US 221 Bypass (3)

-. SLAM
~' ~~
,t
,~ ~.
STATe; car NC)R`rtl C'ARC~t-1NA
EPA,R~I"~NT C)F TRANSPC}RTATION
;~i1C11.1r [. t'. Er1SI.t~Y
t"sc~~ r Rhc~R

'~11 'LIORA~1Di,31Vt TC): '~ter~.~cr ~ ~~:Fr1 ~Scm1~Gr
[~tZt~)~t; J~rm~~~tah F~:1-11r~~in. 1'C_
Project 1'larrr~ir~t, Enginc~r
}'r«jcet Uc~clol~nrcnt an~i f?rrvirt~ntn+~ntai 11n<rivsis Firactx
I.,:~~ "rt~~t~rr
~ruCRETr1R1'
11BJpCT= C)ctobcr 1 ~. '_t)() i ;~1ers~cr "I'r~aYn tii~.;ctirt~ ft~r Pr~rpost:d Rutherfordtt7n Bypass,.
R~rther!'ord C'ount~. TlI' Project R-2~~~
A rrrerer farm mccting ~~•as irc:ld ran fJ~tc>btr l~, "?Cl4?7 for die proposed project.
"i"lte latttrr~in~ pt;ople «erc in ~rttendance:
Trt~v t'~'il1on LI Fitz ~rnct 1,Vildtifc ~er~~ic~:
?t,tarella 13un~ick U~ Tislr and ~~'ittilifc Service
Uavc Baker lJ~ 1~n}~~;• Carps ui~l::n`~ineer
Martz. C'harxrtrers NC 174%ilcilife R~scaurces Cornrnissc>n
13r%an Wrentl 1~1C ~lvisiort of 1t4~ater Quatity
Greg Christta lsotlrcrmat RPt~
Jason Kirt~ Iothcrmai RPC)
Rick Tipton tiC1D~T Dirision 13
}3r-iarr Robinson NCUOT Rtrad~~•rrv Design unit
Sterling Ragland NC1r7flT ltt>crdt~ay Design Unit
Carta Dagnint> CDtJT Natural l:rl~~ironurcr~t [knit
Brett Feulner 1*iCI~tJT ~aturai I~.nvimrnncnt Unit
,Jay'T~uisdalc: ~CDC)T ~lydraulirs E.;nit
Say Mclnnis 1*3CDUT Project De~etopment and Environr~rentat
Analysis Branch
Jameeiah Bi-Amin i1~~11CDC~T Prerject T7eveloprnt~nt anti Environmental
Analysis Brirncli
The purpose c~fthis rnecting ~~as to gain. concurrence on br~idg~ and cul~~cr-t
locations (Concurrence Ptrint 2A) for the pjt;ct.
wrnrcrNS a~r~a~ss: T~~Er~ s~~ 7s~-~,:kr ~acA°irwta-:
NC D~ vP a ~ >.~ err t1F TRAN$PQRTAT7C14V FAX: 9t 3.133-094 TRANSP45RTATKMi Btl~.DtNG
PkaE c; i Dev~~.nc~+aENr ANC7 ENYlRfSNJ.~NTM ANAL rs€s 1 Scum 4Yx.MroN S ruEE7
1.`x48 MAk- SERVE CENTER WE6SITE: 1~MMi.[1t7fd.007;.i ZAT€.NC.US }2Al.E~H A!G
RA: ~G~t NC 2TPi99-1.5~$

s
f'roiect Status
"I he east txtcrger team z~z~rectitl~ «as held o;z April 17, 2{)tt?. At that zneetil~~~, the;
te.cita ccn~e:urred on which altertzatives sh<ncld be studied in ~}hail (Cczn~ttrr~ta~e t'c,itzt Z~.
It that ri~ectir~~~. the cl~erger te:tnz at~reet! i<~ dreg}~ ;lItcz-~tati~ c~, ? ~tnd ~. A ttew altirnati~ c,
~Ifer~r<~tive f leas prescn[ed at this, rl~ceti~2~ and a~~rced to he e.~ured ftirttZer fear lu~7her
stud~~ hit thc~ n7er~~~cr tcan~.
r~.Itc-'raati~c~s t)itict~ssio~z
C'un~c~Itly, .~~ltc~rsc,ni~fes ;~, ~, 6 and ~~`~ ;-1r1. are Mill unc}er cimsi<lerati~~n. All of
these. alterT~ati~°es t~ i}1 itn}?ac~t a i~~tiart~tlotr~~red h~e<~rtlea# h,~~lnjlatinn i:~ the. lart~jeet area,
~#~ler sc,~n~ clise~ssic~«. tltc mc•r~cr tea~3~c a~~rccd there is iu~ ~~~<~~ t:> a~~c~id these i~tipacts
k~~~caltse thc~ U~wart-flt~ti~~cre<1 hcattleat~hopulatioi'~ is lucatec} ,scar the I~c~~inrrin~, c>t the
lat-uje:_t. It «~as stated that ether heartlcrtt' ~c>l~ul:~ti~>>ts ha~~e ht°crt ~;c4ta iu thu pr:~jcct ~u~ea.
"I'he tetuz~ c3cr•idea.l tht:rc «,t> i~c~ need. to visit iI,L: ~tr~•ant <•rc~ssin4~ sites.
rite 1 (Strc:znz f3)
,~Il ii>ur altcrnatiti cs til-ill cress atr-catn T3, This ~:trt~aill is lc~ca.tcd nt.ar the
beginning.; c,f the pr~~}ect. ,~r~ e~.i~tic~4= tu•p-l,arrc~l, 5'x F~' cult/<:rt «ilt hey rctaiucd and
extciaded at this lc~catu~n. `Ila.e teai~~ cc~acurred ~~°itlt the p opc~se,d culvert.
Site 2 (4trc~arn 1C`)
Thrc:c altcrrlatives (, ti and LtS 74A) will crass Streaztz Its:, Anew °~2" reinforced
concrete pipe is proposed tier t(}is Ic~catitan. A questolt li as raised regartlin~ ~4~hether a
72" pipe would lae bit; erlou~~h. ~1'he '_slattiral Resc?tTrccs Tec,hniertl Repc~z-t (NR,TR} states
the stream. is six to ten feet ~~'ide, Marla ~hambc:rs of~ the t~ l~ilife IZesourccs
tW'c~tnmissc~rz stated she a as cocerncci the ~ elocity thrcnt~~h the pipe tivoulcl he too high.
Jay 'l'«~isc~ale ofthe hydraulics Utah said he would lodk into that. Brian 1~~renn of the
Division. of Water Quality asl€ed i f streart~ L3TiC, which runs parallel. tea the proposed
rc}adway and convcr~;es with Strcacrt. 1C;, c:ould be relocated cautside the fill slope.
'±ite '~ {Stream ~~)
Alternatives ~, fi and iJS ~4A will crz~ss `~trcam ?t3. A neu~ sin`rle-harrel, 6'x
fi'cul~ ere is proposed for his Ic~catian. Tlae mcr`~,er tc:an~t expressed ccac~cerc~ about the
length of the; prt~pcased culvt:rt, but <c;rec:d ~vitlt the reccatnmendaticsn.
Site 4 (Strezttn 3-?f_'(C'le~horn Creek))
.~ltcrzaativc 4 ~vi11 cz'rass Cle`~hortt t.reek at this site. "I"his is an existing streart~
crossing.. The existing structure is a ht~ttcamless arch.. ~~ four-barrel., 10'x ~' culvert is
ltruposcd at this location, The tzterger team dill not tzgrcc lti'ith the proposed tirur barrel
cul~ ert. Jay "I'tivisciale discussed the possibility of cc~nstntcting a smaller arch. within the
existing. arch anal ~rnuting %n between, l le stated the existing arch is under aI?proxtnately

3Q feet of fill. It would be very difficult to remove the existing structure. After some
discussion.,. the merger team agreed that a spanning structure should be provided at this
l~~cation. lvls. aC'hambers stated if the existing arch :has to be removed, slie would like to
see a bridge constructed at this location.
Site ~ (titreant 2C', :i-?(' (Stonecutter C"recl:jl
1lternatives }, t, and C!~ %-41 ~~ ill crosti Streams ?C and 3-?C at thrs site. A
hritlge is currenilti' I~roposcd at this (ocatitrn. the Bridge is sparu~rng the streams and
SIZ ~ 1 t)1 ("I~tntnde.r K~~ad}. ;tiir-. T~~~ isdalc dicusscd the possibility c~fshil~tin~; the proposcti
b~,~ass in order to avt~i{t the tributary to Stonecutter Creek. Stonecutter Creek cannot be
a~ oidecl. If the tributary car7not oc ati ~~idc;d, than the tributary_ t~ ill he hridgccl.
Site fi (Strr~m_ZF)
Alternatitie ~ will cross Stream 2F. tin existing trio-barrel, fi'x 13' culvert will be
retained and extended at this location. The team concurred with the proposed ctrl~~ert,
tilth~nr~h cc~nccrns «~crc expressed rcgarchn~; the length ofthe pr±~posed extcnsi~>n.
Sites "~ & ~ {Stre.~ni< 2G tCJe;~hurn Crcekl}
Alternative -t ~~~ill cr<>ss Stream 2G at these sites. Anew two-bane] 9'x 9' culvert.
is proposed at tlte.e ltacations. ~1arl4r Chambers stater] reducing the skew of the rroposed
culvert <~uul possible stream relocation paralleling the alignment would reduce impacts in
this area.
Site 8 Strum 1,91
Alternatives 3, b and US ?4.1 will cross Stream 1J. Anew single-banal, 6'x T
culvert is proposed at #his tocation. 'l~he nYerger team expressed concerns abt~u# the
channel width because the ~itTR saes stream is eight to fifteen feet wide. Brett Feulner
of the I`+latura) En~~ironmcnt Unit stated the stream is only five feet wide itt this location.
Brian Wrenn asked fthe stream cc~uici b~ relt~cated and talon under the road at a narrow
point in the fill width. After some discussion, the. merger team a7ncurred with the
proposed culvert.
Site t1 (Stream 31
Alternative C~ will cross Stream 3X. Anew sani;Ie-barrel., 6'x 7' culvert is
proposed at this location. A question was askc~l regarding the stream width. The stream
at this location is tour to five feet wide. The team concurred with. the proposc~ci culvert.
Site l~ Stream 3G Holiands Creek
Alt+ernativ~; 6 will cross Strc;ar~i 3C. Anew two-barrel, 9'x 1(?' culvert is proposed
at this location. The merger team suggested relocating th+e stream night help reduce
impacts in this area. The suggestion ~~as rnade to relocate the stream parallel to US f4.

Site 13 (Strcain ~~~
Alternatives 3 and L:~S 7~ A will cross Strcarn ~K, Anew double~barre~l, l3'x f3'
culvert is proposed at this location. The team concurred with the proposed culvert.
Site t4 (St:ream 3F {Holancls Creel:))
Alternative 4 will crass Streait~ ~F. An existing two-barrel, 7'~ 7' culvert will bc.
retained Find exte;ndc~ci at this Ic~cation. tine barrel of this existing culvert has partially
tilled with sediment, crc;atinf; a natural sill. Cancenrs were expresse~cl re~.ardinl; the
length of the proposed extension, especially because of ho~v well the cxi~tin culvert is
futlctic~nint. Brian V4~renn n~eriticrnecl to the team that a portion of H.oll~znds Creek.
dcaw°nstrean~ cif the project crossings is on the 30~d list.
Sumtiary
Tlie team. a~xeed ~.vith all the proposed stnactkrres except site 4. At t}zis location,
they recommended a spannin;~r stricture instead cif the proposed four-barrel cctlvert.
itiCllE)`I` agreed with this rccarnntcndation.
Several su;~~cstions were made, in ~uldition to the: proposed structures at other sites
tt~ decrt.~tse strcarn itt~pacts. t~CIIOT ~~-ill continue to ~~~c~rk c+n decreasing stream impacts
as the: project prop;resses.
1ME
cc: Merger Team Members