U-2509 CP 2 Approach Discussion with Co-Team Leaders - 9-16-15 - Meeting Summary.docx

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
1SO1 MAIL SERVICE CENTER, RALEIGH, NC 27699-1SO1
PAT MCCRORY
GOVERNOR
October 7, 2015
MEMORANDUM TO: Meeting Participants
FROM:
NICHOLAS 7. TENNYSON
SECRETriRY
Keith Lewis, Project Manager, VHB
Don Brown, Senior Project Planner, VHB
SUBJECT: Meeting Summary — CP 2 Approach Discussion
Meeting with Co-Team Merger Leaders for STIP
No. U-2509 — US 74 (Independence Blvd.)
Improvements, Conference Drive to I-485 in
Mecklenburg County
TIME & LOCATION:
In Attendance:
Mitch Batuzich
Monte Matthews
Crystal Amschler*
Donna Hood
Wilson Stroud
*attendance by phone
September 16, 2015; 10:00 AM-12:00 PM
PDEA Roadway Design Conference Room
Raleigh, North Carolina
MEETING SUMMARY
FHWA
USACE
USACE
NCDWR
NCDOT— PDEA/PDU
Carla Dagnino
Michael Turchy
Keith Lewis
Don Brown
Overview:
NCDOT— PDEA/NES
NCDOT— PDEA/NES
VHB
VHB
The main purpose of this meeting was to discuss the approach for obtaining CP 2 concurrence.
Wilson Stroud (NCDOT— PDEA/PDU) and Keith Lewis (VHB) began the meeting with a review of
what was presented at the External Scoping Meeting (3-19-15) and the 2014 Stakeholder
Meetings to bring the newer members of the Merger Team (Monte Matthews — USACE and
MAILING ADDRESS: TE�EPHONE: 919-707-6000 LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAX: [phone] CENTURY CENTER, BUILDING A
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1000 BIRCH RIDGE DRIVE
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER WEBSITE: WWW.NCDOT.ORG/DOH/PRECONSTRUCT/PE/ RALEIGH, NC 27610
Rn�EicH NC 27699-1548

U-2509
September 16, 2015 CP 2 Approach Discussion Meeting with Co-Team Merger Leaders
October 7, 2015
Donna Hood — NCDWR) up to speed on the project. Throughout the presentation, numerous
topics were discussed, as presented below.
Number of Exaress Lanes:
There was a question about whether there would be one or two express lanes in each
direction. Keith explained that the Feasibility Study (2013) proposed two express lanes in
each direction as the ultimate plan. However, because of the connectivity of other express
lanes (I-5507, U-5526A) and because of constraints (historic resources) in other areas, it
would be unlikely that two express lanes in each direction would be possible along US 74
closer to uptown Charlotte. Therefore, it was agreed during the 8-18-15 local stakeholders
meeting that one express lane in each direction would be sufficient, so long as a wide
shoulder was provided that could be converted into a second express lane in each
direction should future traffic warrant that change.
CP 2 and CP 3:
• CP 2 alternatives were discussed during the External Scoping Meeting, but concurrence
was not reached.
• Monte requested the project team show that each CP 2 alternative meets the need and
purpose statement as agreed to during the External Scoping Meeting, which is as follows:
1. Existing US 74 does not provide reliable travel time and connectivity for
residents, business patrons, and commuters in Southeastern Charlotte and
Matthews.
2. Traffic estimates indicate that US 74 will require additional capacity to achieve a
goal of LOS D for users by the design year (2040).
3. This project is needed to provide reliable travel time, system sustainability, and
connect to a system of express lanes planned on US 74 to the northwest, I-485 to
the south, and the Monroe Bypass/Connector toll road to the southeast.
• Mitch Batuzich pointed out that the only way to get reliable travel time in an urban area
is with a toll facility.
• Monte stated toll lanes in the median eliminates many of the concerns that the USACE
would ordinarily have with a widening project.
• Monte requested data that shows that the project is sized correctly (number of lanes).
• Mitch asked how much detail the Merger team will need in order to be able to compare
the alternatives for purposes of CP 2(alternatives to carry forward for detailed study) and
CP 3 (LEDPA).
o Monte stated that the amount of detail needed differs from project to project. He
reiterated that alternatives that do not meet the purpose and need can be
dropped, as can any alternative that has a huge "red flag" (including prohibitively
high costs). If the impacts are the same for all of the CP 2 alternatives, then
normally the LEDPA can be the applicant's preferred alternative.
o Monte requested that the project team provide a matrix that presents impacts
and costs for each CP 2 alternative, thereby providing documentation for the CP2
and CP3 decisions. Crystal Amschler agreed that this approach would be sufficient
for the USACE. Donna Hood (NCDWR) stated her approval of this method, also.
o PDEA and VHB will proceed with the NRTR, which will include identification and
verification ofjurisdictional streams and wetlands. Impacts in the CP 2/CP3 matrix
will be based upon the NRTR findings.

U-2509
September 16, 2015 CP 2 Approach Discussion Meeting with Co-Team Merger Leaders
October 7, 2015
Monte suggested that the three concepts presented during the External Scoping Meeting
be shown at the CP 2 meeting, along with the above matrix. If the Merger team agrees
that (1) those three concepts are the appropriate CP 2 alternatives and (2) all but the
expressway alternative can be dismissed based upon impact and cost data provided in the
matrix, we can achieve both CP 2 and CP 3 concurrence during that meeting.
Crystal indicated her preference is to hold the field meeting for the jurisdictional
determination before the CP 2/CP3 meeting.
CP 2A and CP4A:
The proposed parallel road network improvements, which were presented and discussed
during the External Scoping Meeting, will be presented for detailed discussion during the
CP 2A meeting. The majority of the impacts to JD resources will result from these parallel
road connections. NCDOT anticipates impacts to JD resources would be roughly the same,
regardless of which alternative is selected, as the parallel road connections would be
roughly the same for each alternative. Functional design for the parallel road connections
is in progress and is anticipated to be completed in early 2016.
o Monte requested that it be reiterated during the CP2/CP3 meeting thatJD impacts
for the parallel road connections would be roughly the same for each alternative.
It may be possible to also achieve CP 2A concurrence during the CP2/CP3 meeting, since
the hydraulic recommendations report, NRTR, JD resource verification, and functional
design for the expressway concept will have been completed.
It was suggested that preliminary design, rather than functional design, may be required
in order to reach CP 2A and CP4A concurrence. Preliminary design work is anticipated to
be completed in May 2016.
o Monte asked that the project team check on what level the plans need to be for
each of these concurrence points (CP2A and CP4A). Wilson will investigate this
issue.
Other Topics:
• Monte noted that the discussion today has helped the USACE feel more comfortable with
this project.
• Monte suggested that Crystal and Donna send an e-mail to the full Merger team regarding
the topics discussed during this meeting.
o Note: Crystal sent out a meeting summary via e-mail to the Merger team on
9-22-15; NCDOT will forward the meeting summary to the City of Charlotte and
the Town of Matthews.
• Monte stated that this project could be at the CP4A stage very quickly. He reiterated that
the USACE would be fine with addressing Concurrence Points 2 and 3 together at the same
merger meeting. Keith stated that the project team would have CP 2, CP2A, and CP3 forms
ready for the next merger meeting, and each concurrence point will be presented to the
Merger team for discussion during that meeting.
• Wilson Stroud will invite the Merger Team members to the next two stakeholder meetings
in Charlotte (10-22-15 and 12-10-15).
• It was noted that it is important to get toll road information out to the Merger agencies
Statewide, as these projects are new to the state, and these issues will be coming up again
in the future on other toll projects.

U-2509
September 16, 2015 CP 2 Approach Discussion Meeting with Co-Team Merger Leaders
October 7, 2015
Summary:
The plan agreed upon at today's meeting would be to achieve CP 2 concurrence based upon
updated environmental impacts and cost estimates for the three concepts presented during the
External Scoping Meeting. NCDOT will present to the Merger team an expanded alternatives
matrix, using data from the NRTR and updated costs, to compare the three concepts and to
achieve CP 2, and possibly CP2A and CP3, concurrence.
Action Items:
• VHB will create a matrix comparing the three concepts (the proposed CP 2 alternatives)
from an impact and cost standpoint. The Co-Team leaders agree this matrix may allow the
entire Merger team to reach concurrence on CP 2 and CP 3(expressway concept).
• It is anticipated the costs of the freeway concept and the expressway + elevated express
lanes concept are prohibitive, while the impacts are similar or worse with those
alternatives.
• The entire Merger team will be invited to future stakeholder meetings (Wilson Stroud and
VHB).
• VHB will prepare the following for a Merger meeting to be held in the first quarter of 2016:
o CP 2 Form for three alternatives — Freeway, Expressway, and a combination of
Expressway in Charlotte and Arterial with Elevated Express Lanes in Matthews
o CP 2A form after the NRTR and functional design are completed and JD impacts
are determined
o CP 3 form for the Expressway Alternative to be the LEDPA
• Wilson will verify the level to which plans need to be for each concurrence point.
• Crystal and Donna will send an e-mail out to the rest of the Merger team to inform them
of the plan developed during today's meeting for moving forward through CP 2, CP 2A,
and CP 3. (Note: this e-mail was sent on 9/22/15)
• PDEA/NES and USACE (Crystal) will schedule a field visit prior to the next Merger meeting
toverifyjurisdictional resources.
Please direct any comments or questions about the meeting summary to Wilson Stroud, 919-707-
6045, wstroud@ncdot.�ov; Keith Lewis, 919-334-5619, [e-mail]; or pon Brown, 919-
334-5609, [e-mail].
DB/WS