In the final 2012-2020 STIP, both projects were given the
same schedule for right of way acquisition and construction.
The current STIP description is to replace Bridge Nos. 227 and 213. However, NCDOT is in
the process of changing the STIP description to allow for an expanded scope in coordination
with the City of Raleigh. Both projects would be divided into two sections, with the
following descriptions:
B-5121
Current STIP description: US 70/US 401/NC 50 (Capital Boulevard), Replace Bridge No.
227 over Peace Street in Raleigh
Proposed STIP description: US 70/US 401/NC 50 (Capital Boulevard), Replace Bridge No.
227 over Peace Street in Raleigh and Revise Interchange
·Proposed Section A: Replace Bridge No. 227 over Peace Street
·Proposed Section B: Revise Interchange at Capital Boulevard / Peace Street
B-5317
Current STIP description: US 70 Westbound/NC 50 Northbound (Wade Avenue), Replace
Bridge No. 213 over US 401 (Capital Boulevard), in Raleigh
Proposed STIP description: US 70 Westbound/NC 50 Northbound (Wade Avenue), Replace
Bridge No. 213 over US 401 (Capital Boulevard), in Raleigh and Revise Interchange
·Proposed Section A: Replace Bridge No. 213 over US 401 (Capital Boulevard)
·Proposed Section B: Revise Interchange at Capital Boulevard / Wade Avenue
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 2 Environmental Assessment
If the City of Raleigh provides funding for either Project B-5121 and/or Project B-5317, the
interchange improvements will likely be constructed in addition to the bridge replacements.
If the City does not provide funding, only the bridge replacements (Alternatives P-Base and
W-Base) will be constructed at this time.
C.Cost Estimates
Table 1 summarizes the estimated costs for the Project B-5121/B-5317 detailed study
alternatives.
Table 1 – Cost Estimate
Item
Estimated Cost (in millions)
Project B-5121 (Peace Street)Project B-5317 (Wade Avenue)
P-Base P5 W-Base W2c
Construction $10.8 $12.0 $5.6 $8.2
Right of Way $10.8 $17.7 $0.4 $10.3
Utilities $3.8 $8.3 $2.0 $5.1
Total $25.4 $38.0 $8.0 $23.6
The total cost for Project B-5121 (Peace Street interchange) included in the draft 2013-
2023 STIP is $6.1 million. This includes $1 million for right of way acquisition and $5.1
million for construction. The total cost for Project B-5317 (Wade Avenue interchange)
included in the draft 2013-2023 STIP is $6.8 million. This includes $593,000 for right of
way acquisition and $6.3 million for construction.
The City of Raleigh has partnered with NCDOT during the planning and preliminary
design phase of the project. Alternative P5 and Alternative W2c are the City’s preferred
alternatives. Both alternatives are more expensive than the “base” alternatives. The City is
considering providing funds towards right of way, utility relocation, and construction of
this project. The City Council will decide whether or not to contribute funds toward
Alternative P5 and/or Alternative W2c following approval of the Environmental
Assessment. The final selected alternatives will be discussed in an anticipated Finding of
No Significant Impact (FONSI). If the City approves the funds, the City and NCDOT will
sign a Memorandum of Agreement.
II.PURPOSE AND NEED FOR PROPOSED PROJECT
A.Purpose for Project
The primary purpose of Projects B-5121/B-5317 is to replace Bridge Nos. 227 and 213 in a
timely manner since they are nearing the end of their design lives. Another desirable
outcome is to improve the geometry of the interchanges.
B.Need for Project
The bridges are nearing the end of their design lives. Both bridges are deteriorating due
to the age of the superstructure and substructure components. Bridge No. 227 carrying
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 3 Environmental Assessment
Capital Boulevard over Peace Street (Project B-5121) is a half-cloverleaf interchange built
in 1948 with a Federal sufficiency rating of 43.9 out of a possible 100 (as of October 2013).
Bridge No. 213 carrying Wade Avenue over Capital Boulevard (Project B-5317) is a
trumpet interchange built in 1954 with a Federal sufficiency rating of 34.1 out of a possible
100 (as of November 2011). Both bridges are classified as “structurally deficient” due to
age. Due to the cost and potential safety concerns of continuing to maintain the current
bridges, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and NCDOT have identified a need
to replace Bridge Nos. 227 and 213 through the FHWA Highway Bridge Program (HBP).
The geometry of the current interchanges is less than desirable.Existing turning radii of
interchange loops and ramps are below current standards and some turn bay storage lengths
do not accommodate queues during peak hours. Potential improvements to the geometry
may include increasing the radii of the interchange loops and ramps, lengthening the
acceleration and deceleration lanes, lengthening the weave sections, improving grades on the
ramps and loops, and increasing turn bay storage lengths.
1.Description of Existing Conditions
a)Functional Classification
Capital Boulevard is functionally a freeway, designated as a Principal Arterial in the Wake
County Thoroughfare Plan. Peace Street is functionally a collector designated as a Major
Thoroughfare. Wade Avenue is functionally a principal arterial designated as a Major
Thoroughfare.
b)Physical Description of Existing Facility
1.0 Roadway Cross-Section
Capital Boulevard has six lanes with curb and gutter, plus an auxiliary lane northbound
between Peace Street and Wade Avenue. A Jersey barrier with flat green barriers on top to
block glare from oncoming traffic separates northbound and southbound travel lanes.
Capital Boulevard
facing north from the
CSX railroad bridge
toward Peace Street
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 4 Environmental Assessment
Peace Street has five lanes with curb and gutter and sidewalks on both sides. Clearance
under the Capital Boulevard bridge is 14’2.”
Wade Avenue has four lanes with curb and gutter separated by a 6-inch concrete median
through this section.
2.0 Right of Way and Access Control
Existing right of way through the study area is approximately 110 feet wide on Capital
Boulevard between Wade Avenue and Peace Street, between 70 and 75 feet wide on Peace
Street near Capital Boulevard, and 80 feet wide on Wade Avenue. Capital Boulevard has
limited control of access, with interchanges and some driveways on Capital Boulevard and
Peace Street facing east
toward the Capital
Boulevard northbound
ramps
Wade Avenue ramp and
loop facing south
toward Capital
Boulevard
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 5 Environmental Assessment
on the on/off ramps at both interchanges. There is no control of access along Peace Street or
Wade Avenue within the project limits.
3.0 Speed Limit
The posted speed limit on Capital Boulevard is 45 miles per hour (mph) from north of Wade
Avenue to south of Peace Street. The speed limit on Peace Street and Wade Avenue is 35
mph.
4.0 Intersections and Interchanges
The Capital Boulevard/Wade Avenue interchange is a trumpet configuration. The Capital
Boulevard/Peace Street interchange is a half-clover configuration.
Other streets that intersect Capital Boulevard include Old Williamson Road, Dortch Street,
and Johnson Street. On the north end of the study area, West Street intersects the on-ramp
from Wade Avenue to southbound Capital Boulevard. On the south end of the study area,
West Street intersects Peace Street. Several other neighborhood and business district
intersections are within the study area.
5.0 Structures
Built in 1948, Bridge No. 227 (Peace Street interchange) was inspected in October 2013. It
is a steel continuous-girder bridge with a concrete deck. The existing bridge is 137 feet long
and consists of three spans. It is approximately 81 feet wide with a roadway clear width of
68 feet. It crosses the road at a 12-degree skew, and carries six lanes of Capital Boulevard
over four lanes of Peace Street. It has a vertical clearance of approximately 14.2 feet over
Peace Street. The bridge is deteriorating due to the age of the superstructure and substructure
components. The bridge is classified as “structurally deficient” due to deterioration. The
deck has been assessed a condition rating of 4 (“poor”), and the superstructure and
substructure are rated as 5 (“fair”).
Bridge No. 213 (Wade Avenue interchange) was inspected in November 2011 (an updated
report will be available in early 2014). It is a reinforced concrete-deck girder bridge built in
1954. The existing bridge is 261 feet long and consists of six spans. It is approximately 42
feet wide, with a roadway clear width of 34 feet. It crosses the road at a 23 degree skew, and
carries two lanes of Wade Avenue over six lanes of Capital Boulevard. It has a vertical
clearance of approximately 14 feet over Capital Boulevard. The bridge is deteriorating due
to the age of the superstructure and substructure components. The bridge is classified as
“structurally deficient” due to deterioration. The deck has been assessed a condition rating
of 5 (“fair”), and the superstructure and substructure are rated as 4 (“poor”).The bridge is
currently posted at 23 tons for Single Vehicle Truck and 27 tons for Truck Tractors with
Semi-Trailers.
Bridge inspection reports are included in Appendix C.
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 6 Environmental Assessment
6.0 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities
On Capital Boulevard, 6-foot wide sidewalks are adjacent to travel lanes in both directions,
including along the ramps at the Peace Street interchange. Sidewalks on both sides of Wade
Avenue and Peace Street are separated from travel lanes by a narrow grass strip.
Pedestrian counts were performed in August 2013. Over a 24-hour mid-week period, the
following were observed:
Wade Avenue interchange
·30 pedestrians on the sidewalks along the Wade Avenue flyover ramp and loop (5
westbound and 25 eastbound).
Peace Street interchange
·52 pedestrians on the sidewalks along Capital Boulevard near the northbound Capital
Boulevard ramps/Peace Street intersection (16 on the west side and 36 on the east
side).
Capital Boulevard
bridge over Peace Street
Wade Avenue bridge
over Capital Boulevard
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 7 Environmental Assessment
·325 pedestrians on the sidewalks along Peace Street near the northbound Capital
Boulevard ramps/Peace Street intersection (178 on the north side and 147 on the
south side).
·20 pedestrians on the sidewalks along Capital Boulevard near the southbound Capital
Boulevard ramps/Peace Street intersection (15 on the west side and 5 on the east
side).
·292 pedestrians on the sidewalks along Peace Street near the southbound Capital
Boulevard ramps/Peace Street intersection (151 on the north side and 141 on the
south side).
Pedestrian counts on Capital Boulevard were spread throughout the day, with one spike at
6:30 a.m. Counts on Peace Street were steady throughout the day, with only a slight
decrease between midnight and 6:00 a.m. Counts on Wade Avenue ramps were spread
throughout the day, with no discernible peaks.
There are no designated bike routes or bicycle facilities on Capital Boulevard, Peace Street,
or Wade Avenue. However, Flythe Cyclery is located on Peace Street at West Street, two
blocks west of the interchange. This business attracts many bicycle users for repairs, parts,
and purchases. Bicyclists were observed in the area during the site visit.
7.0 Utilities
The following information is based on a preliminary assessment of existing utilities in the
study area. A detailed utilities survey will be conducted prior to final design.
Peace Street interchange
·Underground natural gas lines are along Peace Street under Capital Boulevard.
·Underground telephone and cable lines are along Capital Boulevard and Peace
Street.
·An overhead transmission line crosses Capital Boulevard north of the existing
bridge.
·North of the Peace Street interchange, sewer lines are under both Capital Boulevard
northbound and southbound lanes. Sewer lines also are under the center of the
westbound lane of Peace Street.
·Several stormwater pipes and structures cross Capital Boulevard between the
railroad overpass to the U-Haul Storage Center.
Wade Avenue interchange
·Underground gas lines are along Capital Boulevard and Wade Avenue.
·Underground telephone and cable lines are along Capital Boulevard and Wade
Avenue. In addition, fiber optic cable lines cross over Wade Avenue northwest of the
existing bridge, cross over Capital Boulevard north of the existing bridge, and run
along Capital Boulevard southeast of the existing bridge.
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 8 Environmental Assessment
·Overhead power lines run along Wade Avenue for both Capital Boulevard
northbound and southbound on-ramps. Power lines also are along the west side of
Capital Boulevard, south of the Wade Avenue ramp and along the east side north of
the Wade Avenue ramp. A transmission line travels parallel to West Street prior to
traveling along Fairview Road.
·Sewer lines run along the west side of Capital Boulevard and branch off into the
grass between existing Wade Avenue and Fairview Road. They also run along the
center of West Street and Dortch Street, south of Wade Avenue.
·Offset from Capital Boulevard are various stormwater inlets, primarily on the east
side of the roadway.
c)Transit
Capital Area Transit (CAT) operates three routes in the study area. All three routes travel
along Peace Street, and bus stops are located on both sides of Peace Street near the Capital
Boulevard southbound ramps and on the north side of Peace Street near the northbound
ramps.
d)Traffic Carrying Capacity
1.0 Existing Traffic Volumes
The observed average daily traffic volume (ADT) in 2011 along Capital Boulevard between
Peace Street and Wade Avenue was 55,000 vehicles per day (vpd). Approximately 5% of
the total traffic volume is comprised of trucks (delivery/box trucks and tractor-trailers).
Existing traffic volumes in the project area are shown in Figures 3a and 3b.
2.0 Existing Levels of Service
Level of service (LOS), as defined in the Highway Capacity Manual 2010 (HCM), ranges
from A to F and indicates progressively worse delay conditions.Table 2 displays the LOS
thresholds for signalized intersection delay values.
Table 2 – LOS Criteria for Signalized Intersections
Level of Service (LOS) Delay per Vehicle (seconds per vehicle)
Signalized Intersections Unsignalized Intersections
A ≤ 10 0-10
B > 10-20 > 10-15
C > 20-35 > 15-25
D > 35-55 >25-35
E > 55-80 >35-50
F > 80 >50
Source: Highway Capacity Manual, 2010
Analyses were performed for signalized and unsignalized intersections in the project area to
determine LOS and delay for each study intersection under existing conditions. The
northbound movement at the unsignalized Peace Street/Vaughn Court intersection
experiences longer delays during the peak hours.Table 3 details the results of the
intersection analysis.
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 9 Environmental Assessment
Table 3 – Existing (2011) Intersection Levels of Service and Delay (No Build)
Location LOS (Delay)
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Peace Street at Capital Boulevard southbound ramps
(unsignalized)SB – F (121.8) SB – C (16.8)
Peace Street at Capital Boulevard northbound ramps
(signalized)A (9.2)B (18.0)
Peace Street at West Street (signalized)A (9.8)A (8.8)
Peace Street at Vaughn Court (unsignalized)NB – E (37.8)
SB – B (13.8)
NB – F (56.5)
SB – C (17.0)
Peace Street at Halifax Street/Salisbury
Street/Wilmington Street (signalized)B (18.4)C (22.7)
West Street at Harrington Street (unsignalized)WB – B (10.2)WB – B (10.3)
Harrington Street at Johnson Street (unsignalized)WB – A (9.0)WB – A (8.9)
Note: There are no existing intersections at the Wade Avenue interchange because the trumpet design includes
all free-flow movements.
3.0 Future Traffic Volumes
The Traffic Forecast Report (June 2011) projects growth of approximately 1% per year on
Capital Boulevard. The year 2035 projected traffic volume on Capital Boulevard is
estimated to be approximately 69,000 vpd between Peace Street and Wade Avenue.Figures
3c and 3d present projected future traffic volumes for the no-build scenario in the project
area.
4.0 Future Levels of Service
Table 4 summarizes the projected (2035) LOS and intersection delays for the study
intersections. Both northbound and southbound movements at the unsignalized Peace
Street/Vaughn Court intersection experience longer delays during the peak hours.
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 10 Environmental Assessment
Table 4 – Year 2035 Projected Intersection Levels of Service and Delay (No Build)
Location LOS (Delay)
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Peace Street at Capital Boulevard southbound ramps
(signalized)*B (15.3)A (9.5)
Peace Street at Capital Boulevard northbound ramps
(signalized)B (12.1)C (33.8)
Peace Street at West Street (signalized)B (11.1)B (11.6)
Peace Street at Vaughn Court (unsignalized)NB – F (232.4)
SB – D (30.5)
NB – F (1271.1)
SB – F (836.4)
Peace Street at Halifax Street/Salisbury
Street/Wilmington Street (signalized)C (24.1)C (33.6)
West Street at Harrington Street (unsignalized)WB – B (11.1)WB – B (11.1)
Harrington Street at Johnson Street (unsignalized)WB – A (9.0)WB – A (9.0)
* This intersection is currently unsignalized, but a traffic signal was assumed to be warranted in the 2035 No
Build scenario based on traffic volumes.
e)Accident Data
A crash analysis was performed for the three-year period of February 28, 2008, to February
28, 2011.
Capital Boulevard over Peace Street. Ninety-five crashes occurred along the roadway
segment over Peace Street. Crashes along Capital Boulevard over Peace Street were highly
concentrated around the ramps, with 60 of the 95 total crashes occurring within 100 feet of
the acceleration and deceleration ramp entrances. Thirty-five percent of collisions (33)
occurred within 150 feet of the southbound on-ramp and the northbound off-ramp where
there are no acceleration or deceleration lanes to assist motorists in making the transition
from freeway speeds to low-speed, tight spiral ramps.
Peace Street at the Capital Boulevard interchange. A total of 128 crashes occurred along
Peace Street at the Capital Boulevard interchange. Most collisions on Peace Street occurred
at the intersections with West Street, Capital Boulevard northbound and southbound Ramps,
and Vaughn Court.
Wade Avenue ramp at Capital Boulevard.Six crashes resulting in property damage only
(no injuries or fatalities) occurred along the roadway segment on the Wade Avenue Ramp.
This resulted in an Estimated Property Damage Only (EPDO) severity index of 1.0, the
lowest possible. These collisions may have occurred because of the tight horizontal
geometry of the ramp.
f)Airports
The nearest airport to the project is Raleigh-Durham International Airport, which is
approximately 12 miles to the west.
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 11 Environmental Assessment
g)Projects in the Area
Residential and Commercial Development Projects. There are numerous site-specific
development plans for individual parcels in the vicinity of the projects that currently have
either received permits or are in the application phase. William Peace University (previously
Peace College) plans to continue to expand its facilities. William Peace University has
recently purchased the Seaboard development, and a new development on the north end of
the property is currently under review by the City and may include a combination of offices
and high-density residences. Several large-scale commercial and residential developments
also are planned for the area east of the Peace Street bridge. The closest of these to the
interchange is the Blount Street Commons project, a residential and commercial
development located four blocks east of the bridge that has been approved by the City but is
only partially constructed.
City Development Project. The City is in the process of vacating its existing operations
center west of Capital Boulevard between Dortch and Peace Streets. At that time, the City
plans to convert the 17-acre tract, much of which is in the floodway and floodplain, into a
park with athletic facilities.
City Utility Project. The City of Raleigh plans to construct a new sewer interceptor at the
Wade Avenue interchange, which will move the sewer lines out of the Capital Boulevard
right of way. Also, the sewer lines from Wade Avenue to Peace Street are nearing capacity,
and will need to be expanded. This expansion/relocation project is expected to be completed
in 2016. The City and NCDOT have been coordinating the schedule for these projects with
the bridge replacement projects.
Rail Project. The proposed Southeast High Speed Rail corridor will cross Capital
Boulevard between Wade Avenue and Peace Street. This project is not currently funded.
Other Transportation and Infrastructure Projects. The Peace Street Visioning Study
(May 2011) proposed improvements to Peace Street between Glenwood Avenue and Person
Street, including bicycle and pedestrian facilities on Peace Street and West Street,
redevelopment of underutilized properties, and a new transit station near the CSX bridge
over Peace Street. According to local planners, the Peace Street East portion of this project
was put on hold until NCDOT selected an alternative at the Capital Boulevard/Peace Street
interchange, but the City expects to move forward again with that project later this year. The
Capital Boulevard Corridor Study (August 2012) proposes extending West Street over
Wade Avenue, but this project is not funded.
2.Transportation and Land Use Plans
Several approved transportation and land use plans apply to the study area. To accommodate
the vision of these plans, the replacement bridges would encourage safe pedestrian use along
Peace Street and Capital Boulevard and accommodate pedestrian, commuter, and local
access to downtown Raleigh. City planners also have requested that pedestrian facilities be
upgraded on Peace Street and Wade Avenue and added to the Capital Boulevard/Wade
Avenue interchange.
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 12 Environmental Assessment
a)Transportation Plans
Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization 2040 Long-Range Transportation
Plan (May 2009).The Long-Range Transportation Plan is the region’s guide for future
investment in roads, transit services, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities to accommodate
anticipated growth in the Triangle. It inventories existing infrastructure and transportation-
related services and identifies future needs and potential funding sources. The Capital
Boulevard corridor has been identified for light rail transit and commuter rail by 2030. It
also has been identified for future bicycle accommodations. There are no roadway plans
within the study area.
Raleigh Bicycle Transportation Plan (April 2009).The purpose of this plan is to increase
mode share and safety for all levels of cycling and to provide a bicycle-friendly
environment. It develops a program to address the short- and long-term needs for bicyclists
and bicycle facilities, and promotes bicycling for recreation and commuting. Bicycle
accommodations are recommended on Peace Street, West Street, and Fairview Road. These
include shared lanes (“sharrows”) along West Street and Fairview Road, and a bicycle lane
in combination with a road diet on Peace Street from Glenwood Avenue to Person Street. At
a February 2011 meeting, local planners noted that although the plan calls for a road diet on
Peace Street, they do not recommend this treatment between the ramps at the Capital
Boulevard interchange. The remaining section of the proposed road diet is not funded.
b)Land Use Plans
City of Raleigh Capital Boulevard Corridor Study Report (August 2012). The City of
Raleigh developed a study to “craft a vision and strategy for the revitalization,
redevelopment, and renewal of Capital Boulevard from Downtown to I-440.” The study
area for the bridge replacement projects is contained within the larger corridor study area.
The report includes transportation recommendations for roadways, transit, greenways,
sidewalks, and bicycle accommodations, as well as land use/development goals. Within the
bridge replacement study area, the report proposes extending West Street over Wade
Avenue, adding a greenway along West Street, replacing the Jersey barrier on Capital
Boulevard with a planted median, and introducing light rail along Capital Boulevard. It
supports a square loop design for the Capital Boulevard/Peace Street interchange, and a
diamond design for the Capital Boulevard/Wade Avenue interchange.
City of Raleigh 2030 Comprehensive Plan (November 2009). Raleigh’s Comprehensive
Plan is a policy document that provides the vision and associated strategies for the City to
manage its growth in the next 20 years. A future greenway corridor is identified along
Pigeon House Branch from Crabtree Creek to Wake Forest Road, although local planners
have recently noted that the greenway in the project area will likely be constructed along
West Street instead of Pigeon House Branch to avoid the floodplain. In the vicinity of
Projects B-5121 and B-5317, the City is recommending a new collector street parallel with
the Norfolk Southern rail line, which would serve as an extension/relocation of West Street
between Fairview Road and Wake Forest Road. Capital Boulevard to Atlantic Avenue is
identified for future regional rail, and Glenwood Avenue and Capital Boulevard are targeted
multimodal corridors. Peace Street is identified as a bicycle route with bicycle lanes to be
established through a road diet (currently unfunded).
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 13 Environmental Assessment
Peace Streetscape and Parking Plan (March 15, 2005). This plan includes commercially
zoned properties along Peace Street from West Street to St. Mary’s Street, and extends south
to North Street. The streetscape improvements outlined in the plan are intended to enhance
the appearance of the corridor, improve pedestrian safety, and support economic
development in the area. Pedestrian and bicycle accommodations were recommended on
Peace Street combined with a road diet between Clark Street and Glenwood Avenue (both
implemented several years ago). This plan has been fully funded, but funding for the
remainder of the recommendations is currently being held in reserve for economic reasons.
Glenwood South Streetscape and Parking Plan (January 2000).This plan covers the
Glenwood Avenue commercial area. The goal of this plan was to provide a coordinated
streetscape concept, recommend parking improvements, and revise standards necessary to
support a pedestrian-oriented urban development pattern. Although the City’s intent at the
time of this plan was to construct a transit station on the south side of Peace Street near
Harrington Street, current conversations with City planners indicate this station likely will
be located over Peace Street east of Capital Boulevard. This plan has been completed, and
the City is now updating its Unified Development Ordinances.
Downtown Overlay District (DOD). The DOD is bound by West Street on the west,
Wilmington Street on the east, and extends to the north along the CSX rail line to Halifax
Street and to the south through the downtown. Within the study area, the DOD includes
Seaboard Station and the Peace Street interchange except for the northwest quadrant. The
DOD establishes exceptions to regulations such as minimum setback standards, maximum
height standards, and parking requirements that vary between the numerous underlying
zoning districts within the downtown area. It provides for high-density residential
development and ground-level retail use regardless of the underlying zoning district.
C.Traffic Operations with Project
Table 5 lists the projected 2035 (Build) LOS and delay for the study intersections with
construction of the project. The analysis included improved laneage and signal timing.
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 14 Environmental Assessment
Table 5 – Year 2035 Projected Intersection Levels of Service and Delay
Location LOS (Delay)
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Alternative P-Base
Peace Street at Capital Boulevard southbound
ramps/Harrington Street Extension (signalized)B (12.5)B (10.8)
Peace Street at Capital Boulevard northbound ramps
(signalized)B (10.8)B (15.4)
Alternative P5
Peace Street at Capital Boulevard southbound
ramps/Harrington Street Extension (signalized)B (13.1)A (9.6)
Peace Street at Capital Boulevard northbound ramps
(signalized)B (14.9)C (24.6)
Peace Street at West Street (signalized)A (9.3)A (9.5)
Peace Street at Vaughn Court (unsignalized)NB – F (172.4)
SB – D (26.8)
NB – F (1562.3)
SB – F (Err)*
Peace Street at Halifax Street/Salisbury
Street/Wilmington Street (signalized)C (21.8)C (33.9)
West Street at Harrington Street (unsignalized)WB – B (11.7)WB – B (11.4)
Harrington Street at Johnson Street (unsignalized)WB – E (42.9)WB – B (13.8)
Harrington Street at Harrington Street Extension
(unsignalized)EB – B (10.6)EB – B (10.3)
Alternative W2c
Wade Avenue at Capital Boulevard northbound ramps
(signalized)D (40.6)D (44.8)
Wade Avenue at West Street (unsignalized)NB – C (22.9)NB – C (18.0)
* Synchro does not report LOS for unsignalized movements with a volume/capacity ratio greater than 3.0.
III.ALTERNATIVES
A.No Build Alternative
Typically, the No Build alternative implies no action will be taken. In this situation, since a
no-action alternative would create an unsafe situation for the interchanges, the No Build
alternative is not acceptable. However, the No Build alternative serves as a basis for
comparing impacts and benefits of the build alternatives.
B.Preliminary Build Alternatives
Between the beginning of the project and selection of alternatives to carry forward for
detailed study, a total of ten alternatives were developed at the Peace Street interchange, and
nine alternatives were developed at the Wade Avenue interchange. This section summarizes
the alternatives considered, which are described in more detail in the Alternatives
Development Report (September 2013).
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 15 Environmental Assessment
The following conceptual options were presented to the public at the September 2011 public
meeting:
Peace Street interchange
·Alternative P1 – diamond
·Alternative P2 – square loop
·Alternative P3 – bowtie
Wade Avenue interchange
·Alternative W1 – trumpet
·Alternative W2 – diamond with West Street bridge
·Alternative W3 – compressed diamond West Street bridge
·Alternative W4 – compressed diamond with right-in/right-out at West Street
Functional designs of these (above) seven alternatives were developed for the purpose of
estimating preliminary costs and impacts. Between November 2011 and July 2012, several
alternatives were eliminated because they had higher impacts, or did not offer the same
benefits as another alternative with similar impacts. Alternatives P2, W1, and W2 were
modified to reduce impacts. Finally, “base” alternatives were added, which are designs
similar to the existing interchanges (a half cloverleaf at Peace Street and a trumpet at Wade
Avenue).
After several modifications of Alternatives P2, W1, and W2, the following alternatives were
shown at the second public meeting in October 2012:
Peace Street interchange
·Alternative P-Base – half cloverleaf
·Alternative P2d – square loop
Wade Avenue interchange
·Alternative W-Base – trumpet
·Alternative W1a – trumpet
·Alternative W2 – diamond with West Street bridge
·Alternative W2b – diamond
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 16 Environmental Assessment
C.Detailed Study Alternatives
Following the October 2012 public meeting comment period and a meeting with the State
Historic Preservation Office in January 2013, Alternative P2d was eliminated because of
impacts to the historic Roundhouse site. Alternative P5 was introduced as a new alternative
that retains a square loop in the southwest quadrant and uses ramps in the east quadrants to
avoid the Roundhouse. At Wade Avenue, Alternative W2 was eliminated because of the cost
and impacts of constructing a West Street bridge over Wade Avenue. Alternative W2b was
modified to combine the diamond and trumpet designs, which reduces impacts to properties
on the west side of Capital Boulevard.
Preliminary designs were developed for the following detailed study alternatives:
Peace Street interchange
·Alternative P-Base – half cloverleaf
·Alternative P5 – square loop/ramps
Wade Avenue interchange
·Alternative W-Base – trumpet
·Alternative W2c – diamond/trumpet
Impacts of the current alternatives are shown on Tables 6 and 7.
If the City of Raleigh provides funding for Project B-5121, Alternative P5 will likely be
selected as the preferred alternative. Otherwise, Alternative P-Base will be selected.
If the City provides funding for Project B-5317, Alternative W2c will likely be selected as
the preferred alternative. Otherwise, Alternative W-Base will be selected.
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 17 Environmental Assessment
Table 6 – Impacts of Detailed Study Alternatives – Peace Street Interchange
Impact Alternative
P-Base (Half Cloverleaf)P5 (Square Loop/Ramps)
Business Relocations*9 12
Impact to Business
District No adverse effect
No adverse effect because although businesses
will be relocated, this alternative allows for
redevelopment in SW quadrant
Effect on
Development/
Land Use
No effect
Encourages redevelopment in SW quadrant
because of potential driveway access from
loops; City expects development in SW
quadrant to be enhanced compared with
alternatives that have a loop in the NW
quadrant
Change in Vehicular
Access
Will close Johnson Street at Capital
Boulevard; will close some existing
driveways on Capital Boulevard
Will allow for driveways from loops in SW
quadrant; will close some existing driveways
on Capital Boulevard
Change in Pedestrian
Access
No change for pedestrians crossing
ramps/loops; wider sidewalks on Peace
Street
Improved access across square loop compared
with half-cloverleaf ramps/loops; wider
sidewalks on Peace Street and on square loop
Consistent with Local
Plans
Not consistent with City of Raleigh’s
Capital Boulevard Corridor Study,
which recommends a square loop
design. Consistent with LRTP and
other local plans, which do not specify
interchange type.
Consistent – partially matches design in local
plan, allows City to retrofit interchange in the
future
Change in Geometry Slight increase in radius of ramp/loop
in NW quadrant
Replaces southbound ramp/loop with square
loop
Change in Traffic
Operations No change
Square loop is intended to function more
slowly, like a street rather than an interchange
ramp; adds traffic signal to northbound ramp
movements
Impact to Parks Decreases size of City’s planned park
in NW quadrant
Square loop expected to have positive impact
on use of City’s planned park
Historic Properties
(Adverse Effect)
No Adverse Effect –Raleigh Cotton
Mill (on the condition adequate access
is provided)
No Adverse Effect – Roundhouse**
No Adverse Effect – Raleigh Cotton Mill
No Adverse Effect – Roundhouse**
Stream Impacts Extend existing culverts for Pigeon
House Branch by 20 linear feet
Extend existing culverts for Pigeon House
Branch by 24 linear feet
FEMA Floodplains 1.6 acres affected; no FEMA
coordination anticipated
2.0 acres affected; no FEMA
coordination anticipated
Culvert Extension 1 1
Cost Estimate (in millions)
Construction $10.8 $12.0
Right of Way $10.8 $17.7
Utility Relocation $3.8 $8.3
Total Cost (Estimated)$25.4 $38.0
* No residential relocations are anticipated for any of the alternatives.
** The Seaboard Air Line Turntable and Raleigh & Gaston Railroad HD and Roundhouse Site
Note: There were no impacts by any of the alternatives to forested areas, community facilities, wetlands, or federally
protected species. There are no communities meeting the environmental justice criteria, and benefits and burdens resulting
from the projects are anticipated to be equitably distributed throughout the community; therefore, there are no
disproportionately high and adverse impacts to minority or low-income populations. The study area is in urbanized area as
defined by US Census urbanized area maps, so a NRCS AD-1006 farmland forms for point projects are not required.
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 18 Environmental Assessment
Table 7 – Impacts of Detailed Study Alternatives – Wade Avenue Interchange
Impact Alternative
W-Base (Trumpet)W2c (Diamond/Trumpet)
Business Relocations*1 9
Impact to Business
District No adverse effect No adverse effect
Effect on
Development/
Land Use
No effect
Diamond ramps will improve access to
businesses on east side of Capital
Boulevard
Change in Vehicular
Access No change
Retains existing trumpet ramps but adds
half-diamond ramps on the east side of
Capital, providing access to properties on
that side
Change in Pedestrian
Access No change Improved access across diamond
interchange compared with trumpet ramp
Consistent with Local
Plans
Not consistent with City of Raleigh’s
Capital Boulevard Corridor Study,
which recommends a diamond design.
Consistent with LRTP and other local
plans, which do not specify
interchange type.
Consistent – partially matches design in
local plan, allows City to retrofit
interchange and extend West Street in the
future
Change in Geometry No change Replaces flyover ramp with on/off ramps
on east side
Change in Traffic
Operations No change Convert northbound on/off ramps from
free-flow movement to signal-controlled
Impact to Parks No effect on existing or planned parks No effect on existing or planned parks
Historic Properties
(Adverse Effect)No Effects No Effects
Stream Impacts No impact Extend existing culverts for Pigeon House
Branch by 34 linear feet
FEMA Floodplains 0.2 acres; no FEMA
coordination anticipated
0.1 acres; FEMA
coordination is anticipated
Culvert Extension 0 1
Cost Estimate (in millions)
Construction $5.6 $8.2
Right of Way $0.4 $10.3
Utility Relocation $2.0 $5.1
Total Cost (Estimated)$8.0 $23.6
* No residential relocations are anticipated for any of the alternatives.
Note: There were no impacts by any of the alternatives to forested areas, community facilities, wetlands, or federally
protected species. There are no communities meeting the environmental justice criteria, and benefits and burdens resulting
from the projects are anticipated to be equitably distributed throughout the community; therefore, there are no
disproportionately high and adverse impacts to minority or low-income populations. The study area is in urbanized area as
defined by US Census urbanized area maps, so a NRCS AD-1006 farmland forms for point projects are not required.
IV.PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
The following section is related to the detailed study alternatives.
A.Roadway Cross-Section and Alignment
Functional designs for the detailed study alternatives are shown on Figures 2a through 2d.
Proposed typical sections for the project are shown on Figures 4.
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 19 Environmental Assessment
Alternative P-Base.This “half cloverleaf” alternative includes ramps and loops in the
northeast and northwest quadrants. The proposed typical section on Capital Boulevard
includes three 11-foot travel lanes in each direction with curb and gutter. A 10-foot planted
median with 4-foot clear zones is proposed, for a total median width of 18 feet. On the
bridge over Peace Street, Capital Boulevard will have four 11-foot travel lanes southbound
and three 11-foot travel lanes northbound, with 4.5-foot paved shoulders on the inside lanes
and 8-foot paved shoulders on the outside lanes. The Capital Boulevard bridge will have
15.5 feet of clearance over Peace Street.
Peace Street is proposed to include an inside 11-foot travel lane and an un-striped outside
16-foot travel lane in each direction with curb and gutter. A 4-foot concrete median is
adjacent to two left-turn lanes that extend between the ramp termini.
The Capital Boulevard/Peace Street ramps are proposed to have one 12-foot travel lane with
a 2-foot paved outside shoulder and curb and gutter. The Peace Street loops are proposed to
have one 12-foot travel lane with a 6-foot paved outside shoulder and curb and gutter.
Alternative P5.This “square loop/ramps” alternative includes a square loop in the
southwest quadrant and ramps in the northeast and southeast quadrants. The proposed
typical section on Capital Boulevard includes three 11-foot travel lanes in each direction
with curb and gutter. A 10-foot planted median with 4-foot clear zones is proposed, for a
total median width of 18 feet. On the bridge over Peace Street, Capital Boulevard will have
four 11-foot travel lanes southbound and three 11-foot travel lanes northbound to
accommodate acceleration and deceleration lanes, with 4.5-foot paved shoulders on the
inside lanes. The Capital Boulevard bridge will have 15.5 feet of clearance over Peace
Street.
Peace Street is proposed to include an inside 11-foot travel lane and an un-striped outside
16-foot travel lane in each direction with curb and gutter. A 4-foot concrete median is
adjacent to two left-turn lanes that extend between the ramp termini.
The Capital Boulevard/Peace Street “square loop” in the southwest quadrant is comprised of
Johnson Street and Harrington Street, which will be extended to intersect with Peace Street.
Johnson Street will have two 12-foot travel lanes and a center two-way left-turn lane.
Harrington Street will have two 12-foot travel lanes with curb and gutter. The off- and on-
ramps in the east quadrants include one 12-foot travel lane with additional turn and merge
lanes and curb and gutter is on both sides.
Alternative W-Base.This “trumpet” alternative will replace the existing ramp and loop
with a similar ramp and loop in approximately the same location. Capital Boulevard will not
be affected as part of this alternative. Wade Avenue is proposed to have two 14-foot travel
lanes with a 4-foot concrete monolithic island with curb and gutter. Eastbound includes a 3-
foot paved shoulder outside, and westbound includes a 2-foot paved shoulder outside and a
4-foot paved shoulder inside. The Wade Avenue bridge will have 16.5 feet of clearance over
Capital Boulevard.
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 20 Environmental Assessment
Alternative W2c.This “diamond/trumpet” alternative will retain the existing ramps on the
west side of Capital Boulevard, and introduce new diamond-style ramps on the east side of
Capital Boulevard. The southbound lanes on Capital Boulevard will not be affected as part
of this alternative, and the existing median barrier will be retained. The northbound lanes on
Capital Boulevard are proposed to include three 11-foot travel lanes with curb and gutter.
Wade Avenue over Capital Boulevard is proposed to have two 12-foot travel lanes in each
direction separated by a 4-foot concrete monolithic island, with curb and gutter. The Wade
Avenue ramps will have two 12-foot travel lanes and curb and gutter. The Wade Avenue
bridge will have 16.5 feet of clearance over Capital Boulevard.
B.Right of Way and Access Control
Proposed right of way through the study area is variable. The current design extends right of
way to the back of the berm along all streets.
Capital Boulevard will continue to have limited control of access, with interchanges and
some driveways on Capital Boulevard and on the on/off ramps at both interchanges. There is
no control of access along Peace Street or Wade Avenue within the project limits.
C.Speed Limit
The posted speed limit on Capital Boulevard will remain 45 mph from north of Wade
Avenue to north of Peace Street. However, the posted speed limit through the Capital
Boulevard/Peace Street interchange will be reduced to 35 mph. The speed limits on Peace
Street and Wade Avenue will remain 35 mph.
D.Design Speed
The design speed on Capital Boulevard is 50 mph from north of Wade Avenue to north of
Peace Street and 40 mph through the Capital Boulevard/Peace Street interchange and south
to the end of the project.
E.Anticipated Design Exceptions
Design exceptions would be necessary for all four detailed study alternatives (as explained
below). For all detailed study alternatives, Capital Boulevard is proposed to have 11-foot
lanes, which is narrower than the 12-foot design standard.
Additionally, current design standards require a 444-foot radius for ramps, 150-foot radius
for a diamond interchange-style loops, and 533-foot radius for a trumpet interchange-style
flyover ramp. Design exceptions at interchanges in an urban area are not uncommon.
Alternative P-Base.Design exceptions would be required for both loops and one ramp. The
current design of the loop in the northwest quadrant has a 77-foot radius, and the loop in the
northeast quadrant has a 67-foot radius. The ramp in the northeast quadrant has a 125-foot
radius as it approaches a stop condition at Peace Street.
Alternative P5. The roads that make up the square loop in the southwest quadrant function
as city streets rather than highway ramps or loops.
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 21 Environmental Assessment
Alternative W-Base. Design exceptions would be required for two movements. The current
design of the Wade Avenue flyover ramp has a 460-foot radius, and the loop in the southeast
quadrant has a 90-foot radius.
Alternative W2c. Design exceptions would be required for two ramps. The current design
of the ramp in the northwest quadrant has a 200-foot radius, and the ramp in the southwest
quadrant has a 300-foot radius. Also for this alternative, a design exception would be
required for the reverse curve on the service road, which has a 110-foot radius compared
with a design standard of 154-foot radius.
F.Intersections/Interchanges
The existing Capital Boulevard/Peace Street interchange is a half-clover, with ramps and
loops in the northeast and northwest quadrants. The existing Capital Boulevard/Wade
Avenue interchange is a trumpet, with a flyover ramp from Wade Avenue to the southeast
quadrant, a loop in the southeast quadrant, and a ramp in the northwest quadrant.
Alternative P-Base.This alternative would retain a half-clover interchange design, but
would slightly improve the turn radii in the two loops. As part of this design, several
business driveways are proposed to be closed. Other driveways to the same parking lots will
remain open, and no impacts to the businesses are anticipated. Driveways to properties that
will be relocated also would be closed.
The existing intersection of Johnson Street with the frontage road in the southwest quadrant
will be closed, and Johnson Street will become a cul-de-sac. The existing intersection of
Peace Street with the Capital Boulevard southbound ramps will be shifted to the west and a
traffic signal will be installed.
Alternative P5. This alternative would construct a square loop in the southwest quadrant
and ramps in the east quadrants. As part of this design, several business driveways are
proposed to be closed. Other driveways to the same parking lots will remain open, and no
impacts to the businesses are anticipated. Driveways to properties that will be relocated also
would be closed.
The existing intersection of Johnson Street with the frontage road will be closed, and
Johnson Street will intersect with Capital Boulevard as part of the square loop. Harrington
Street will be extended to intersect with Peace Street at a signalized tee-intersection. The
driveway to the strip shopping center in the northeast quadrant will be retained, but will no
longer be connected to the on-ramp. The new off- and on-ramp will intersect Peace Street
with a traffic signal.
Alternative W-Base. This alternative would retain a trumpet interchange design, but would
slightly improve the turn radii on the flyover ramp and loop. Driveways to properties that
will be relocated would be closed.
Alternative W2c. This alternative would construct a diamond interchange, creating a new
signalized intersection at Wade Avenue and the NCDOT Rail Division property on the east
side of the interchange. The intersection of Capital Boulevard and Old Williamston Road
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 22 Environmental Assessment
will be closed, and Old Williamston Road will be accessed via an existing intersection with
the NCDOT Rail Division driveway. Driveways to properties that will be relocated would
be closed.
G.Service Roads
There are no service roads proposed as a part of this project.
H.Railroad Crossings
No existing railroads cross this project. The CSX Railroad is parallel with Capital Boulevard
on the west side, and has a bridge over Wade Avenue at the western terminus of the Capital
Boulevard/Wade Avenue interchange design. The Norfolk Southern Railroad is parallel with
Capital Boulevard on the east side, and has a bridge over Capital Boulevard approximately
0.4 mile south of Peace Street.
The Southeast High Speed Rail project proposes to cross Capital Boulevard between Wade
Avenue and Peace Street.
I.Structures
Bridge Nos. 213 and 227 would be replaced as part of all detailed study alternatives. The
bridge lengths are listed in Table 8.
Table 8 – Bridge Lengths
Alternative Bridge Length (ft)Description
P-Base 127 each Two parallel bridge structures
P5 127 each Two parallel bridge structures
W-Base 360 Single-structure flyover ramp
W2c 276 Single-structure ramp between southbound ramp
termini and northbound ramp termini
The following major (> 72 inch) culverts were evaluated for structural integrity:
Alternative P-Base.One 7-foot x 7-foot RCBC and one 14-foot x 7-foot RCBC under
Peace Street, west of the Capital Boulevard interchange. It is proposed that these existing
structures remain and the outlets be extended approximately 20 linear feet as a result of the
Peace Street widening. This will match the existing structure and continue to provide
approximately 140 square feet of opening. The channel width changes from 27 feet at the
face of the culvert to approximately 15 feet approximately 36 feet downstream of the
culvert. Through this distance, the concrete walls of the channel will most likely have to be
modified or reconstructed to accommodate the increased length of the culvert.
Alternative P5.One 7-foot x 7-foot RCBC and one 14-foot x 7-foot RCBC under Peace
Street, west of the Capital Boulevard interchange. It is proposed that these existing
structures remain and the outlets be extended approximately 24 linear feet as a result of the
Peace Street widening. This will match the existing structure and continue to provide
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 23 Environmental Assessment
approximately 140 square feet of opening. The channel width changes from 27 feet at the
face of the culvert to approximately 15 feet approximately 36 feet downstream of the
culvert. Through this distance, the concrete walls of the channel will most likely have to be
modified or reconstructed to accommodate the increased length of the culvert.
Alternative W2c. Two 14-foot x 12-foot RCBC under Capital Boulevard north of the Wade
Avenue interchange. It is proposed that these structures remain and the outlet be extended
approximately 34 linear feet as a result of the proposed northbound Capital Boulevard on-
ramp. The culvert would continue to provide approximately 432 square feet of opening.
However, both culverts have experienced scour issues and have some structural damage.
During final design, consideration will be given to rehabilitating these culverts as part of this
project.
There is a large aerial sewer line that is currently downstream of the existing culvert. This
utility is expected to be expanded and relocated as part of a City of Raleigh project to be
completed in 2016 and should not influence the design of the culvert extension. Since this
culvert extension will occur in a FEMA regulated floodway and the adjacent floodplain
contains insurable structures, FEMA approval process will be required. If this alternative is
selected, this extension will require a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) or a Conditional
Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) during the final design stage.
Construction Methodology. Stream bank stabilization is anticipated for the Capital
Boulevard culvert extension east of the Wade Avenue bridge. Banks stabilization methods
will be developed during final design. No bank stabilization will be needed for the Peace
Street culvert extension due to the existing concrete walls adjacent to the stream. No
dewatering is anticipated for the construction of the Capital Boulevard bridge. There is a
potential need for dewatering around the Wade Avenue bridge piers during construction, and
for both culvert extensions. Final dewatering locations and methodology will be determined
during final design. No need for temporary access is anticipated at either bridge location.
Foundation test borings will be performed as part of NCDOT’s standard practices.
J.Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities
Alternative P-Base.Capital Boulevard is proposed to include 6-foot sidewalks separated
from the travel lane by a 6.5-foot grass verge. On the bridge over Peace Street, Capital
Boulevard will have 5.5-foot raised sidewalks adjacent to the outside lanes.
Peace Street is proposed to include an un-striped outside 16-foot travel lane in each direction
to accommodate bicycles with 14-foot sidewalks on both sides.
The Capital Boulevard/Peace Street ramps and loops are proposed to have 5-foot sidewalks
separated from the outside travel lane by a 5-foot grass verge.
Alternative P5.Capital Boulevard is proposed to include 6-foot sidewalks separated from
the travel lane by a 6.5-foot grass verge. On the bridge over Peace Street, Capital Boulevard
will have 5.5-foot raised sidewalks adjacent to the outside lanes.
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 24 Environmental Assessment
Peace Street is proposed to include an un-striped outside 16-foot travel lane in each direction
to accommodate bicycles with 14-foot sidewalks on both sides.
Johnson Street will have a 6-foot sidewalk on the south side and a 14-foot sidewalk on the
north side. Harrington Street will have 14-foot sidewalks on both sides. The off- and on-
ramps in the east quadrants include a 6-foot sidewalk on the east side separated from the
travel lane by a grass verge.
Alternative W-Base.Capital Boulevard will not be affected as part of this alternative. Wade
Avenue is proposed to have 6-foot sidewalks on both sides, which are separated from travel
lanes by a 6.5-foot grass verge. On the bridge over Capital Boulevard and the loop, Wade
Avenue will have 6-foot raised sidewalks on both sides.
Alternative W2c.The southbound lanes on Capital Boulevard will not be affected as part of
this alternative, and the existing median barrier will be retained. Existing sidewalks on
northbound Capital Boulevard will be removed through this section, replaced with sidewalks
on the northbound off- and on-ramps.
Wade Avenue is proposed to have 6-foot sidewalks on both sides that are separated from
travel lanes by a 6.5-foot grass verge. On the bridge over Capital Boulevard, Wade Avenue
will have 5.5-foot raised sidewalks on both sides. The Wade Avenue ramps will have 5-foot
sidewalks on the east side of the ramps.
K.Utilities
Preliminary utility relocation information is based on the Utilities Technical Memorandum
(May 2013). A utility survey and relocation design will be completed during final design.
The following utility relocations will likely be necessary:
Alternative P-Base.
·Sanitary Sewer – Relocate lines along east and west sides of Capital Boulevard
·Stormwater Pipes and Structures – Relocate infrastructure along Capital Boulevard
Alternative P5.
·Natural Gas – Relocate lines along Peace Street
·Telephone and Cable – Relocate lines on Peace Street
·Sanitary Sewer – Relocate lines along south side of Peace Street
·Relocate lines along east and west sides of Capital Boulevard
·Stormwater Pipes and Structures – Relocate infrastructure along Peace Street and
Capital Boulevard
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 25 Environmental Assessment
Alternative W-Base.
·Natural Gas – Relocate lines along Wade Avenue
·Telephone and Cable – Relocate underground on Wade Avenue and above-ground
fiber optic lines across Wade Avenue and along Capital Boulevard
·Power – Relocate power lines along Capital Boulevard and/or Wade Avenue
·Stormwater Pipes and Structures – Relocate along Capital Boulevard and/or Wade
Avenue
Alternative W2c.
·Natural Gas – Relocate lines along Wade Avenue
·Telephone and Cable – Relocate underground on Wade Avenue and above-ground
fiber optic lines across Wade Avenue and along Capital Boulevard
·Power – Relocate power lines along Capital Boulevard and/or Wade Avenue
·Stormwater Pipes and Structures – Relocate along Capital Boulevard and/or Wade
Avenue
L.Landscaping
No new landscaping is currently proposed as part of this project. The City of Raleigh has
requested additional landscaping in the medians, which will be addressed during final
design.
M.Noise Barriers
No noise barriers are recommended as part of the detailed study alternatives.
N.Work Zone, Traffic Control, and Construction Phasing
Preliminary traffic control and construction phasing plans have been developed, and will be
finalized during final design. The detailed study alternatives have been designed so that
Capital Boulevard will remain open to traffic during construction. Detours will be used if
individual ramps are closed at any point.
V.ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF PROPOSED ACTION
A.Natural Resources
Natural resources were catalogued in the Natural Resources Technical Report (July 2011)
and are shown on Figure 5.
1.Biotic Resources
a)Terrestrial Communities
Two terrestrial communities were identified in the study area: maintained/disturbed and
mixed hardwood forest.
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 26 Environmental Assessment
Maintained/Disturbed. The majority of the study area is comprised of urban areas
including residential, commercial, and industrial properties. Maintained/disturbed
communities include habitats that are impacted by human disturbances including regularly
maintained roadside shoulders, highway medians, and utility rights-of-way. Common
species within this community include low-growing grasses and herbs, including, but not
limited to kudzu, broomsedge, Japanese honeysuckle, fescue, wild onion, and Bermuda
grass.
Mixed Hardwood Forest. The mixed hardwood forest community differs from the
maintained/disturbed community that makes up the majority of the project area due to the
age class (25-50 years old) and contiguous nature of this community. This area is located in
the northeastern quadrant of the study area near Wade Avenue. Common species that
comprise the canopy in this community include loblolly pine, sycamore, and river birch.
Herbaceous vegetation was observed to be very sparse to absent. Woody vine species
include poison ivy and Japanese honeysuckle. Included in this community is a wetland area
WB, which is categorized as a floodplain pool using the NC Wetland Assessment Method
(NCWAM) classification system.
b)Aquatic Communities
Pigeon House Branch and Williamson Branch are both perennial streams that provide
aquatic habitat within the study area.
c)Summary of Anticipated Effects
Terrestrial communities in the study area may be impacted by project construction as a
result of clearing, grading, and paving of portions of the study area. All impacts to terrestrial
communities will be to maintained/disturbed areas. No long-term impacts are anticipated to
aquatic communities.
2.Waters of the United States
a)Streams, Rivers, Impoundments
Two jurisdictional streams were identified in the study area (listed in Table 9). The physical
characteristics of these water resources are provided in Table 10.
Table 9 – Water Resources in the Study Area
Stream
Name
Length
(ft) in
Study
Area
Classification
NCDWQ
Index
Number
Best Usage
Classification
Compensatory
Mitigation
Required
Pigeon House
Branch 5,839 Perennial 27-33-18 C, NSW Yes
Williamson
Branch 40 Perennial 27-33-18-1 C, NSW Yes
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 27 Environmental Assessment
Table 10 – Physical Characteristics of Water Resources in the Study Area
Stream Name
Bank
Height
(ft)
Bankfull
Width
(ft)
Water
Depth
(in)
Channel
Substrate Velocity Clarity
Pigeon House
Branch 9-15 6-30 17
Rip rap, gravel,
cobble, sand,
bedrock, concrete
Slow Turbid
Williamson
Branch 2-4 30 3 Gravel, cobble,
sand Moderate Clear
There are no designated anadromous fish waters or Primary Nursery Areas (PNA) present in
the study area. There are no Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW), High Quality Waters
(HQW), or water supply watersheds (WS-I or WS-II) within 1 mile of the project study area
or within 1 mile downstream. The NCDWQ 2012 Final 303(d) list of impaired waters
identifies Pigeon House Branch within the study area as an impaired water due to an excess
of zinc as well as poor bioclassification of biological integrity.
There are no benthic monitoring stations within the project study area or within 1 mile of the
project study area. Currently, this stream is “Not Rated” for aquatic life. No fish sampling
stations are present within 1 mile of the study area.
b)Wetlands
One jurisdictional wetland was identified in the project study area. Wetland classification
and quality rating data are presented in Table 11.
Table 11 – Jurisdictional Characteristics of Wetlands in the Study Area
Map
ID
NCWAM
Classification
Hydrologic
Classification
NCDWQ
Wetland Rating Area (ac)
WB Floodplain Pool Riparian 25 0.007
c)Riparian Buffers
Streamside riparian zones within the study area are protected under provisions of the Neuse
River Buffer Rules administered by NCDWQ. Both streams in the study area are subject to
the buffer rule protection. No impacts are anticipated to streams or stream buffers, but final
impacts will be determined during final design.
d)Summary of Anticipated Effects
There are no anticipated impacts to wetlands. Alternative P-Base will extend existing
culverts for Pigeon House Branch by 20 linear feet. Alternative P5 will extend existing
culverts for Pigeon House Branch by 24 linear feet. Alternative W2c will extend existing
culverts for Pigeon House Branch by 34 linear feet.
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 28 Environmental Assessment
e)Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation
Avoidance and Minimization of Impacts.Pigeon House Branch and Williamson Branch
are subject to Neuse River Buffer Rules. Therefore, Design Standards for Sensitive
Watersheds will be implemented during project construction. All detailed study alternatives
avoid impacts to streams and wetlands, and NCDOT will continue to avoid or minimize
impacts to the greatest extent practicable during final design.
Compensatory Mitigation of Impacts. The NCDOT will reevaluate during final design
whether some minor encroachments may occur. If compensatory mitigation is required,
NCDOT will investigate potential on-site stream and wetland mitigation opportunities. If
on-site mitigation is not feasible, mitigation will be provided by North Carolina Department
of Environment and Natural Resources Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP).
3.Rare and Protected Species
As of December 27, 2012, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists three
federally protected species for Wake County (Table 12). A brief description of each species’
habitat requirements follows, along with the Biological Conclusion rendered based on
survey results in the study area. Habitat requirements for each species are based on the
current best available information from referenced literature and/or USFWS.
Table 12 – Federally Protected Species Listed for Wake County
Scientific Name Common Name Federal
Status
Habitat
Present
Biological
Conclusion
Picoides borealis Red-cockaded
woodpecker E No No Effect
Alasmidonta heterodon Dwarf wedgemussel E No No Effect
Rhus michauxii Michaux's sumac E No No Effect
Suitable habitat for the red-cockaded woodpecker is not present within the study area.
Terrestrial communities within and in the vicinity of the study area are classified as
maintained/disturbed or mixed hardwood forest (25-50 years old). No open, mature or old
growth pine forest communities suitable for nesting or foraging occur within the study area
or in the vicinity of the study area. In addition, a review of the NCNHP records (updated
July 2013), indicates no known red-cockaded woodpecker occurrence within 1 mile of the
study area.
A thorough description of the habitat assessment and survey results for the dwarf-
wedgemussel is included in the appendix of the Natural Resources Technical Report, along
with the rationale for the biological conclusion rendered. In addition, a review of the
NCNHP records, (updated July 2013), indicates no known dwarf wedgemussel occurrences
within 1 mile of the study area.
Suitable habitat for Michaux’s sumac is not present within the study area. The mixed
hardwood forested area located in the northeastern quadrant of the study area is too shady to
accommodate this species. The remaining portions of the study area are primarily urban and
regularly maintained or mowed. Although, this species will grow best in areas of occasional
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 29 Environmental Assessment
disturbance, the study area is too frequently maintained to allow this species the chance to
propagate. A review of the NCNHP records (updated July 2013), indicates no known
Michaux’s sumac occurrence within 1 mile of the study area.
Habitat for the bald eagle primarily consists of mature forest in proximity to large bodies of
open water for foraging. Large, dominant trees are utilized for nesting sites, typically within
1 mile of open water.No water bodies large enough or sufficiently open to be considered
potential feeding sources were identified, and there was no foraging habitat within the
review area. Additionally, a review of the NCNHP database (updated July 2013) revealed no
known occurrences of this species within 1 mile of the project study area. Due to the lack of
habitat, known occurrences, and minimal impact anticipated for this project, it has been
determined that this project will not affect this species.
4.Soils
The Wake County Soil Survey identifies seven soil types within the study area.Table 13
summarizes the characteristics of each soil series in the project study area.
Table 13 – Soils in the Study Area
Soil Series Mapping Unit Drainage Class Hydric Status
Appling sandy loam ApC2 Well-drained Nonhydric
Cecil sandy loam, 2-6% slopes CeB2 Well-drained Nonhydric
Cecil sandy loam, 6-10% slopes CeC2 Well-drained Nonhydric
Cecil sandy loam, 10-15% slopes CeD Well-drained Nonhydric
Cecil sandy loam, 15-45% slopes CeF Well-drained Nonhydric
Chewacla soils Ch Somewhat poorly
drained Hydric*
Made land Ma NA Nonhydric
*Soils which are primarily non-hydric by may contain hydric inclusions.
B.Cultural Resources
This project is subject to compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act of 1966, as amended, and implemented by the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation’s Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified as 36 CFR Part 800.
Section 106 requires Federal agencies to take into account the effect of their undertakings
(federally-funded, licensed, or permitted) on properties included in or eligible for inclusion
in the National Register of Historic Places and to afford the Advisory Council a reasonable
opportunity to comment on such undertakings.
1.Historic Architectural Resources
An architectural survey was performed in October 2011, and the Historic Architectural
Analysis Report was completed in April 2012. There are five properties eligible or
recommended eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) within
the Area of Potential Effects (APE), shown on Figure 6. Effects on historic resources are
summarized in Table 14.
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 30 Environmental Assessment
Table 14 – Historic Effects
Property and
Status Alternative Effect
Finding Reasons
Raleigh Cotton Mill
(WA 3919)
Alt P-Base No Adverse
Effect
Moves Capital Blvd. away from property,
adequate access to be maintained.
Alt P5 No Adverse
Effect
Moves Capital Blvd. away from property,
access will be maintained by creating a new
access point from Peace Street
Seaboard Air Line
Turntable and
Raleigh & Gaston
Railroad (WA 7383)
Alt P-Base No Adverse
Effect
No construction within historic boundaries,
but some temporary easement or new ROW
within historic boundaries possible
Alt P5 No Adverse
Effect
No construction within historic boundaries,
but some temporary easement or new ROW
within historic boundaries possible
Alt W-Base No Effect No construction within historic boundaries,
but some temporary easement or new ROW
within historic boundaries possible
Alt W 2c No Effect No construction within historic boundaries,
but some temporary easement or new ROW
within historic boundaries possible
Noland Plumbing
Company Building
(WA 7126)
Alt W-Base No Effect No construction within historic boundaries,
but some temporary easement or new ROW
within historic boundaries possible
Alt W 2c No Effect Maintains existing ROW
2.Archaeological Resources
A memo from SHPO (March 16, 2011, included in Appendix A) noted the presence of
archaeological site 31WA1448 within the Area of Potential Effects (APE) for the proposed
project. Containing a portion of the Raleigh & Gaston/Seaboard Air Line Railyard Complex,
archaeological site 31WA1448 is considered potentially eligible for inclusion in the NRHP.
For areas of the site affected by the bridge replacement project, SHPO recommended
archaeological deep testing via backhoe to evaluate site significance and potential project
effects as well as intensive historical and land use research of the APE.
According to a second memo from SHPO (March 18, 2011, included in Appendix A),
archaeological site 31WA527, representing the remains of the Mordecai Mill in association
with the Mordecai Plantation, is located within the northern portion of the proposed study
area. SHPO noted that if the site were to be determined eligible for inclusion in the NRHP,
then appropriate mitigation measures would need to be developed. Upon further review, it
was determined that the location of archaeological site 31WA527 does not fall within the
Area of Potential Effects (APE) for the proposed project, and will not be impacted;
therefore, no further action is required regarding archaeological site 31WA527.
According to a memo to the Office of State Archaeology (OSA) from the NCDOT
Archaeology Group (December 18, 2012, included in Appendix A), the Raleigh &
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 31 Environmental Assessment
Gaston/Seaboard Air Line Railyard Complex (i.e. archaeological site 31WA1448) was
determined to be eligible for the NRHP. The letter also recommended that if this site were to
be impacted by the Preferred Alternative, then additional measures would be considered that
may include development of a Memorandum of Agreement stipulating the efforts NCDOT
will carry out to mitigate effects to the resource. In response (March 5, 2013, included in
Appendix A), SHPO concurred with the determination of eligibility and the potential need
for additional investigations if the site were to be impacted. Based on geospatial data
presented by the NCDOT Archaeology Group, the designs of the alternatives at the Peace
Street interchange were modified in order to eliminate any potential impacts to this site;
therefore, no further action is required regarding archaeological site 31WA1448.
C.Section 4(f) Resources
Section 4(f) of the US Department of Transportation (USDOT) Act of 1966, as amended,
specifies that publicly owned land from a public park, recreation area, wildlife and
waterfowl refuge, and all historic sites of national, state, and local significance may be used
for federal projects only if there is no feasible and prudent alternative to the use of such land
and the project includes all possible planning to minimize harm to 4(f) lands resulting from
such use.
In the Capital Boulevard Corridor Study Report, the City of Raleigh identified a future open
space, Devereux Meadows Park, to be constructed on the property currently used for the
City’s Solid Waste Services and Vehicle Fleet Services. The City envisions this area as a
linear park including stream restoration and a greenway. According to City staff, the portion
of the property within the proposed Capital Boulevard right of way will be designated as a
transportation corridor rather than parkland, and therefore no use of park property is
anticipated.
D.Section 6(f) Resources
Section 6(f) of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 stipulates that property
acquired or developed with the assistance of the Fund may not be converted to a use other
than public recreation unless suitable replacement property is provided. No properties
acquired or developed with the assistance of the Land and Water Conservation Fund exist in
the project area.
E.Farmland
The Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA) requires all federal agencies or their
representatives to consider the impact of land acquisition and construction projects on prime
and important farmland soils and to minimize the impact of Federal programs, or projects
completed with the assistance of a Federal agency, have on the unnecessary and irreversible
conversion of farmland (directly or indirectly) to non-agricultural uses. North Carolina
Executive Order Number 96 requires all state agencies to consider the impact of land
acquisition and construction projects on prime farmland soils and to ensure that actions of
State agencies under the jurisdiction of the Governor will minimize the loss of prime
agricultural and forest lands, as designated by the US Natural Resources Conservation
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 32 Environmental Assessment
Service (NRCS). Land planned or zoned for urban development or identified as urbanized
according to US Census maps is not subject to FPPA requirements.
Wake County has a Voluntary Agriculture District (VAD) ordinance and is working on a
Farmland Protection Plan. However, there are no prime or important farmland soils within
the study area, and no active farms within 1 mile. Also, since all of the land affected by the
project is either currently developed or is zoned for residential or urban land use, this project
is not subject to FPPA. No Farmland Conversion Impact Rating Forms (USDA Form AD-
1006) are required for the project.
F.Social Effects
Community features are shown on Figure 7.
1.Neighborhoods/Communities
Although several neighborhoods are on the edge of the study area, none of the alternatives
are expected to directly impact any residences in those neighborhoods or affect the
community cohesion and stability. Alternative W2c provides a new access point to
commercial and state properties on the east side of Capital Boulevard. None of the Peace
Street alternatives are expected to impact any nearby communities.
2.Relocation of Residences and Businesses
None of the alternatives are anticipated to impact residences.
Most property impacts are permanent, although some temporary construction easements
along the corridor also are likely. Both interchanges will be built using staged construction
schedules; traffic will remain open at all times, although some ramp movements may be
closed temporarily during construction. Therefore, temporary changes in access are not
expected to negatively affect business operations. Traffic control plans are described in more
detail in Section IV.N.
The estimated number of business relocations for each alternative is in Table 15. The
NCDOT relocation estimate is in Appendix B.
Table 15 – Business Relocations
Alternative Total Business
Relocations Special Needs/Notes
Peace Street Interchange
P-Base 9 Finch’s (locally important restaurant)
P5 12 Finch’s (locally important restaurant)
Wade Avenue Interchange
W-Base 1
W2c 9
Alternative P-Base. This alternative will impact businesses in the northwest, southwest, and
southeast quadrants of the Capital Boulevard/Peace Street interchange.
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 33 Environmental Assessment
Alternative P5. This alternative will impact the majority of businesses in the southwest
quadrant as well as Fairview Advertising in the southeast quadrant. In the southeast
quadrant, Johnson Street will intersect with the northbound off-ramp to provide access to
remaining properties.
Alternative W-Base.Several businesses in the southeast quadrant would be relocated by the
new trumpet configuration.
Alternatives W2c. The new diamond interchange design would construct a new access
point on the east side of Capital Boulevard near Old Williamson Road. This would provide
direct access between those properties, Capital Boulevard, and Wade Avenue. The new
ramps would require business relocations in the northeast and southeast quadrants.
NCDOT will offer relocation assistance to businesses that will be directly impacted by this
project as part of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies
Act (1970, as amended in 1987). A relocation report will be prepared for alternatives
following preliminary design.
3.Environmental Justice
“Environmental justice” refers to issues related to the prevention of discrimination against
minority and low-income communities. According to the FHWA, there are three
fundamental environmental justice principles:
·To avoid, minimize, or mitigate disproportionately high and adverse human health
and environmental effects, including social and economic effects, on minority
populations and low-income populations.
·To ensure the full and fair participation by all potentially affected communities in the
decision-making process.
·To prevent the denial of, reduction in, or significant delay in the receipt of benefits
by minority and low-income populations.
The U.S. Department of Transportation Order to Address Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income Populations (DOT Order 5680.1 – April 15, 1997) defines
minority groups as being African-American, Hispanic, Asian-American, American Indian,
and Alaskan Native. This same Order defines low-income as being persons whose median
household income is at or below the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS)
poverty guidelines.
There are no communities identified within the study area that meet environmental justice
criteria. Benefits and burdens resulting from the projects are anticipated to be equitably
distributed throughout the community. Public involvement and outreach activities must
ensure full and fair participation of all potentially affected communities in the transportation
decision-making process.
4.Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities
There are no designated bike routes or bicycle facilities on Capital Boulevard, Peace Street,
or Wade Avenue. Existing sidewalks on Capital Boulevard, Peace Street, the Capital
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 34 Environmental Assessment
Boulevard/Peace Street ramps, and Wade Avenue will be retained or rebuilt. In addition,
new sidewalks are proposed on the Capital Boulevard/Wade Avenue ramps, and grass
verges are proposed between sidewalks and travel lanes in most locations.
5.Recreational Facilities
None of the alternatives will affect existing recreational facilities.
6.Other Public Facilities and Services
The nearest emergency response facilities, all approximately 1 mile from the projects, are
the Whitaker Mill EMS station on Noble Road; fire stations on Fairview Road, Oberlin
Road, and Dawson Street; and the Raleigh Police Department on Cabarrus Road. The
Capital Boulevard corridor south of Wake Forest Road is part of the downtown fire response
district.
The City of Raleigh Police Department, Wake County Sheriff’s Department, and Wake
County Emergency Medical Services (EMS) and Fire Department use Capital Boulevard as
a primary patrol route and to respond to calls. All alternatives will leave Capital Boulevard,
Wade Avenue, and Peace Street open to traffic during most of construction, which will help
minimize short-term increases in response time during construction. According to EMS
personnel, responders utilize GPS that automatically reroutes to avoid road closures. The
Wake County EMS Chief of Operations was concerned about potential delays from queued
traffic on the square loops at Peace Street, but overall did not have a preference between
alternatives at Capital Boulevard/Peace Street. He supported the idea of connecting Fairview
Road to West Street and extending West Street over Wade Avenue (no longer under
consideration), but otherwise did not have a preference between alternatives at Capital
Boulevard/Wade Avenue.
G.Economic Effects
Alternatives P-Base and W-Base.The base alternatives will require business relocations,
but will retain existing traffic and development patterns.
Alternative P5.The August 2012 Capital Boulevard Corridor Study notes that “[square
loops] will have significant property impacts both during the construction phase and for
right of way acquisition. The land that remains in the square loop option will consist of
regularly shaped blocks suitable for mixed-use redevelopment.” According to the City,
impacting businesses in these two quadrants will not have an overall effect on the greater
downtown business district. Alternative P5 would allow for limited redevelopment in the
southeast and southwest quadrants, with driveways permitted on the loop in the southwest
quadrant and access to Johnson Street from the ramp in the southeast quadrant. This is a
similar design to the two-loop concept discussed in the Capital Boulevard Corridor Study,
although Alternative P5 has fewer property impacts than the two-loop concept.
Alternatives W2c. The new diamond interchange design would provide direct access to the
properties on the east side of the interchange.
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 35 Environmental Assessment
H.Land Use
1.Existing Land Use and Zoning
Zoning regulations within the study area are implemented by the City of Raleigh. The
existing zoning classifies most of the study area as “I-2” (industrial), with a small section of
“NB” (neighborhood business) at the Capital Boulevard/Peace Street interchange.
The City of Raleigh 2030 Comprehensive Plan identifies the study area as part of the
Downtown Regional Center, which is described as the area within Raleigh with the most
intense growth and highest levels of transit, bicycle, and pedestrian access. The study area is
currently comprised of primarily commercial and industrial uses along Capital Boulevard
and West Street. Downtown Raleigh, which includes office, government, and commercial
uses, is along the south edge of the study area; residential neighborhoods are on the north
and west edges; and the CSX railroad track and rail/shipping uses (including NCDOT Rail
Division offices and transfer facilities from rail to truck) form the east boundary.
Several overlay districts apply to areas within the study area. The Downtown Overlay
District is intended to promote the development of intensive residential and nonresidential
uses within the downtown area. The Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District is
intended to preserve and enhance the general quality and appearance of older
neighborhoods, for it is recognized that built environmental characteristics are a major part
of the identity and positive image of the City. The Pedestrian Business Overlay District is
intended to preserve and enhance the character of pedestrian-oriented retail districts.
2.Future Land Use
The City of Raleigh proposes to change the existing industrial land uses to a mix of
commercial, office, and residential along Capital Boulevard and West Street. Although the
City’s current zoning does not yet reflect this change, the Future Land Use Map in the 2030
Comprehensive Plan and the Capital Boulevard Corridor Study describe the City’s vision.
The 2030 Comprehensive Plan describes the two primary future land use categories: The
Central Business District category is intended to enhance Downtown Raleigh as a vibrant
mixed-use urban center. The Office Residential—Mixed-Use category is applied primarily
to frontage lots along thoroughfares where low-density residential uses are no longer
appropriate, as well as office parks and developments suitable for a more mixed-use
development pattern.
3.Project Compatibility with Local Plans
The City of Raleigh currently has most of the study area zoned as Industrial-2. However, the
City’s 2030 Comprehensive Plan and Capital Boulevard Corridor Study envision Capital
Boulevard and West Street as a multiuse corridor with commercial, office, and some
residential areas. One of the action items in the Comprehensive Plan was to amend the
zoning ordinance to create a new “Downtown” zoning district, which likely would include
the portion of Capital Boulevard within the study area.
The Capital Boulevard Corridor Study supports a square loop design for the Capital
Boulevard/Peace Street interchange, and a diamond design for the Capital Boulevard/Wade
Avenue interchange.
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 36 Environmental Assessment
I.Indirect and Cumulative Effects
Indirect and cumulative effects are described in more detail in the Indirect and Cumulative
Effects Report (May 2013).
Indirect and cumulative effects were considered for the time period between now and 2035,
which is the design year of the project. The horizon year of the most recent Capital Area
Metropolitan Planning Organization Long-Range Transportation Plan is 2040 (updated in
April 2013). The City of Raleigh Comprehensive Plan (2009) has a horizon year of 2030.
The following subsections summarize indirect and cumulative project effects.
1.Indirect Effects
Indirect community effects are characterized by those changes in land use related to the
proposed project but not directly caused by the project. Construction of Project B-5121/B-
5317 is expected to have minor indirect effects on land use decisions in the vicinity.
Under the “base” alternatives at both interchanges, there will be no change in travel patterns,
access, exposure, or travel time. The other build alternatives, Alternative P5 and W2c, will
increase access and exposure to new properties, but may slightly increase travel time for
drivers using these interchanges. None of the alternatives are expected to create a new land
use or transportation node. The design of Alternative W2c would allow the City to extend
West Street over Wade Avenue in the future without reconstructing the Capital
Boulevard/Wade Avenue interchange. The West Street extension project, which is proposed
in the City’s Capital Boulevard Corridor Study, may affect residential and commercial
development patterns along West Street.
Local planners expect most of the land within the vicinity to redevelop regardless of which
alternative is selected (with the base alternatives having the same effect on development as
the no build scenario). However, the pace of redevelopment will likely be quicker with the
non-base alternatives, and the type of development may vary depending on alternative,
especially at the Peace Street interchange.
2.Cumulative Effects
Cumulative effects represent the total anticipated direct and indirect effects resulting from
the project, in addition to those effects by other projects in the vicinity. No long-term
cumulative effects are expected. Negligible short-term cumulative effects are anticipated on
travel time during construction, while portions of the existing interchanges are closed and
traffic is detoured.
Local planners expect that the “base” alternatives will have a negligible impact on the pace
and type of development. Alternatives P5 and W2c are likely to increase the pace of
development at the interchanges, and may result in minor cumulative impacts. Direct natural
environmental impacts by NCDOT projects will be addressed by avoidance, minimization,
or mitigation, consistent with programmatic agreements with the natural resource agencies
during the Merger and Permitting processes. All developments will be required to follow
local, state, and federal guidelines and permitting regulations.
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 37 Environmental Assessment
J.Flood Hazard Evaluation
The three major drainage crossings along the project (Pigeon House Branch under Capital
Boulevard, Pigeon House Branch under Wade Avenue, and Pigeon House Branch under
Peace Street) are located within a regulated FEMA study area.
Based on portions of the proposed roadway widening, realignment, culvert extensions, and
proposed bridge occurring in a FEMA floodway, this project is likely to create an
encroachment on the existing floodplain and floodway. Since both of the culvert extensions
and bridge replacement are in a regulated FEMA floodway (FIRM Map Number
3720170400J, Panel Number 1704) a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) or a Conditional
Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) will be required. Floodplain crossings will be designed to
minimize the floodplain encroachments as much as possible. In NFIP flood hazard areas, the
final hydraulic design should strive for a no-rise condition in the 100-year base flood
elevation.
K.Traffic Noise Analysis
1.Introduction
This analysis is consistent with Title 23 Code of Federal Regulations Part 772, Procedures
for Abatement of Highway Traffic Noise and Construction Noise (Title 23 CFR 772) and
the NCDOT Traffic Noise Abatement Policy (July 13, 2011). In accordance with these
policies and procedures, Type I highway project must be analyzed for predicted traffic noise
impacts. In general, Type I projects are proposed Federal or Federal-aid highway projects
for construction of a highway or interchange on new location, improvements of an existing
highway that substantially changes the horizontal or vertical alignment or increases the
vehicle capacity, or projects that involve new construction or substantial alteration of
transportation facilities such as weigh stations, rest stops, ride-share lots or toll plazas.
In accordance with the NCDOT Traffic Noise Analysis and Abatement Manual, the FHWA
Traffic Noise Model® (TNM v.2.5) was used to predict existing and future design year 2035
hourly equivalent traffic noise levels, Leq(h), for the noise-sensitive receptor locations in the
vicinity of the proposed Capital Boulevard bridge replacements. This traffic noise report
represents the preliminary analysis of the predicted traffic noise impacts along the proposed
bridge replacement projects.
Details of the analysis are in the Traffic Noise Analysis (October 2013), and results are
summarized below.
2.Traffic Noise Impacts and Noise Contours
The project area was divided into Noise Study Areas (NSA) in order to group similar land
uses that are exposed to similar noise sources together. Noise Study Area A is located in the
northeast quadrant of the Capital Boulevard and Peace Street interchange, and contains four
noise-sensitive receptors. Noise Study Area B is located in the northwest quadrant of the
Capital Boulevard and Wade Avenue interchange, and contains three noise-sensitive
receptors. One of the receptors in NSA A is predicted to experience noise levels that
approach or exceed the NAC, and none in NSA B are predicted to do so. None of the
receptors in either NSA are predicted to experience a substantial noise increase.
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 38 Environmental Assessment
Future build (2035) traffic is predicted to impact two noise-sensitive receptors. The
impacted noise-sensitive receptors are predicted to experience noise levels that will
approach or exceed the NAC. The number and types of predicted traffic noise impacts in
each category are shown in Table 16. Impacts are delineated as either approaching or
exceeding the FHWA NAC, by a substantial increase in Design Year 2035 build-condition
traffic noise levels over existing noise levels, or by meeting both criteria.
Table 16 – Traffic Noise Impact Summary
Alternative
Impacted Receptors Approaching or Exceeding FHWA NAC
NAC B
(Residential)
NAC C
(Active Sport Areas,
Cemeteries, etc.)
Total
P-Base 0 0 0
P5 1*0 1
W-Base 0 1**1
W2c 0 1**1
Note: There were no impacted receptors in categories A (lands intended to be serene and quiet), D
(auditoriums, libraries, places of worship, etc.), E (businesses, restaurants, hotels, etc.), or F (agriculture,
manufacturing, emergency services, etc.).
* Green space at a condominium complex
** Entrance to a recording studio
3.Traffic Noise Abatement Measures
FHWA and NCDOT require that feasible and reasonable noise abatement measures be
considered and evaluated for the benefit of all impacted build-condition traffic noise
receptors. Feasibility and reasonableness are distinct and separate considerations. Feasibility
is the consideration as to whether noise abatement measures can be implemented.
Reasonableness is the consideration as to whether noise abatement measures should be
implemented. Per NCDOT Policy, the following traffic noise abatement measures may be
considered: highway alignment selection, traffic systems management, buffer zones, noise
barriers (earth berms and noise walls), and noise insulation of Activity Category D land use
facilities.
Consideration for noise abatement measures was given to all impacted receptors in the
future build case. Noise abatement was determined not to be feasible due to site access
constraints. Driveways of each property and other side streets were located such that a noise
barrier would not be able to be constructed to adequately provide the required abatement.
L.Air Quality Analysis
This section summarizes the results of the air quality analysis, which is discussed in detail in
the Air Quality Analysis (April 2013).
1.Project Air Quality Effects
Air pollution originates from various sources. Emissions from industry and internal
combustion engines are the most prevalent sources. The impact resulting from highway
construction ranges from intensifying existing air pollution problems to improving the
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 39 Environmental Assessment
ambient air quality. Changing traffic patterns are a primary concern when determining the
impact of a new highway facility or the improvement of an existing highway facility.
The Federal Clean Air Act of 1970 established the National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS). These standards were established to protect the public from known or
anticipated effects of air pollutants. The most recent amendments to the NAAQS contain
criteria for sulfur dioxide (SO2), particulate matter (PM), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen
dioxide (NO2), ozone (O3), and lead (Pb).
The primary pollutants from motor vehicles are unburned hydrocarbons, nitrous oxides,
carbon monoxide, and particulates. Hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides can combine in a
complex series of reactions catalyzed by sunlight to produce photochemical oxidants such as
ozone and NO2. Because these reactions take place over a period of several hours,
maximum concentrations of photochemical oxidants are often found far downwind of the
precursor sources.
A project-level air quality analyses were prepared for this project. A copy of the unabridged
version of the full technical report entitled Air Quality Analysis (Microscale Carbon
Monoxide and Mobile Source Air Toxics),dated September 30 2012 and Revised Air
Quality Analysis dated March 2013,can be viewed at the Project Development &
Environmental Analysis Unit, Century Center Building A, 1010 Birch Ridge Drive, Raleigh.
2.Attainment Status
The project is located in Wake County, which is within the Raleigh-Durham maintenance
area for carbon monoxide (CO) as defined by the EPA. The Raleigh Durham area was
redesignated for CO on September 18, 1995 and due to improved monitoring data was
placed under a limited maintenance plan (conformity is required without a regional
emissions analysis) on July 22, 2013. Section 176(c) of the CAAA requires that
transportation plans, programs, and projects conform to the intent of the state air quality
implementation plan (SIP). The current SIP does not contain any transportation control
measures for Wake County. The Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization 2040
Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) and the 2012-2018 Transportation Improvement
Program (TIP) conform to the intent of the SIP. The USDOT made a conformity
determination on the LRTP on June 14, 2013 and the TIP on June 14, 2013. The current
conformity determination is consistent with the final conformity rule found in 40 CFR Parts
51 and 93. There are no significant changes in the project’s design concept or scope, as used
in the conformity analyses.
3.Carbon Monoxide
Because the project is located within the Raleigh-Durham maintenance area for carbon
monoxide (CO), a microscale air quality analysis was performed to determine future CO
concentrations resulting from the proposed highway improvements. "CAL3QHC - A
Modeling Methodology for Predicting Pollutant Concentrations near Roadway
Intersections" was used to predict the CO concentration near sensitive receptors. Carbon
monoxide vehicle emission factors were calculated for the years 2017, 2022, and 2035 using
the EPA publication "Mobile Source Emission Factors", and the MOBILE6 mobile source
emissions computer model. Consultation with the North Carolina Department of
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 40 Environmental Assessment
Environment & Natural Resources’ Air Quality Section indicated that an ambient CO
concentration of 2.9 ppm is suitable for calculations in Wake County. The analysis was
performed between August 2012 and April 2013.
Table 17 – Comparison of Model Result to Ambient Air Quality Standards for CO
Intersection of Peace Street at Capital Boulevard Northbound Ramps
Measurement
Period
NAAQS
(ppm)
2017 Build
Conditions
(PM Peak)
2022 Build
Conditions
(PM Peak)
2035 Build
Conditions
(PM Peak)
Rec 3 & 4 Rec 4 Rec 3
1-hour (peak)35 4.5 4.5 4.9
8-hour 9 3.7 3.7 4.0
Table 18 – Comparison of Model Result to Ambient Air Quality Standards for CO
Intersection of Wade Avenue at Capital Boulevard Southbound Ramps
Measurement
Period
NAAQS
(ppm)
2017 Build
Conditions
(PM Peak)
2022 Build
Conditions
(PM Peak)
2035 Build
Conditions
(PM Peak)
Rec 3 & 4 Rec 4 Rec 3
1-hour (peak)35 4.5 4.4 4.8
8-hour 9 3.7 3.6 3.9
4.Mobile Source Air Toxics (MSATs)
Controlling air toxic emissions became a national priority with the passage of the Clean Air
Act Amendments (CAAA) of 1990, whereby Congress mandated that the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulate 188 air toxics, also known as hazardous
air pollutants. A 2007 EPA rule requires controls that will dramatically decrease MSAT
emissions through cleaner fuels and cleaner engines.
Air toxics analysis is a continuing area of research. While much work has been done to
assess the overall health risk of air toxics, many questions remain unanswered. In particular,
the tools and techniques for assessing project-specific health outcomes as a result of lifetime
MSAT exposure remain limited. These limitations impede the ability to evaluate how
potential public health risks posed by MSAT exposure should be factored into project-level
decision-making within the context of NEPA.
Nonetheless, air toxics concerns continue to be raised on highway projects during the NEPA
process. Even as the science emerges, we are duly expected by the public and other agencies
to address MSAT impacts in our environmental documents. The FHWA, EPA, the Health
Effects Institute, and others have funded and conducted research studies to try to more
clearly define potential risks from MSAT emissions associated with highway projects. The
FHWA will continue to monitor the developing research in this field.
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 41 Environmental Assessment
The FHWA developed a tiered approach with three categories for analyzing MSAT in
NEPA documents, depending on specific project circumstances. This project falls under
Category 2 (“Projects with Low Potential MSAT Effects”) because it is intended to improve
the operations of a highway, transit or freight without adding substantial new capacity or
without creating a facility that is likely to meaningfully increase emissions, and the Design
Year traffic is not projected to meet or exceed the 140,000 to 150,000 AADT criterion.
Incomplete or Unavailable Information for Project-Specific MSAT Health Impacts
Analysis. In FHWA's view, information is incomplete or unavailable to credibly predict the
project-specific health impacts due to changes in MSAT emissions associated with a
proposed set of highway alternatives. The outcome of such an assessment, adverse or not,
would be influenced more by the uncertainty introduced into the process through assumption
and speculation rather than any genuine insight into the actual health impacts directly
attributable to MSAT exposure associated with a proposed action.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is responsible for protecting the public
health and welfare from any known or anticipated effect of an air pollutant. They are the
lead authority for administering the Clean Air Act and its amendments and have specific
statutory obligations with respect to hazardous air pollutants and MSAT. The EPA is in the
continual process of assessing human health effects, exposures, and risks posed by air
pollutants. They maintain the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS), which is "a
compilation of electronic reports on specific substances found in the environment and their
potential to cause human health effects" (EPA, http://www.epa.gov/iris/). Each report
contains assessments of non-cancerous and cancerous effects for individual compounds and
quantitative estimates of risk levels from lifetime oral and inhalation exposures with
uncertainty spanning perhaps an order of magnitude.
Other organizations are also active in the research and analyses of the human health effects
of MSAT, including the Health Effects Institute (HEI). Two HEI studies are summarized in
Appendix D of FHWA's Interim Guidance Update on Mobile Source Air Toxic Analysis in
NEPA Documents. Among the adverse health effects linked to MSAT compounds at high
exposures are; cancer in humans in occupational settings; cancer in animals; and irritation to
the respiratory tract, including the exacerbation of asthma. Less obvious is the adverse
human health effects of MSAT compounds at current environmental concentrations (HEI,
http://pubs.healtheffects.org/view.php?id=282) or in the future as vehicle emissions
substantially decrease (HEI,http://pubs.healtheffects.org/view.php?id=306).
The methodologies for forecasting health impacts include emissions modeling; dispersion
modeling; exposure modeling; and then final determination of health impacts – each step in
the process building on the model predictions obtained in the previous step. All are
encumbered by technical shortcomings or uncertain science that prevents a more complete
differentiation of the MSAT health impacts among a set of project alternatives. These
difficulties are magnified for lifetime (i.e., 70-year) assessments, particularly because
unsupportable assumptions would have to be made regarding changes in travel patterns and
vehicle technology (which affects emissions rates) over that time frame, since such
information is unavailable.
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 42 Environmental Assessment
It is particularly difficult to reliably forecast 70-year lifetime MSAT concentrations and
exposure near roadways; to determine the portion of time that people are actually exposed at
a specific location; and to establish the extent attributable to a proposed action, especially
given that some of the information needed is unavailable.
There are considerable uncertainties associated with the existing estimates of toxicity of the
various MSAT, because of factors such as low-dose extrapolation and translation of
occupational exposure data to the general population, a concern expressed by HEI
(http://pubs.healtheffects.org/view.php?id=282). As a result, there is no national consensus
on air dose-response values assumed to protect the public health and welfare for MSAT
compounds, and in particular for diesel PM. The EPA
(http://www.epa.gov/risk/basicinformation.htm#g) and the HEI
(http://pubs.healtheffects.org/getfile.php?u=395) have not established a basis for quantitative
risk assessment of diesel PM in ambient settings.
There also is the lack of a national consensus on an acceptable level of risk. The current
context is the process used by the EPA as provided by the Clean Air Act to determine
whether more stringent controls are required in order to provide an ample margin of safety
to protect public health or to prevent an adverse environmental effect for industrial sources
subject to the maximum achievable control technology standards, such as benzene emissions
from refineries. The decision framework is a two-step process. The first step requires EPA
to determine an "acceptable" level of risk due to emissions from a source, which is generally
no greater than approximately 100 in 1 million. Additional factors are considered in the
second step, the goal of which is to maximize the number of people with risks less than 1 in
1 million due to emissions from a source. The results of this statutory two-step process do
not guarantee that cancer risks from exposure to air toxics are less than 1 in 1 million; in
some cases, the residual risk determination could result in maximum individual cancer risks
that are as high as approximately 100 in 1 million. In a June 2008 decision, the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit upheld EPA's approach to addressing risk in its
two step decision framework. Information is incomplete or unavailable to establish that even
the largest of highway projects would result in levels of risk greater than deemed acceptable.
Because of the limitations in the methodologies for forecasting health impacts described,
any predicted difference in health impacts between alternatives is likely to be much smaller
than the uncertainties associated with predicting the impacts. Consequently, the results of
such assessments would not be useful to decision makers, who would need to weigh this
information against project benefits, such as reducing traffic congestion, accident rates, and
fatalities plus improved access for emergency response, that are better suited for quantitative
analysis.
5.Construction Air Quality Effects
During construction of the proposed project, all materials resulting from clearing and
grubbing, demolition or other operations will be removed from the project, burned or
otherwise disposed of by the contractor. Any burning will be performed in accordance with
applicable local laws and ordinances and regulations of the North Carolina SIP for air
quality in compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520. Care will be taken to insure burning will be
done at the greatest distance practical from dwellings and not when atmospheric conditions
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 43 Environmental Assessment
are such as to create a hazard to the public. Burning will be performed under constant
surveillance. Also during construction, measures will be taken to reduce the dust generated
by construction when the control of dust is necessary for the protection and comfort of
motorists or area residents.
M.Hazardous Materials
Three hazardous material surveys have been conducted within the B-5121/B-5317 project
study area. The first survey was performed by the NCDOT Geotechnical Engineering Unit
in May 2009 for Project B-5121, and identified 12 potentially hazardous sites in the B-5121
(Peace Street) interchange area.
The second survey included a review of environmental regulatory records for federal and
state databases within the B-5121/B-5317 study area and was provided by Environmental
Data Research (EDR). The third survey was a review of environmental regulatory records
and was provided by FirstSearch Technology Corporation.
Based on the surveys, the study area contains 28 potential leaking underground storage tank
(LUST) sites, one potentially hazardous waste site, 22 underground storage task (UST) sites,
and ten Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) generators. Several of the sites
within the study area are on multiple lists.
A geotechnical report will be prepared for the full B-5121/B-5317 study area at a later phase
in the project. Impacts to potential hazardous material sites will be determined at that time.
VI.COMMENTS AND COORDINATION
A public involvement program is part of this project and has included the following efforts:
·Holding public meetings, which were advertised through direct mail and local
newspapers
·Mailing newsletters to property owners in the project vicinity, which provided
information on the status and decisions made through the project process
·Attending meetings with local officials
·Creating and updating the mailing list of community contacts to include workshop
attendees and concerned citizens
·Responding consistently to citizens’ requests for information
A.Public Meetings
First Public Meeting
The first public meeting was held September 29, 2011, at the Progress Energy Center for the
Performing Arts. On display were three conceptual designs at the Capital Boulevard/Peace
Street interchange and four conceptual designs at the Capital Boulevard/Wade Avenue
interchange. The meeting was held jointly with the City of Raleigh, which was displaying
information about the City’s Capital Boulevard Corridor Study. A short PowerPoint
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 44 Environmental Assessment
Presentation about the bridge replacement projects was shown on a continuous loop, and a
formal presentation was made by NCDOT and City staff. A total of 131 citizens signed in
during the meeting.
Seventeen comment sheets or emails were received following the meeting. At Peace Street,
there was a strong preference for Alternative P2 (square loops) over the other two
alternatives. At Wade Avenue, preference was evenly divided for Alternatives W1
(trumpet), W2 (diamond), and W3 (compressed diamond with a grade separation at West
Street). Several citizens requested pedestrian and bicycle access to be included in the
project.
Second Public Meeting
A second public meeting was held October 22, 2012, at the Progress Energy Center for the
Performing Arts. All of the previous alternatives had been revised or replaced with new
alternatives. These new alternatives were displayed at the meeting. Additional information
about several ongoing City projects was available as well. No formal presentation was made.
Seventy-two citizens signed in during the meeting.
Forty-three comment sheets or emails were received following the meeting. At Peace Street,
75% of commenters preferred Alternative P2d (square loops) over P-Base (half-clover). At
Wade Avenue, support was relatively evenly divided for Alternatives W-Base (trumpet),
W1a (trumpet with West Street bridge), and W2 (diamond with West Street bridge), with
slightly less support for Alternative W2b (diamond).
Third Public Meeting
A third public meeting was held November 19, 2013, at the Duke Energy Center for the
Performing Arts (formerly the Progress Energy Center for the Performing Arts). The current
alternatives were displayed, including Alternatives P-Base and P5 at Peace Street, and
Alternatives W-Base and W2c at Wade Avenue.
Approximately 100 citizens attended the meeting, and 37 submitted comments. Of those
who expressed a preferred alternative, approximately 83% supported Alternative P5 (26 out
of 31 total) and 90% supported Alternative W2c (16 out of 20 total). Many citizens were in
favor of improved bicycle facilities, and several were concerned about the change in access
to businesses. Some of the impacted businesses opposed the alternatives that would relocate
them and others did not oppose the proposed relocation.
B.Local Officials Meetings
The first local officials meeting was held September 29, 2011, at the Progress Energy Center
for the Performing Arts, prior to the first public meeting. The history and purpose and need
of the project were presented. Topics discussed included potential environmental and design
considerations, as well as potential design alternatives.
A second local officials meeting was held October 22, 2012, at the Progress Energy Center
for the Performing Arts, prior to the second public meeting. Current alternative designs were
presented and discussed. Local officials did not state support for specific alternatives.
TIP Project B-5121/B-5317
December 2013 45 Environmental Assessment
The City of Raleigh will identify a preferred alternative after the public hearing. This
decision will be documented in the final environmental document.
C.Public Hearing
A Public Hearing will be held following the distribution of this Environmental Assessment.
D.Agency Coordination
A start of study letter was mailed to agencies on February 18, 2011, inviting comments on
Project B-5121/B-5317. Comments were received from the following agencies:
·U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
·Department of Environment and Natural Resources – Office of Conservation,
Planning & Community Affairs
·North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
·Department of Environment and Natural Resources – Division of Water Quality
·North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources – State Historic Preservation
Office

FIGURES
Wake County
!(
!(
Peace Street
Capital Boulevard
Wade Avenue
No
r
f
o
l
k

S
o
u
t
h
e
r
n

R
a
i
l
r
o
a
d
CS
X

R
a
i
l
r
o
a
d
Williamson Bra
n
c
h
£¤70
£¤401
£¤70
£¤401
®"50
®"50
Polk St
Mor
d
e
c
a
i

D
r
N
P
e
r
s
o
n

S
t
Ha
l
i
f
a
x

S
t
N
E
a
s
t

S
t
Cl
i
f
t
o
n

S
t
Wak
e

F
o
r
e
s
t

R
d
Wa
t
a
u
g
a

S
t
El
m

S
t
Sasser St
Holden St
Cou
r
t
l
a
n
d

D
r
De
l
w
a
y

S
t
Pace St
Oakwood Ave
N
B
l
o
o
d
w
o
r
t
h

S
t
N W
e
s
t

S
t
Wade Ave
W Peace St
Tucker St
H
o
l
t

D
r
Frank St
W Johnson St
Poplar

S
t
No
r
r
i
s

S
t
S
a
i
n
t

M
a
r
y
s

S
t
E Franklin St
Harv
e
y

S
t
Clay St
N Boundary StE Peace St
Ha
r
p

S
t
Harding St
S
c
a
l
e
s

S
t
Mu
l
b
e
r
r
y

S
t
Ga
s
t
o
n

S
t
Washington St
N
B
l
o
u
n
t

S
t
W Aycock St
N
S
a
l
i
s
b
u
r
y

S
t
U
S
-
4
0
1
Na
s
h

D
r
Lafayette Rd
Cole

S
t
W Lane St
C
a
s
w
e
l
l

S
t
M
a
r
s
h
a
l
l

S
t
Bickett Blvd
Virginia Ave
Fais
o
n

P
l
Har St
Pell St
Fair
v
i
e
w

R
d
N
H
a
r
r
i
n
g
t
o
n

S
t
N
W
i
l
m
i
n
g
t
o
n

S
t
S
y
c
a
m
o
r
e

S
t
C
h
e
r
o
k
e
e

D
r
Ha
y
n
e
s

S
t
W North St
Br
o
o
k
s
i
d
e

D
r
Gl
e
n
w
o
o
d

A
v
e
Semart Dr
Adams St
Wilmington Ter
Glascock St
Morr
i
s
o
n

A
v
e
Cedar
S
t
Peace Ter
Hinsdale St
Va
u
g
h
n

S
t
Sp
r
i
n
g

S
t
An
w
o
o
d

P
l
Mimosa S
t
Devereux St
Park Dr
Jefferson St
N Dawson St
I
r
e
d
e
l
l

D
r
Brooklyn S
t
Parkridge Ln
Westview

L
n
Parhams Aly
Wat
a
u
g
a

S
t
Ha
r
p

S
t
N Dawson St
Wilmington Ter
Jeff
e
r
s
o
n

S
t
Bick
e
t
t

B
l
v
d
W Peace St
Harvey St
N
W
e
s
t

S
t
Wata
u
g
a

S
t
El
m

S
t
Harvey St
Gl
e
n
w
o
o
d

A
v
e
Pigeon Ho
u
s
e

B
r
a
n
c
h
B-5317
B-5121
Legend
Study Area
Streams
Interstates NCDOT
US Highways
Streets
!(Proposed Bridges to be Replaced
Railroads
Wake County
Public Open Areas
0 1,000 2,000500Feet Ü
Project Area
Figure 1Vicinity Map
TIP Projects B-5121 & B-5317 Capital Boulevard Bridge ReplacementsCity of Raleigh, Wake County
NORTH CAROLINADEPARTMENTOFTRANSPORTATION
N W
e
s
t

S
t
Ca
p
i
t
a
l

B
l
v
d
W Peace St
£¤401
®"50
£¤70
No
r
f
o
l
k

S
o
u
t
h
e
r
n

R
a
i
l
r
o
a
d
CS
X

R
a
i
l
r
o
a
d
Ha
r
r
i
n
g
t
o
n

S
t
Johnson St
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX,Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, and the GIS User Community
0 200400100Feet
Ü
Figure 2aAlternative P-BaseNORTH CAROLINADEPARTMENTOFTRANSPORTATION TIP Projects B-5121 & B-5317 Capital Boulevard Bridge ReplacementsCity of Raleigh, Wake County
Legend
Proposed Right of Way
Proposed Roadway Bridge
Proposed Edge of Travel
Proposed Concrete Island
Proposed Sidewalk
N W
e
s
t

S
t
Ca
p
i
t
a
l
Blv
d
W Peace St
£¤401
£¤70
No
r
f
o
l
k

S
o
u
t
h
e
r
n

R
a
i
l
r
o
a
d
CS
X

R
a
i
l
r
o
a
d
Ha
r
r
i
n
g
t
o
n

S
t
Johnson St
®"50
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX,Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, and the GIS User Community
0 200400100Feet
Ü
Figure 2bAlternative P5
TIP Projects B-5121 & B-5317 Capital Boulevard Bridge ReplacementsCity of Raleigh, Wake County
NORTH CAROLINADEPARTMENTOFTRANSPORTATION
Legend
Proposed Right of Way
Proposed Roadway Bridge
Proposed Edge of Travel
Proposed Concrete Island
Proposed Sidewalk
Cap
i
t
a
l

B
l
v
d
£¤401
£¤70
No
r
f
o
l
k

S
o
u
t
h
e
r
n

R
a
i
l
r
o
a
d
CS
X

R
a
i
l
r
o
a
d
£¤401
£¤70
Wade
A
v
e
Fair
v
i
e
w

R
d
O
l
d

W
i
l
l
i
a
m
s
t
o
n

R
d
®"50
®"50
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX,Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, and the GIS User Community
0 200 400100Feet
Ü
Legend
Proposed Right of Way
Proposed Roadway Bridge
Proposed Edge of Travel
Proposed Concrete Island
Proposed Sidewalk
Figure 2cAlternative W-Base
TIP Projects B-5121 & B-5317 Capital Boulevard Bridge ReplacementsCity of Raleigh, Wake County
NORTH CAROLINADEPARTMENTOFTRANSPORTATION
Cap
i
t
a
l

B
l
v
d
£¤401
£¤70
No
r
f
o
l
k

S
o
u
t
h
e
r
n

R
a
i
l
r
o
a
d
CSX

R
a
i
l
r
o
a
d
£¤401
£¤70
Wad
e

A
v
e
Fair
v
i
e
w

R
d
O
l
d

W
i
l
l
i
a
m
s
t
o
n

R
d
®"50
®"50
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX,Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, and the GIS User Community
0 200 400100Feet
Ü
Legend
Proposed Right of Way
Proposed Roadway Bridge
Proposed Edge of Travel
Proposed Concrete Island
Proposed Sidewalk
Figure 2dAlternative W2c
TIP Projects B-5121 & B-5317 Capital Boulevard Bridge ReplacementsCity of Raleigh, Wake County
NORTH CAROLINADEPARTMENTOFTRANSPORTATION
Fi
g
u
r
e

3
a
Ex
i
s
t
i
n
g

(
2
0
1
1
)

A
v
e
r
a
g
e

D
a
i
l
y

T
r
a
f
f
i
c

V
o
l
u
m
e
s
Pe
a
c
e

S
t
r
e
e
t

I
n
t
e
r
c
h
a
n
g
e
NO
R
T
H

C
A
R
O
L
I
N
A
DE
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
OF
TR
A
N
S
P
O
R
T
A
T
I
O
N
TI
P

P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s

B
-
5
1
2
1

&

B
-
5
3
1
7
Ca
p
i
t
a
l

B
o
u
l
e
v
a
r
d

B
r
i
d
g
e

R
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
s
Ci
t
y

o
f

R
a
l
e
i
g
h
,

W
a
k
e

C
o
u
n
t
y
L
e
g
e
n
d
X
X

A
M

P
e
a
k

H
o
u
r
(X
X
)

P
M

P
e
a
k

H
o
u
r
Ü
Figure 3bExisting (2011) Average Daily Traffic VolumesWade Avenue InterchangeNORTH CAROLINADEPARTMENTOFTRANSPORTATION TIP Projects B-5121 & B-5317 Capital Boulevard Bridge ReplacementsCity of Raleigh, Wake County
Legend XX AM Peak Hour(XX) PM Peak Hour
Fi
g
u
r
e

3
c
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
e
d

(
2
0
3
5
)

A
v
e
r
a
g
e

D
a
i
l
y

T
r
a
f
f
i
c

V
o
l
u
m
e
s
Pe
a
c
e

S
t
r
e
e
t

I
n
t
e
r
c
h
a
n
g
e
NO
R
T
H

C
A
R
O
L
I
N
A
DE
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
OF
TR
A
N
S
P
O
R
T
A
T
I
O
N
TI
P

P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s

B
-
5
1
2
1

&

B
-
5
3
1
7
Ca
p
i
t
a
l

B
o
u
l
e
v
a
r
d

B
r
i
d
g
e

R
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
s
Ci
t
y

o
f

R
a
l
e
i
g
h
,

W
a
k
e

C
o
u
n
t
y
L
e
g
e
n
d
X
X

A
M

P
e
a
k

H
o
u
r
(X
X
)

P
M

P
e
a
k

H
o
u
r
Ü
Figure 3dProjected (2035) Average Daily Traffic VolumesWade Avenue InterchangeNORTH CAROLINADEPARTMENTOFTRANSPORTATION TIP Projects B-5121 & B-5317 Capital Boulevard Bridge ReplacementsCity of Raleigh, Wake County
Legend XX AM Peak Hour(XX) PM Peak Hour
Ü
Figure 4aTypical SectionsPeace Street InterchangeNORTH CAROLINADEPARTMENTOFTRANSPORTATION TIP Projects B-5121 & B-5317 Capital Boulevard Bridge ReplacementsCity of Raleigh, Wake County
Roadway Typical Section 1
Roadway Typical Section 2
Bridge Typical Section 1
Ü
Figure 4bTypical SectionsWade Avenue Int erchangeNORTH CAROLINADEPARTMENTOFTRANSPORTATION TIP Projects B-5121 & B-5317 Capital Boulevard Bridge ReplacementsCity of Raleigh, Wake County
Roadway Typical Section 1 - Capital Boulevard
Bridge Typical Section 1 - Alternative W2c
Bridge Typical Section 1 - Alternative W-Base
!(
!(
Pigeon H
o
u
s
e

B
r
a
n
c
h
W
A
N W
e
s
t

S
t
Ca
p
i
t
a
l

B
l
v
d
W Peace St
Ha
r
r
i
n
g
t
o
n

S
t
Wade

A
v
e
Fair
v
i
e
w

R
d
B-5317
B-5121
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX,Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, and the GIS User Community
0 1,000 2,000500Feet
Ü
Pigeon House Br
a
n
c
h
Willi
a
m
s
o
n

B
r
a
n
c
h
WA
WA WB
WB
Figure 5Environmental FeaturesNORTH CAROLINADEPARTMENTOFTRANSPORTATION
Legend
Environmental Study Area
Wetlands
Streams
!(Proposed Bridges to be Replaced
TIP Projects B-5121 & B-5317 Capital Boulevard Bridge ReplacementsCity of Raleigh, Wake County
#*
#*
#*
!(
!(
N W
e
s
t

S
t
Ca
p
i
t
a
l

B
l
v
d
W Peace St
Ha
r
r
i
n
g
t
o
n

S
t
Wade

A
v
e
Fair
v
i
e
w

R
d
Seaboard Air Line Turntable
Raleigh Cotton Mill
Nolan Plumbing Company Building
Raleigh & Gaston Railroad
B-5317
B-5121
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX,Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, and the GIS User Community
0 1,000 2,000500Feet
Figure 6Historic ResourcesNORTH CAROLINADEPARTMENTOFTRANSPORTATION
Legend
!(Proposed Bridges to be Replaced
Area of Potential Effects
#*Historic Resources
Historic Districts TIP Projects B-5121 & B-5317 Capital Boulevard Bridge ReplacementsCity of Raleigh, Wake County
Ü
a
a
a
a
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_!(
!(
N W
e
s
t

S
t
Ca
p
i
t
a
l

B
l
v
d
W Peace St
Ha
r
r
i
n
g
t
o
n

S
t
Wade

A
v
e
Fair
v
i
e
w

R
d
No
r
f
o
l
k

S
o
u
t
h
e
r
n

R
a
i
l
r
o
a
d
CSX Ra
i
l
r
o
a
d
Peace CollegePartnership Elementary
Capital Park
Halifax Community Park
Fred Fletcher Park
Poplar Park
Mordecai Mini Park
Underwood ElementaryCowper Drive Park
Tucker House
Roanoke Neighborhood Park
Broughton High School
Wells Park
Cameron Park
Wiley Elementary
B-5317
B-5121
Mordecai
Capital Park
Roanoke Park
Glenwood-Brooklyn
Finch's
Pilot Mills
Halifax C.C.
Government Mall
Seaboard Station
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX,Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, and the GIS User Community
0 1,000 2,000500Feet
Figure 7Community FeaturesNORTH CAROLINADEPARTMENTOFTRANSPORTATION
Legend
!(Proposed Bridges to be Replaced
^_Community Facility or Node
a Neighborhoods
Study Area
Floodway
100 Year Floodplain
500 Year Floodplain
Park
School
Public Open Space
TIP Projects B-5121 & B-5317 Capital Boulevard Bridge ReplacementsCity of Raleigh, Wake County
Ü

APPENDICES
Appendix A – Agency Comments
Appendix B – NCDOT Relocation Estimate
Appendix C – Bridge Inspection Reports
APPENDIX A
AGENCY COMMENTS

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M. Bartos, Administrator
Pat McCrory, Governor Office of Archives and History
Susan W. Kluttz, Secretary Division of Historical Resources
Kevin Cherry, Deputy Secretary David Brook, Director
Location: 109 East Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 Telephone/Fax: [phone]-6599

March 5, 2013

MEMORANDUM

TO: Matt Wilkerson
Office of Human Environment
NCDOT Division of Highways

FROM: Ramona M. Bartos

SUBJECT: Replace Bridge 227 on Capital Boulevard over Peace Street, B-5121, Wake County, ER 08-2607

Thank you for your letter of December 18, 2012, to Steve Claggett concerning the above project. We
apologize for the delay in our response.

We concur with your determination that archaeological site 31WA1448** is eligible for inclusion in the
National Register of Historic Places under criterion D. If the site is to be affected by the Preferred Alternative
for the project, additional investigations will be needed prior to project implementation. We look forward to
working with you and your staff on the development of a Memorandum of Agreement delineating the
appropriate mitigation measures for 31WA1448**. Please forward information concerning the Preferred
Alternative as soon as it is available.

The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation’s Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR
Part 800.

Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919-807-6579. In all future
communication concerning this project, please cite the above-referenced tracking number.

From:[e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, March 18, 2011 1:31 PM
To: Rhea, Vincent J
Cc:[e-mail]; Ridings, Rob
Subject: Start of Study for B-5121 and B-5317, Wake Co.
Vince: EPA has reviewed the Start of Study information for the referenced bridge
replacements projects located in the City of Raleigh at Peace Street and Wade Avenue along
Capital Boulevard. EPA notes that Pigeon House Branch is listed on the 2010 NCDWQ
303(d) list for impaired waters of the U.S. Please include the most stringent stormwater
control measures and other BMPs in the bridge replacement designs to minimize future
impacts from construction activities and stormwater to this degraded stream.
EPA did not identify any other environmental concerns for these bridge replacement
projects. Thank you.
Christopher A. Militscher, REM, CHMM
USEPA Region 4 Raleigh Office
919-856-4206
From: Wilson, Travis W. [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2011 8:37 AM
To: Rhea, Vincent J; Strong, Brian
Cc: Hairr, Ron; Moore, Jeff; Gresham, Teresa
Subject: RE: Scoping meeting for B-5121/B-5317
Vince, WRC does not have any specific concerns related to the replacement of these two structures.
Travis W. Wilson
Eastern Region Highway Project Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
NC Wildlife Resources Commission
1142 I-85 Service Rd.
Creedmoor, NC 27522
Phone: [phone] ext. 6
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
APPENDIX B
NCDOT RELOCATION ESTIMATE
REQUEST FOR R/W COST ESTIMATE
DATE RECEIVED:11/26/13 DISTRIBUTED:12/04/13 REVISION /
UPDATE :
UPDATE
I.D.NO./
BREAK DESCRIPTION SCHEDULE
B-5121 /
B-5317
Replacement of bridges on Capital Blvd (US 70 / US 401 / NC
50) At Peace St. and Wade Ave. (US 70 / NC 50)
R/W
CONST
FY
FY UNFUND POST YRS
ACCESS: FULL C/A PARTIAL C/A NO CONTROL
WBS ELEMENT NUMBER:42263.1.1 COUNTY:Wake
ENGINEER:Ahmad Al-Sharawneh DEPT.:PDEA DIV.:5 APPRAISAL OFFICE.:2
TYPE OF PLANS FURNISHED FOR ESTIMATE:Preliminary
DATE DUE:Before 12/26/13
PRIOR ESTIMATES OF LAND AND DAMAGES (WITH DATES):
B-5121 08/29/12 L. Strickland: Base - 21 Parcels; $9,710,370 L&D; $9,940,370 Total
P2D - 32 Parcels; $17,263,465 L&D; $17,723,465 Total
B-5317 09/14/12 L. Strickland; Base - 4 Parcels; $327,150 L&D; $347,150 Total
W1A - 25 Parcels; $11,777,100 L&D; $12,102,100 Total
W2 - 27 Parcels; $13,340,550 L&D; $13,725,550 Total
W2B - 15 Parcels; $10,206,825 L&D; $10,506,825 Total
BASED ON PAST PROJECT HISTORICAL DATA, THE LAND AND DAMAGE FIGURES HAVE BEEN ADJUSTED BY A
FACTOR OF 50% TO INCLUDE CONDEMNATION AND ADMINISTRATIVE INCREASES THAT OCCUR DURING
SETTLEMENT OF ALL PARCELS. THESE FIGURES PROJECT THE MOST ACCURATE ACQUISITION ESTIMATES FOR 2
(TWO) YEARS FROM THE DATE OF THIS ESTIMATE.
ESTIMATED BY: WBL TIME SPENT: 1 Day COMPLETED DATE: 12/27/2013 EXTENSION REQ.:
ALTERNATES
Peace St. Int.
Alt P - Base
Peace St. Int.
Alt P5
Wade Ave. Int.
Alt W- Base
Wade Ave. Int.
Alt W2C
ESTIMATED NO. OF PARCELS:21 32 4 13
RESIDENTIAL RELOCATIONS:0 0 0 0
BUSINESS RELOCATIONS:9/$225,000 12/$300,000 1/$25,000 9/$225,000
GRAVES 0 0 0 0
LAND AND DAMAGE:$10,515,370 $17,263,465 $327,150 $9,970,750
ACQUISTION:$105,000 $160,000 $20,000 $65,000
TOTAL ESTIMATED R/W
COST:$10,845,370 $17,723,465 $372,150 $10,260,750
** TOTALS/VALUES **
PLEASE PROVIDE ONLY BASE NUMBERS. ALL TOTALING CALCULATIONS WILL BE
COMPLETED BY THE ESTIMATE COORDINATOR, SARAH D. WHITE.
THERE ARE NO FIGURES FOR UTILITY INVOLVEMENT ON THIS ESTIMATE AND NO PUE’s.
NOTES: Land and Damages includes a 50% increase factored in to cost.
APPENDIX C
BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORTS

INSPECTION TYPE:
WAKECOUNTY BRIDGE NUMBER 910213 INSPECTION CYCLE YRS
ROUTE ACROSS M.P.US70 US401 0
LOCATION 0.3 MI.E. SR1793
SUPERSTRUCTURE
SUBSTRUCTURE
REINFORCED CONCRETE DECK GIRDERS
E.BTS&INT.BTS:2,3 & 5 RC CAP ON H-PILES;INT.BTS:RCP&B
SPANS 1@49';1@47'6;1@45'6;1@36';1@42';1@40'6
LONGITUDE LATITUDE
PRESENT CONDITION INVENTORY RATING
INSPECTION DATE OPERATING RATING
PRESENT POSTING PROPOSED POSTING
COMPUTER UPDATE ANALYSIS DATE
POSTING LETTER DATE SUFFICIENCY RATING
OTHER SIGNS PRESENT
SIGN NOTICE
ISSUED FOR
NUMBERED
REQUIRED
WEIGHT LIMIT
DELINEATORS
NARROW BRIDGE
ONE LANE BRIDGE
LOW CLEARANCE
78° 38' 50.0"34° 47' 42.0"
POOR
SV 23 TTST 27
11/07/2011
2 DELINEATORS
No
No
No
No
No
LOOKING EAST
Routine Inspection - Contract
0
BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
BRIDGE MANAGEMENT UNIT
ATTENTION PM ISSUED BT 4 LT END OF CAP
(1) STATE NAME -NORTH CAROLINA
(8) STRUCTURE NUMBER(FEDERAL)
(5) INVENTORY ROUTE (ON/UNDER) - ON
(2) STATE HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT DISTRICT
(4) PLACE CODE
(6) FEATURE INTERSECTED -
(11)MILEPOINT
(16)LAT
(98)BORDER BRIDGE STATE CODE
(99)BORDER BRIDGE STRUCTURE NO
(43) STRUCTURE TYPE MAIN:
(44) STRUCTURE TYPE APPR :
(45) NUMBER OF SPANS IN MAIN UNIT
(46) NUMBER OF APPROACH SPANS
(107)DECK STRUCTURE TYPE -
TYPE -
(108)WEARING SURFACE / PROTECTIVE SYSTEM :
(A) TYPE OF WEARING SURFACE -
(B) TYPE OF MEMBRANE -
(C) TYPE OF DECK PROTECTION -
(27) YEAR BUILT
(28) LANES: ON STRUCTURE UNDER STRUCTURE
(29) AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC
(30) YEAR OF ADT (109) TRUCK ADT PCT
(19) BYPASS OR DETOUR LENGTH
UNDER -
(42) TYPE OF SERVICE : ON -
(106)YEAR RECONSTRUCTED
(3) COUNTY CODE
(9) LOCATION
(17)LONG
(7) FACILITY CARRIED
(48) LENGTH OF MAXIMUM SPAN
(49) STRUCTURE LENGTH
(50)CURB OR SIDEWALK: LEFT
(51) BRIDGE ROADWAY WIDTH CURB TO CURB
(52) DECK WIDTH OUT TO OUT
(32) APPROACH ROADWAY WIDTH (W/SHOULDERS)
(33) BRIDGE MEDIAN -
(34) SKEW (35) STRUCTURE FLARED
(10) INVENTORY ROUTE MIN VERT CLEAR
(47) INVENTORY ROUTE TOTAL HORIZ CLEAR
(53) MIN VERT CLEAR OVER BRIDGE RDWY
(54) MIN VERT UNDERCLEAR REF
(55) MIN LAT UNDERCLEAR RT REF
(56) MIN LAT UNDERCLEAR LT REF -
(38) NAVIGATION CONTROL -
(111)PIER PROTECTION -
(39) NAVIGATION VERTICAL CLEARANCE
(116)VERT - LIFT BRIDGE NAV MIN VERT CLEAR
(40) NAVIGATION HORIZONTAL CLEARANCE
SUFFICIENCY RATING =
STATUS =
(112)NBIS BRIDGE SYSTEM -
(104)HIGHWAY SYSTEM
(26) FUNCTIONAL CLASS -
(100)STRAHNET HIGHWAY -
(101)PARALLEL STRUCTURE -
(102)DIRECTION OF TRAFFIC -
(103)TEMPORARY STRUCTURE -
(110)DESIGNATED NATIONAL NETWORK -
(20) TOLL
(31) MAINTAIN -
(22) OWNER -
(37) HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE -
(58) DECK
(59) SUPERSTRUCTURE
(60) SUBSTRUCTURE
(61) CHANNEL & CHANNEL PROTECTION
(62) CULVERTS
(31) DESIGN LOAD
(64) OPERATING RATING -
(66) INVENTORY RATING -
(70) BRIDGE POSTING -
(41) STRUCTURE OPEN, POSTED ,OR CLOSED
DESCRIPTION -
(67) STRUCTURAL EVALUATION
(68) DECK GEOMETRY
(69) UNDERCLEARANCES,VERTI & HORIZ
(71) WATERWAY ADEQUACY
(72) APPROACH ROADWAY ALIGNMENT
(36) TRAFFIC SAFETY FEATURES
(113)SCOUR CRITICAL BRIDGES
(75) TYPE OF WORK -
(76) LENGTH OF STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT
(94) BRIDGE IMPROVEMENT COST
(95) ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT COST
(96) TOTAL PROJECT COST
(97) YEAR OF IMPROVEMENT COST ESTIMATE
(114)FUTURE ADT (115) YEAR FUTURE ADT
(90) INSPECTION DATE
(92) CRITICAL FEATURE INSPECTION :(93) CFI DATE
A) FRACTURE CRIT DETAIL -
B) UNDERWATER INSP -
C) OTHER SPECIAL INSP
SCOUR
A)
B)
C)
BRIDGE
21000700
55000
US401
US70
0.3 MI.E. SR1793
0
78° 38' 50.0"34° 47' 42.0"
TYPE - CODE
CODE
CODE
IDENTIFICATION
STRUCTURE TYPE AND MATERIAL
AGE AND SERVICE
GEOMETRIC DATA
RIGHT
NAVIGATION DATA
CODE
CODE
CLASSIFICATION CODE
CODECONDITION
CODELOAD RATING AND POSTING
CODEAPPRAISAL
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
INSPECTIONS
Concrete
Tee Beam 104
000
6
1 CODE
CODE
CODE
CODE
1954
Highway - Pedestrian
Highway - Waterway 56
2 6
25000
2003 12%
2 MI
49 FT
261 FT
3 FT 3 FT
34.2 FT
42.3 FT
33 FT
2 FTNo Median
023°
999.9 FT
34.2 FT
999.9 FT
0 FT
CODE
Not a Highway or Railroad
000 FT
000 FT
0 FT
FT
0
No Navigational Control 0
Not a Highway or Railroad
34.1
Structurally Deficient
YES
0Is not on NHS
14Other Principal Arterial
0Not a STRAHNET Route
No Parallel Structure N
2-way Traffic 2
Not on the National Network 0
On Free Road 3
State Highway Agency 01
State Highway Agency 01
Not Eligible 5
5
4
4
7
N
H 15 2
HS-17 130
HS-10 118
Posting Required 2
P
Posted for Load
4
4
2
8
6
0111
8
CODE
50000 2025
11/07/2011
NO
NO
NO
PCT SHARE
910213
1
000000001830213
183
(63) OPERATING RATING METHOD -Load Factor
(65) INVENTORY RATING METHOD -Load Factor
NATIONAL BRIDGE INVENTORY-------- STRUCTURE INVENTORY AND APPRAISAL Run Date: 12/20/2011
11034.10 14.80 2H 120035500030142100401014.90US 401 NBL4 9
11017.80 15.80 1H 120032750010142100401015.90US 401 RAMP NBL5 9
11034.80 14.80 2H 220035500020142100401014.90US 401 SBL3 9
Sp
a
n

N
u
m
b
e
r
Fe
a
t
u
r
e

I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
e
d
In
v
e
n
t
o
r
y

R
o
u
t
e
6 5 10 11
Mi
n
i
m
u
m

M
a
x
i
m
u
m

V
e
r
t
i
c
a
l

Cl
e
a
r
a
n
c
e
Mi
l
e
p
o
i
n
t
LR
S

I
n
v
e
n
t
o
r
y

R
o
u
t
e
12 13
Ba
s
e

H
i
g
h
w
a
y

N
e
t
w
o
r
k
To
l
l
20 26
Fu
n
c
t
i
o
n
a
l

C
l
a
s
s
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
28
B
Nu
m
e
r

o
f

L
a
n
e
s
29
Av
e
r
a
g
e

D
a
i
l
y

T
r
a
f
f
i
c
30
Ye
a
r

o
f

A
v
e
r
a
g
e

D
a
i
l
y

T
r
a
f
f
i
c
56
Mi
n
i
m
u
m

V
e
r
t
i
c
a
l

Un
d
e
r
c
l
e
a
r
a
n
c
e
47
To
t
a
l

H
o
r
i
z
o
n
t
a
l

C
l
e
a
r
a
n
c
e
54A
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e

F
e
a
t
u
r
e
Ri
g
h
t

L
a
t
e
r
a
l

Un
d
e
r
c
l
e
a
r
a
n
c
e
54
Un
d
e
r
c
l
e
a
r
a
n
c
e

Ap
p
r
a
i
s
a
l

G
r
a
d
e
6955
Le
f
t

L
a
t
e
r
a
l

Un
d
e
r
c
l
e
a
r
a
n
c
e
ST
R
A
H
N
E
T

H
i
g
h
w
a
y

De
s
i
g
n
a
t
o
r
100 102
Di
r
e
c
t
i
o
n

o
f

T
r
a
f
f
i
c
Hi
g
h
w
a
y

S
y
s
t
e
m

o
f

R
o
u
t
e
104
See Note 1
Structure No:County:Run Date:910213 WAKE
Note 1: Items 54, 55, and 56 are not reported FHWA under route data points but are collected for each under route to determine the minimum value for Underclearance Appraisal Item 69. The
under route that generates the lowest Underclearance Appraisal value will be reported on the Facility Carried record.
COUNTY : DIVISION :DISTRICT:STRUCTURE NUMBER :LENGTH :
ROUTE CARRIED :FEATURE INTERSECTED :
LOCATED :BRIDGE NAME :
FUNC. CLASS :SYST.ON :SYST.UNDER :ADT & YR :RAIL TYPE :
BUILT :BY :PROJ :FED.AID PROJ :DESIGN LOAD :
REHAB :BY :PROJ :ALIGNMENT :SKEW :LANES :
NAVIGATION :HT. CRN. TO BED : WATER DEPTH :
SUPERSTRUCTURE :
1954 SHC 4863 B-5317 H 15
RT.67 2
14 FA NFA 25000 201
0.3 MI.E. SR1793
US70 US401
261
0 30 10FTVCHCFT FT
REINFORCED CONCRETE DECK GIRDERS
6ONUNDER
201LTRT2003
FEET
FT
CITY :
RALEIGH
SUBSTRUCTURE :
SPANS :
BEAMS OR GIRDERS :
FLOOR :ENCROACHMENT :DECK (OUT TO OUT) :
CLEAR ROADWAY :BETWEEN RAILS :SIDEWALK OR CURB :
VERT.CL.OVER :
INV.RTG. :OPE.RTG. :CONTR.MEMBER :POSTED :
SYSTEM :GREEN LINE ROUTE :
E.BTS&INT.BTS:2,3 & 5 RC CAP ON H-PILES;INT.BTS:RCP&B
1@49';1@47'6;1@45'6;1@36';1@42';1@40'6
6 LNS.1'6X2'4.5 REINF.CONC.DECK GIRDERS @ 7'6CENTERS
42.3 FT
34.2 FT 40.3 FT 3 FT
999.9 FT
HS-10 HS-17 RCDG 23
Primary U.S. Route N
LT RT 3 FT
SV TTST 27 DATE 07/09/2008
UNDER ROUTES AND CLEARANCES
WAKE 5 1 910213
Span Route Description
Vertical Clearances
MMVC MVC
Horizontal Clearances
Total Left Right
4 US 401 NBL 14.90 14.80 34.10 1 2
5 US 401 RAMP NBL 15.90 15.80 17.80 1 1
3 US 401 SBL 14.90 14.80 34.80 2 2
Note: All measurements are in feet.
BRIDGE MANAGEMENT UNIT
DATA ON EXISTING STRUCTURE Run Date: 12/20/2011
REMARKS :
3. RAILING
Routine Inspection - ContractINSPECTION TYPE
BRIDGE NO.
STRUCTURE TYPE
ROUTE ORIENTATION
COUNTY ROUTE
SPANS
OVERWAKEUS70 US401910213
REINFORCED CONCRETE DECK GIRDERS
W - E 1@49';1@47'6;1@45'6;1@36';1@42';1@40'6
EVALUATION CODES: CRITICAL (C, 0 - 3); POOR (P, 4); FAIR (F, 5, 6); GOOD (G, 7 - 9)
INSPECTION ITEM
DECK ITEMS GRADES
1. WEARING SURFACE
2. DECK NO.
OF EA TYPE
SPN GRADE
RATES SI & A
ITEM 58
a. CONCRETE
b. TIMBER
c. STEEL PLANK
d. OPEN GRID
a. CONCRETE
b. TIMBER
c. ALUMINUM
d. STEEL
4. CURBS, WHEELGUARDS, PARAPETS, MEDIANS
5. WALKWAYS (ON OR ATTACHED TO STRUCTURE)
6. DECK EXP
JTS. OR
DEVICES.
NO. OF EACH
b. MISC PREFAB
a. STEEL PL OR FINGER
c. COMPRESSION SEAL
d. STANDARD JOINTS
e. OPEN JOINTS
7. DECK DEBRIS (INCLUDES EXCESS SAND/GRAVEL)
SUPER STR. (FM. 1 (90)B TRUSS) ITEM 59
10. LONGITUDINAL BEAMS OR GIRDERS
11. LONGITUDINAL JOIST OR STRINGERS
12. INT. DIAP'S, X-FRAMES, BRACING & CONN'S
13. END DIAP'S, CURTAIN WALLS, & CONN'S
14. FLOOR BEAMS AND CONNECTIONS
15. BEARING ASSEMBLIES (INCLUDING MISALIGN)
16. DRAINAGE SYSTEM (ON STRUCTURE)
17. MOVABLE SPAN MACHINERY
SUB STR. ITEMS. ITEM 60 (INCLUDE SCOUR)
35. TIM SUB
STR.
36. CONC
SUB STR.
37. STEEL
SUB STR.
38. FOUNDATION PILES TYPE MATERIAL
39. SLOPE PROT., RIP-RAP (INCLUDE DRAINAGE)
40. FENDER SYSTEMS
41. DRIFT
a. ABUT. & INT. BENT CAPS & RISERS
b. PILES, POST, SILLS, & BRACING
c. BULKHEADS, WING'S, & TIE BACKS
a. ABUT. & INT. BENT CAPS
b. ABUT. & BENT COL'S BREASTWALLS
c. ABUT. & INT. BENT PILES
d. BACKWALLS, WING'S, RETAIN. WALLS
e. ABUT. & BENT FOOTINGS & SILLS
a. ABUT. & INT. BENT CAPS & RISERS
b. PILES, BRACING, AND BULKHEADS
ITEM 61
45. CHANNEL
& CHANNEL
PROT.
a. WATERWAY
b. ALIGNMENT
c. SCOUR
d. SLOPE PROT., RIP-RAP, DIKES, ETC.
50. APPROACH ROADWAY CONDITION
51. APPROACH SLABS
52. PAINT SYSTEM
53. UTILITIES
54. RESPONSE TO LIVE LOAD
55. ESTIMATED REMAINING LIFE
60. REGULATORY SIGN NOTICE ISSUED
61. PROMPT-ACTION NOTICE ISSUED
62. PRESENTLY POSTED
63. TOT. FIELD INSP TIME (INCLUDE WRITE UP)(MAN HR)
64. TOTAL SNOOPER INSP. TIME (HRS)
65. TOTAL TRAFFIC CONTROL TIME (MAN HRS)
70. SI&A GENERAL CONDITION RATINGS
ITEM 58
b. SUPERSTRUCTURE
c. SUBSTRUCTURE
d. CHANNEL & CHANNEL PROT.
a. DECK
ITEM 59
ITEM 60
ITEM 61
71. SI&A FIELD APPRAISAL RATINGS
a. WATERWAY ADAQUACY
b. APPR. RDWY. ALIGNMENT
72. FIELD SCOUR EVALUATION
USE OF INSP. ACCESSIBILITY EQUIPMENT
SNOOPER (CODE S, 4, OR N)
LADDER
BUCKET TRUCK
BOAT
OTHER
SPECIAL INSPECTION REQUESTED FOR
NOTE
80. INSPECTED BY:
81. REVIEWED BY:
CODE
F
F6
F
F
F
5 F
G
P
F
P
P
F
P
P
F
F
G
G
G
G
G
G
3
NO
YES
YES
6
5
4
4
7
7
7
G
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
HRS
BRIDGE INSPECTION RECORD AND SUMMARY
BRIDGE I & A FORM1 (90)A

No
No
No
No
FAIR
INSPECTION TYPE:
WAKECOUNTY BRIDGE NUMBER 910227 INSPECTION CYCLE YRS
ROUTE ACROSS M.P.US70 PEACE ST.0
LOCATION 0.2 MI N SR 1513
SUPERSTRUCTURE
SUBSTRUCTURE
RC DECK ON CONT I-BEAMS
EBTS:RC CAP/H-PILES @8'6;IBTS:RCP&B/PILE FTGS.
SPANS 1@42'6;1@52';1@42'6 CONT.
LONGITUDE LATITUDE
PRESENT CONDITION
US-70
INSPECTION DATE
PRESENT POSTING PROPOSED POSTING
OTHER SIGNS PRESENT
SIGN NOTICE
ISSUED FOR
NUMBERED
REQUIRED
WEIGHT LIMIT
DELINEATORS
NARROW BRIDGE
ONE LANE BRIDGE
LOW CLEARANCE
0.2 OF A MILE NORTH OF SR-1513
1 @ 42'6 ; 1 @ 52' ; 1 @ 42'6 CONT.
78° 38' 34.51"35° 47' 18.15"
N
10/23/2013
No
No
No
No
No
LOOKING NORTH
NOT POSTED
Routine Inspection
2
Fracture Critical
Temporary Shoring
Scour Critical
Scour POA
BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
BRIDGE MANAGEMENT UNIT
ATTENTION
(1) STATE NAME -NORTH CAROLINA
(8) STRUCTURE NUMBER(FEDERAL)
(5) INVENTORY ROUTE (ON/UNDER) - ON
(2) STATE HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT DISTRICT
(4) PLACE CODE
(6) FEATURE INTERSECTED -
(11)MILEPOINT
(16)LAT
(98)BORDER BRIDGE STATE CODE
(99)BORDER BRIDGE STRUCTURE NO
(43) STRUCTURE TYPE MAIN:
(44) STRUCTURE TYPE APPR :
(45) NUMBER OF SPANS IN MAIN UNIT
(46) NUMBER OF APPROACH SPANS
(107)DECK STRUCTURE TYPE -
TYPE -
(108)WEARING SURFACE / PROTECTIVE SYSTEM :
(A) TYPE OF WEARING SURFACE -
(B) TYPE OF MEMBRANE -
(C) TYPE OF DECK PROTECTION -
(27) YEAR BUILT
(28) LANES: ON STRUCTURE UNDER STRUCTURE
(29) AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC
(30) YEAR OF ADT (109) TRUCK ADT PCT
(19) BYPASS OR DETOUR LENGTH
UNDER -
(42) TYPE OF SERVICE : ON -
(106)YEAR RECONSTRUCTED
(3) COUNTY CODE
(9) LOCATION
(17)LONG
(7) FACILITY CARRIED
(48) LENGTH OF MAXIMUM SPAN
(49) STRUCTURE LENGTH
(50)CURB OR SIDEWALK: LEFT
(51) BRIDGE ROADWAY WIDTH CURB TO CURB
(52) DECK WIDTH OUT TO OUT
(32) APPROACH ROADWAY WIDTH (W/SHOULDERS)
(33) BRIDGE MEDIAN -
(34) SKEW (35) STRUCTURE FLARED
(10) INVENTORY ROUTE MIN VERT CLEAR
(47) INVENTORY ROUTE TOTAL HORIZ CLEAR
(53) MIN VERT CLEAR OVER BRIDGE RDWY
(54) MIN VERT UNDERCLEAR REF
(55) MIN LAT UNDERCLEAR RT REF
(56) MIN LAT UNDERCLEAR LT REF -
(38) NAVIGATION CONTROL -
(111)PIER PROTECTION -
(39) NAVIGATION VERTICAL CLEARANCE
(116)VERT - LIFT BRIDGE NAV MIN VERT CLEAR
(40) NAVIGATION HORIZONTAL CLEARANCE
SUFFICIENCY RATING =
STATUS =
(112)NBIS BRIDGE SYSTEM -
(104)HIGHWAY SYSTEM
(26) FUNCTIONAL CLASS -
(100)STRAHNET HIGHWAY -
(101)PARALLEL STRUCTURE -
(102)DIRECTION OF TRAFFIC -
(103)TEMPORARY STRUCTURE -
(110)DESIGNATED NATIONAL NETWORK -
(20) TOLL
(31) MAINTAIN -
(22) OWNER -
(37) HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE -
(58) DECK
(59) SUPERSTRUCTURE
(60) SUBSTRUCTURE
(61) CHANNEL & CHANNEL PROTECTION
(62) CULVERTS
(31) DESIGN LOAD
(64) OPERATING RATING -
(66) INVENTORY RATING -
(70) BRIDGE POSTING -
(41) STRUCTURE OPEN, POSTED ,OR CLOSED
DESCRIPTION -
(67) STRUCTURAL EVALUATION
(68) DECK GEOMETRY
(69) UNDERCLEARANCES,VERTI & HORIZ
(71) WATERWAY ADEQUACY
(72) APPROACH ROADWAY ALIGNMENT
(36) TRAFFIC SAFETY FEATURES
(113)SCOUR CRITICAL BRIDGES
(75) TYPE OF WORK -
(76) LENGTH OF STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT
(94) BRIDGE IMPROVEMENT COST
(95) ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT COST
(96) TOTAL PROJECT COST
(97) YEAR OF IMPROVEMENT COST ESTIMATE
(114)FUTURE ADT (115) YEAR FUTURE ADT
(90) INSPECTION DATE
(92) CRITICAL FEATURE INSPECTION :(93) CFI DATE
A) FRACTURE CRIT DETAIL -
B) UNDERWATER INSP -
C) OTHER SPECIAL INSP
SCOUR
A)
B)
C)
BRIDGE
21000700
55000
PEACE ST.
US70
0.2 MI N SR 1513
0
78° 38' 34.51"35° 47' 18.15"
TYPE - CODE
CODE
CODE
IDENTIFICATION
STRUCTURE TYPE AND MATERIAL
AGE AND SERVICE
GEOMETRIC DATA
RIGHT
NAVIGATION DATA
CODE
CODE
CLASSIFICATION CODE
CODECONDITION
CODELOAD RATING AND POSTING
CODEAPPRAISAL
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
INSPECTIONS
Steel Continuous
Stringer Mutlibeam or Girder 402
000
3
1 CODE
CODE
CODE
CODE
1948
Highway - Pedestrian
Highway 51
6 4
42000
2011 12%
3 MI
51 FT
137 FT
5 FT 5 FT
68.25 FT
81.25 FT
66 FT
2No Median
012°
999.9 FT
33.125 FT
999.9 FT
14.2 FT
CODE
Highway
2.5 FT
0 FT
0 FT
FT
0
Not Applicable N
Highway
43.92
Structurally Deficient
YES
0Is not on NHS
12Artierial - Other
0Not a STRAHNET Route
No Parallel Structure N
2-way Traffic 2
On the National Network 1
On Free Road 3
State Highway Agency 01
State Highway Agency 01
Not Eligible 5
4
5
5
N
N
H 15 2
HS-28 50
HS-17 30
No Posting Required 5
A
Open, No Restriction
5
2
3
N
8
0000
N
CODE
84000 2025
10/23/2013
NO
NO
NO
PCT SHARE
910227
1
000000001830227
183
(63) OPERATING RATING METHOD -Load Factor 1
(65) INVENTORY RATING METHOD -Load Factor 1
NATIONAL BRIDGE INVENTORY-------- STRUCTURE INVENTORY AND APPRAISAL Run Date: 11/14/2013
02042.7 14.2 2.5H2011180004019500000014.3PEACE ST 2 9
Sp
a
n

N
u
m
b
e
r
Fe
a
t
u
r
e

I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
e
d
In
v
e
n
t
o
r
y

R
o
u
t
e
6 5 10 11
Mi
n
i
m
u
m

M
a
x
i
m
u
m

V
e
r
t
i
c
a
l

Cl
e
a
r
a
n
c
e
Mi
l
e
p
o
i
n
t
LR
S

I
n
v
e
n
t
o
r
y

R
o
u
t
e
12 13
Ba
s
e

H
i
g
h
w
a
y

N
e
t
w
o
r
k
To
l
l
20 26
Fu
n
c
t
i
o
n
a
l

C
l
a
s
s
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
28
B
Nu
m
e
r

o
f

L
a
n
e
s
29
Av
e
r
a
g
e

D
a
i
l
y

T
r
a
f
f
i
c
30
Ye
a
r

o
f

A
v
e
r
a
g
e

D
a
i
l
y

T
r
a
f
f
i
c
56
Mi
n
i
m
u
m

V
e
r
t
i
c
a
l

Un
d
e
r
c
l
e
a
r
a
n
c
e
47
To
t
a
l

H
o
r
i
z
o
n
t
a
l

C
l
e
a
r
a
n
c
e
54A
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e

F
e
a
t
u
r
e
Ri
g
h
t

L
a
t
e
r
a
l

Un
d
e
r
c
l
e
a
r
a
n
c
e
54
Un
d
e
r
c
l
e
a
r
a
n
c
e

Ap
p
r
a
i
s
a
l

G
r
a
d
e
6955
Le
f
t

L
a
t
e
r
a
l

Un
d
e
r
c
l
e
a
r
a
n
c
e
ST
R
A
H
N
E
T

H
i
g
h
w
a
y

De
s
i
g
n
a
t
o
r
100 102
Di
r
e
c
t
i
o
n

o
f

T
r
a
f
f
i
c
Hi
g
h
w
a
y

S
y
s
t
e
m

o
f

R
o
u
t
e
104
See Note 1
Structure No:County:Run Date:910227 WAKE
Note 1: Items 54, 55, and 56 are not reported FHWA under route data points but are collected for each under route to determine the minimum value for Underclearance Appraisal Item 69. The
under route that generates the lowest Underclearance Appraisal value will be reported on the Facility Carried record.
COUNTY : DIVISION :DISTRICT:STRUCTURE NUMBER :LENGTH :
ROUTE CARRIED :FEATURE INTERSECTED :
LOCATED :BRIDGE NAME :
FUNC. CLASS :SYST.ON :SYST.UNDER :ADT & YR :RAIL TYPE :
BUILT :BY :PROJ :FED.AID PROJ :DESIGN LOAD :
REHAB :BY :PROJ :ALIGNMENT :SKEW :LANES :
NAVIGATION :HT. CRN. TO BED : WATER DEPTH :
SUPERSTRUCTURE :
1948 DOH 4858 U-694(1 H 15
TAN.102 6
12 FA NFA 42000 311
0.2 MI N SR 1513
US70 PEACE ST.
137
0 0 00FTVCHCFT FT
RC DECK ON CONT I-BEAMS
4ONUNDER
311LTRT2011
FEET
FT
CITY :
RALEIGH
SUBSTRUCTURE :
SPANS :
BEAMS OR GIRDERS :
FLOOR :ENCROACHMENT :DECK (OUT TO OUT) :
CLEAR ROADWAY :BETWEEN RAILS :SIDEWALK OR CURB :
VERT.CL.OVER :
INV.RTG. :OPE.RTG. :CONTR.MEMBER :POSTED :
SYSTEM :GREEN LINE ROUTE :
EBTS:RC CAP/H-PILES @8'6;IBTS:RCP&B/PILE FTGS.
1@42'6;1@52';1@42'6 CONT.
10 LINES VAR.CONT I-BEAMS @ 8'3 CTS.
7 RC/5 AWS 81.25 FT
68.25 FT 78.25 FT 5 FT
999.9 FT
HS-17 HS-28 Cont I-Bms
Int
Primary U.S. Route N
LT RT 5 FT
SV TTST DATE 04/23/2009
UNDER ROUTES AND CLEARANCES
WAKE 5 1 910227
Span Route Description
Vertical Clearances
MMVC MVC
Horizontal Clearances
Total Left Right
2 PEACE ST 14.30 14.20 42.70 0 2.50
Note: All measurements are in feet.
BRIDGE MANAGEMENT UNIT
DATA ON EXISTING STRUCTURE Run Date: 11/14/2013
REMARKS :
3. RAILING
Routine InspectionINSPECTION TYPE
BRIDGE NO.
STRUCTURE TYPE
ROUTE ORIENTATION
COUNTY ROUTE
SPANS
OVERWAKEUS70 PEACE ST.910227
RC DECK ON CONT I-BEAMS
S - N 1@42'6;1@52';1@42'6 CONT.
EVALUATION CODES: CRITICAL (C, 0 - 3); POOR (P, 4); FAIR (F, 5, 6); GOOD (G, 7 - 9)
INSPECTION ITEM
DECK ITEMS GRADES
1. WEARING SURFACE
2. DECK NO.
OF EA TYPE
SPN GRADE
RATES SI & A
ITEM 58
a. CONCRETE
b. TIMBER
c. STEEL PLANK
d. OPEN GRID
a. CONCRETE
b. TIMBER
c. ALUMINUM
d. STEEL
4. CURBS, WHEELGUARDS, PARAPETS, MEDIANS
5. WALKWAYS (ON OR ATTACHED TO STRUCTURE)
6. DECK EXP
JTS. OR
DEVICES.
NO. OF EACH
b. MISC PREFAB
a. STEEL PL OR FINGER
c. COMPRESSION SEAL
d. STANDARD JOINTS
e. OPEN JOINTS
7. DECK DEBRIS (INCLUDES EXCESS SAND/GRAVEL)
SUPER STR. (FM. 1 (90)B TRUSS) ITEM 59
10. LONGITUDINAL BEAMS OR GIRDERS
11. LONGITUDINAL JOIST OR STRINGERS
12. INT. DIAP'S, X-FRAMES, BRACING & CONN'S
13. END DIAP'S, CURTAIN WALLS, & CONN'S
14. FLOOR BEAMS AND CONNECTIONS
15. BEARING ASSEMBLIES (INCLUDING MISALIGN)
16. DRAINAGE SYSTEM (ON STRUCTURE)
17. MOVABLE SPAN MACHINERY
SUB STR. ITEMS. ITEM 60 (INCLUDE SCOUR)
35. TIM SUB
STR.
36. CONC
SUB STR.
37. STEEL
SUB STR.
38. FOUNDATION PILES TYPE MATERIAL
39. SLOPE PROT., RIP-RAP (INCLUDE DRAINAGE)
40. FENDER SYSTEMS
41. DRIFT
a. ABUT. & INT. BENT CAPS & RISERS
b. PILES, POST, SILLS, & BRACING
c. BULKHEADS, WING'S, & TIE BACKS
a. ABUT. & INT. BENT CAPS
b. ABUT. & BENT COL'S BREASTWALLS
c. ABUT. & INT. BENT PILES
d. BACKWALLS, WING'S, RETAIN. WALLS
e. ABUT. & BENT FOOTINGS & SILLS
a. ABUT. & INT. BENT CAPS & RISERS
b. PILES, BRACING, AND BULKHEADS
ITEM 61
45. CHANNEL
& CHANNEL
PROT.
a. WATERWAY
b. ALIGNMENT
c. SCOUR
d. SLOPE PROT., RIP-RAP, DIKES, ETC.
50. APPROACH ROADWAY CONDITION
51. APPROACH SLABS
52. PAINT SYSTEM
53. UTILITIES
54. RESPONSE TO LIVE LOAD
55. ESTIMATED REMAINING LIFE
60. REGULATORY SIGN NOTICE ISSUED
61. PROMPT-ACTION NOTICE ISSUED
62. PRESENTLY POSTED
63. TOT. FIELD INSP TIME (INCLUDE WRITE UP)(MAN HR)
64. TOTAL SNOOPER INSP. TIME (HRS)
65. TOTAL TRAFFIC CONTROL TIME (MAN HRS)
70. SI&A GENERAL CONDITION RATINGS
ITEM 58
b. SUPERSTRUCTURE
c. SUBSTRUCTURE
d. CHANNEL & CHANNEL PROT.
a. DECK
ITEM 59
ITEM 60
ITEM 61
71. SI&A FIELD APPRAISAL RATINGS
a. WATERWAY ADAQUACY
b. APPR. RDWY. ALIGNMENT
72. FIELD SCOUR EVALUATION
USE OF INSP. ACCESSIBILITY EQUIPMENT
SNOOPER (CODE S, 4, OR N)
LADDER
BUCKET TRUCK
BOAT
OTHER
SPECIAL INSPECTION REQUESTED FOR
NOTE
80. INSPECTED BY:
81. REVIEWED BY:
CODE
F
P3
F
F
F
2 F
F
P
F
F
F
F
F
P
G
F
F
G
4
V
NO
YES
NO
6
0
0
4
5
5
8
N
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
HRS
BRIDGE INSPECTION RECORD AND SUMMARY
BRIDGE I & A FORM1 (90)A