20161268_Wetland Stream and Other Surface Waters Impacts_20130326

Wetlands, Stream and Other Surface Waters Impacts
Impacts calculated based on slope stakes + 25 feet. Numbers in red show change after avoidance and minimization.
Comparison of Northern Interchange Options 6R and 6TR
Option 611
U -4751 (M1)
R -3300 (E -H)
U -4751 & R -3300
No. of Lanes Needed in Front of
3
(M1 +E -H)
Delineated Wetland Impacts (acres)
99.83 ( -2.9)
148.32 ( +4.35)
248.15 ( +1.45)
Delineated Stream Impacts (linear feet)
11,558 ( -677)
10,821 ( +750)
22,379 ( +73)
Delineated Surface Water Impacts
intersection
41,000 / 39,200
AADT North /South of Topsail
Stormwater ponds with a connection to
1.16
2.45 ( +0.45)
3.61 ( +0.45)
tributary waters (acres)
Level of Service at: Northern
C — D — D
Stormwater ponds with no connection to
.02
1.4(+0.79)
1.42 ( +0.79)
tributary waters (acres)
interchanges
circulation
Tributary waters determined to be
Reduced design more
appropriate for a major
jurisdictional based on the presence of an
13,722/0.32
53/0
4,972..11
18,694/0.43
Ordinary High Water Mark OH
1 911 -0.04
Likelihood a Traffic Event at Schools
(-1,911/-0.04)
(square feet /acres)
Would Result in Backup onto Bypass
j
Impacts calculated based on slope stakes + 25 feet. Numbers in red show change after avoidance and minimization.
Comparison of Northern Interchange Options 6R and 6TR
Option 611
Option 6TR
No. of Lanes Needed in Front of
3
School to Resolve Queuing Back -up
2
onto Hampstead Bypass
Higher speeds from
i Southbound Approach to Topsail
Lower speeds from stop at T
freeway free flow ramp
Schools Complex
intersection
41,000 / 39,200
AADT North /South of Topsail
19,800 / 19,800
---------------------------------------
Schools Complex Intersection (vpd)
D — E — F
Level of Service at: Northern
C — D — D
Interchange — Schools — Jenkins Rd.
>5 miles between
Local Access
Better local traffic
interchanges
circulation
Reduced design less
Reduced design more
appropriate for a major
Design
appropriate for local access
interchange
interchange
More Likely
Likelihood a Traffic Event at Schools
----------------------------------------------------
Less Likely
Would Result in Backup onto Bypass
j

Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Comparison in the Vicinity of Topsail Schools Complex
Jenkins Road Topsail Schools
Interchange
Existing US 17

7d
O
O
O
is
o
0 rn
S CO
M p
X J
a
L - 300 (443)
T- 1,142(2,151)
R - 394 (309)
T- 2,150(1,142)
T - (2,348)
91 (1
R - 91 (197)
17
�= T - 2,348 (1,360)
(118)
rn
O �
J �
o
iA
Hampstead Bypass F 3,313 (2,503)
2,503 (3,313) --0--
'd
G�
N
ti
� I
o
rn
� O M
W
R- 1,158 (639)
E� T - 1,428 (713)
` L - 410 (425)
b
cii O
O U
0 CO
W N
Inset
Z
n � R - 139 (55)
T - 2,755 (1,592)
��`J/hv L- 180(246)
L - 590 (651) ==�>
� O
r o
T- 713(1,428)
N
R - 175 (363)
L.
I---I
R- 69(162)
o
F
L - 213 (226)
U
17
_
N O
N
T - 2,683 (4,392)
O
U
N
b
cii O
O U
0 CO
W N
Inset
Z
n � R - 139 (55)
T - 2,755 (1,592)
��`J/hv L- 180(246)
T - 391 (232)
B L -6(6)
V M
I �
v
� I JCC
Leeward Ln.
XwS
a,
Q
4--�
N
LEGEND
Traffic Volumes Lane Use
00 AM Peak Hour (vph) Existing
(00) PM Peak Hour (vph) Roadway improvements proposed as
part of R -3300
Traffic Control Devices Roadway improvements required
O Traffic Signal for Potential Future Development
O Stop Sign Level of Service
A -C
D
E
F
F
L - 116 (79)
T - 2,695 (4,571)
T - 1,592 (2,755) c�>
R - 86 (201)
R- 69(162)
o
F
L - 213 (226)
17
_
N O
N
T - 2,683 (4,392)
V v
N
N M
J N
N
� F
J �
f-4
J K
O
T - 391 (232)
B L -6(6)
V M
I �
v
� I JCC
Leeward Ln.
XwS
a,
Q
4--�
N
LEGEND
Traffic Volumes Lane Use
00 AM Peak Hour (vph) Existing
(00) PM Peak Hour (vph) Roadway improvements proposed as
part of R -3300
Traffic Control Devices Roadway improvements required
O Traffic Signal for Potential Future Development
O Stop Sign Level of Service
A -C
D
E
F
F
T - 4,577 (2,692)
T - 4,403 (2,674)
19 L - 117 (149)
L - 213 (226)
17
T - 2,683 (4,392)
R - 167 (292)
M
N
N
N N
J �
f-4
J K
O
O
O

o y
0
M M
M O
V �
TS
Lei
s.
0
O
v
L - 300 (443)
T- 1,142(2,151) c�
3,139 (2,638)
2,638 (3,076)
Inset
17 Hampstead Bypass
BUSINESS ,-�
17 �
O
O
"O U
CIO'
CA
CA
O0
v R.7
T - 1,360 (2,348) c�
R - 91 (197) rho �� L - 131 (103) _
L -451 (864) _ T- 789(1,371)
Q T -8(24) R- 13(16)
CO
M
J �
o �
w o
rn
R - 150 (449)
s..
Q
L
c
c
C
&,t
voio.,I-
a
ct
Cn
G
LEGEND
Traffic Volumes Lane Use
00 AM Peak Hour (vph) Existing
(00) PM Peak Hour (vph) Roadway improvements proposed as
part of R -3300
Traffic Control Devices Roadway improvements required
O Traffic Signal for Potential Future Development
O Stop Sign Level of Service
A -C
D
E
F
Inset
ao ;
v�
O
R - 136 (106) J
T - 1,314 (840) R - 264 (100)
L - 14 (16) T - 170 (204)
L - 798 (1,362) `3 ?Q T - 3,030 (4,060)
T- 264(161) R- 97(178)
v � �
rn
rn ro
N 7
Inset
372 (388) &00
369
6J
Hampstead Bypass
F 2,767 (2,250) 3,660 (2,946)
2,250 (2,712) F 2,946 (3,605) i 2.240 (3,484) y —5
175
(708)
�8J
887 (754)
O�
00
o O�
N �� ��Y
C?
00
l�
T -4,066 (3,024)
L - 117 (149)
T 3,924 (2,(
L - 213 (226)
nry
78
7247/19) vow
(676)
Nrnco
rn
T - 2,999 (3,913)
^ `
rno�
0� r if1
ago
O O
T - 2,348 (1,360)
�L- 94(118)
��
R - 1,059 (577) J
R -2,1 ((1,1
T -2,150 (1,142)
J �
����
l�)
�1Vy�
T -1, (9
L- 420(357)
Service
��
Rd.
T - 1,360 (2,348) c�
R - 91 (197) rho �� L - 131 (103) _
L -451 (864) _ T- 789(1,371)
Q T -8(24) R- 13(16)
CO
M
J �
o �
w o
rn
R - 150 (449)
s..
Q
L
c
c
C
&,t
voio.,I-
a
ct
Cn
G
LEGEND
Traffic Volumes Lane Use
00 AM Peak Hour (vph) Existing
(00) PM Peak Hour (vph) Roadway improvements proposed as
part of R -3300
Traffic Control Devices Roadway improvements required
O Traffic Signal for Potential Future Development
O Stop Sign Level of Service
A -C
D
E
F
Inset
ao ;
v�
O
R - 136 (106) J
T - 1,314 (840) R - 264 (100)
L - 14 (16) T - 170 (204)
L - 798 (1,362) `3 ?Q T - 3,030 (4,060)
T- 264(161) R- 97(178)
v � �
rn
rn ro
N 7
Inset
372 (388) &00
369
6J
Hampstead Bypass
F 2,767 (2,250) 3,660 (2,946)
2,250 (2,712) F 2,946 (3,605) i 2.240 (3,484) y —5
175
(708)
�8J
887 (754)
O�
00
o O�
N �� ��Y
C?
00
l�
T -4,066 (3,024)
L - 117 (149)
T 3,924 (2,(
L - 213 (226)
nry
c�
T - 2,999 (3,913)
^ `
R - 186 (260)
��
or
� N
N N
J K
J �
0
0
'o
a
0
0
NTS