20190593_I-5111 Merger Team Update October 2016 w AppendicesFINAL_20161104

Merger Team U pdate
for Concurrence Points 1 and 2
October 2016
STIP Project I-5111
Wake & Johnston Counties
I-40 Widening
From I-440 (Exit 301, I-40/Raleigh Beltline split) to NC 42 (Exit 312)
North Carolina Department of Transportation

STIP Project I-5111
Wake & Johnston Counties
I-40 Widening
From I-440 (Exit 301, I-40/Raleigh Beltline split) to NC 42 (Exit 312)
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to widen I-40 from I-440 (Raleigh
Beltline) near Exit 301 where I-40 and I-440 diverge, to near Exit 312 at the interchange of I-40 and NC
Highway 42. The proposed project, I-5111, is included in the 2016-2025 North Carolina Transportation
Improvement Program (TIP) for planning and design. Funding for construction is currently posted in the TIP as
beginning in Fiscal Year 2018.
As a takeaway from the December 16, 2015 Merger Update meeting, the Project Team is providing a revised
Purpose and Need Statement and Study Area. Additional clarification of alternatives was also requested,
particularly the number of lanes added under each Alternative. The handout and final minutes from the
December meeting are included in Appendix A.
2.0 PURPOSE REVISIONS
As noted during the December 16, 2015 Merger Update meeting, the purpose and need statement needs to be
revised because of the updated design year from 2035 to 2040. In addition, the LOS D threshold is not
expected to be met based on the updated traffic forecast received in June 2015.
Original Purpose
The Project Purpose is to improve the Level of Service on I-40 within the limits of the project study area,
providing a Level of Service (LOS) "D" or better, on all sections of I-40 from Exit 301 (Beltline in Raleigh) to Exit
312 (NC 42) in Johnston County, through the year 2035 (Design year).
New Purpose
The purpose of the proposed project is to better accommodate forecasted levels of congestion on I-40 from
Exit 301 (Beltline in Raleigh) to Exit 312 (NC 42) through the year 2040 (Design year), in accordance with the
MPO's (CAMPO) long term goals to impart a positive impact on mobility for the public using this transportation
corridor.
Need for Project
Current traffic conditions on I-40 throughout the proposed project limits are often very crowded and subject to
frequent delays, due to regional commuting patterns, particularly during morning and evening rush hours. With
Raleigh and Research Triangle Park serving as employment centers for the region, many people commute into
the Raleigh area and live in outlying towns and surrounding counties. This section of I-40 serves suburban
communities in Wake and Johnston Counties and also connects to the I-95 corridor. In addition, this leg of I-40
ultimately serves as a primary route to the North Carolina beaches and during the summer months tends to
experience heavy traffic volumes around the weekends.
Information provided by NCDOT's Traffic Forecasting Unit and Congestion Management Unit shows recent
data (year 2015 No-Build) for traffic conditions throughout the limits of the proposed project generally operating
at LOS "D" and "E". The 2040 No-Build scenario would deteriorate into a LOS "F" condition. Public comments
Merger Team Update 1

from the Citizens Information Workshop support this information, conveying for many attendees the frustration
with the congestion and delays experienced on a daily basis when traveling along this segment of I-40.
Travelers on I-40 in the project area regularly experience congestion, which is projected to worsen through
2040. Traffic volumes along I-40 in the project area are projected to increase by 50 to 61 percent between
2015 and 2040. Existing and estimated average travel speeds are well below the posted speed limit during
peak hours.
Improving 2040 Build travel conditions on I-40 throughout this portion of the freeway, with a goal of achieving
LOS "E" or better, will help achieve CAMPO's desired long-term goals, including alleviating one of their
identified bottlenecks on I-40 (bottleneck #9 in CAMPO's 2013 Status of the System Report). This will have a
direct and positive impact on mobility experienced by the public using this corridor and allow for more efficient
long range travel and daily commuting between Raleigh and NC 42 with fewer delays.
3.0 STUDY AREA
Due to the modifications to the design along portions of I-40, the Study Area needs to be widened slightly,
particularly around the I-440 interchange and US 70 Business interchange. The I-440 interchange was
expanded to accommodate the new flyover ramps. The US 70 Business interchange may include a new
"leftover" from eastbound US 70 to westbound I-40, in order to eliminate the loop in the southeast quadrant
and subsequent problematic weave section onto I-40 westbound. See Appendix B for a revised Study Area
map.
4.0 TWO BUILD ALTERNATIVES ARE BEING CARRIED FORWARD FOR DETAILED STUDY
NCDOT TIP Project I-5111 involves widening and capacity improvements to existing I-40 from the I-440
interchange in Wake County to south of NC 42 in Johnston County. Generally along existing I-40 there are
currently three lanes in each direction between I-440 and US 70 Business, and two lanes in each direction
between US 70 Business and NC 42. The general scope of this project involves widening to accommodate
two additional travel lanes in each direction. As part of the preliminary design, two alternatives are under
consideration by the Department, in addition to the No Build.
4.1. Build Alternative 1
Widening to accommodate the addition of 2 general purpose lanes in each direction throughout the project
limits.
4.2. Build Alternative 2
Widening to accommodate the addition of 2 general purpose lanes in each direction, but with only 1 general
purpose lane in each direction from south of US 70 Clayton Bypass to NC 42.
Included in Appendix C are two figures (Alternative 1 and Alternative 2) that display what the existing laneage
is along I-40, and what additional lanes are being proposed.
Merger Team Update 2

5.0 ADDITIONAL INFORMATIO
At both the February 2011 Concurrence Point 1/2 Meeting and the December 16, 2015 Update Meeting, the
Merger Team agreed there was no need to conduct a Concurrence Point 2A meeting. The next planned
meeting is the Concurrence Point 3(LEDPA) Meeting.
Coordination is continuing on several fronts regarding the Swift Creek bridge. Three separate TIP projects (I-
5111, I-4739, R-2828) converge in the southern-most two miles of I-5111 near Swift Creek. NCDOT is
anticipating constructing the Swift Creek bridge crossing to accommodate the necessary lanes for all of these
projects. Doing so would minimize the magnitude and duration of the construction impacts to the traveling
public and the resources in the vicinity of Swift Creek. The exact number of lanes (bridge width) and bridge
length are currently under study and will be determined in the near future. Section 7 consultation with USFWS
is ongoing for R-2828 and the Biological Assessment for I-5111 will be underway in late 2016/early 2017.
NCDOT is coordinating the environmental studies and design for all three projects to the greatest degree
possible.
6.0 CURRENT PROJECT SCHEDULE / NEXT STEPS
Based on previous information provided, here is the updated I-5111 schedule and next steps:
Y USFWS Section 7- ongoing coordination amongst all 3 projects (see Section 5.0 above)
Y Noise Study — Anticipated Fall 2016 completion
Y Air Quality Study — Anticipated Fall 2016 completion
Y Indirect & Cumulative Effects — Updated Fall 2015
Y Draft Environmental Assessment — December 2016
Y Final EA — Spring 2017
Y FONSI — December 2017
Merger Team Update 3

ATTACHMENTS
ATTACHMENT A Handout and Final Minutes from December 16, 2015 Merger Meeting
ATTACHMENT B Proposed Updated Study Area Limits
ATTACHMENT C I-5111 Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 Figures
Merger Team Update

ATTA C H M E N T A
���

Merger Team Update Meeting
December 16, 2015
(revised 12-15-15)
STIP Project I-5111
Wake & Johnston Counties
I-40 Widening
From I-440 (Exit 301, I-40/Raleigh Beltline split) to NC 42 (Exit 312)
North Carolina Department of Transportation

STIP Project I-5111
Wake & Johnston Counties
I-40 Widening
From I-440 (Exit 301, I-40/Raleigh Beltline split) to NC 42 (Exit 312)
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1. Obiective
Our objective today is to update the Merger Team on the project and gather feedback on the current
approach.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to widen I-40 from I-440 (Raleigh
Be►tline) near Exit 301 where I-40 and I-440 diverge, to near Exit 312 at the interchange of I-40 and NC
Highway 42. The proposed project, I-5111, is included in the 2016-2025 North Carolina Transportation
Improvement Program (TIP) for planning and design. Funding for construction is currently posted in the TIP as
beginning in Fiscal Year 2018.
1.2. Proiect Description
I-40 from the I-40/I-440 (Raleigh Beltline)
PRo�Ecr �escR�Prion,: Interchange in Wake County to NC 42
(Exit 312) in Johnston County
I wes:
42346.1.1
EXISTING NO. LANES: 4-6 IalleS, median-divided
PROPOSED NO. LANES: 6-8 Ia112S, median-divided
PROJECTLENGTH:
LETTING:
AADT (2015 FORECAST)
ESTIMATED COSTS
NCDOT - PDEA
CONTACT:
Approximately 11 miles
FY 2018
103,200 (at I-440) to
64,100 (at NC 42)
$156 million
Bob Deaton
40
01
�rF� �� 5.
- �r ;
INA �^��
Figure 1: Project Location Map
KNIGHT�ALE
h `_I _
: �.
�y,��k a� : '
��1., _ .
� / �-- f �
� i
,;
-. ' ' �
�\ _ /
1.3. Project Setting
I-5111 is located in Wake and Johnston Counties, on the southeast side of the City of Raleigh and begins near
Exit 301, where I-40 and I-440 (Raleigh Beltline) diverge, and extends to Exit 312 at the interchange of I-40
and NC Highway 42. Existing I-40 through the entire project limits is a median divided, controlled access
facility. The functional classification for I-40 is Interstate, as well as being designated as a Strategic Highway
Corridor.
December 2015 Merger Team Update Meeting 1

I-40 through the project area is a Strategic Highway Corridor and is identified as a completed project in 2030 in
the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (CAMPO) 2040 Comprehensive Transportation Plan.
1.4. Existing Lane Confiquration
From I-440 southwards to US 70 Business,
3 lanes each direction with a 70' to 85' median
�.. , _ -
—'�.� ,� ' "
� � ': .
'��l 5 _ . .__
'�.{'L" � . _ �� — ..- �f . w '.1 �S . .
�'' — � �,
� . -. ._�—,�... .-.. _._.� -. � .— _ _
�� . .. _ _ __ ___.
, #� .�f� _ . � � .s .� ,� �'�',�,�d
� �. {��`. �. r..
- ���"�ie����e�� . ��.��"�J
From US 70 Business southwards to NC 42,
2 lanes each direction with a 46' median
c j ��� sM� 1� � �L.+ }��7��. '�i ' • �;m
b' S q�i '`�, -s � :
..��yG 4 - s��'.�C„wi��• P� .
� ' � �^ 4 �l ' ��J �t -
__ �
_ — — _ ' '� ` _ _ _ — —
�-! T��
�,�n
. . h .t�, '.'v tA ,}�']: � ;�i�'
� �� � �� �
� ,,.��r' � �i� ^ y�.y� .,��� _ ,.
�
!��._ t. � '�`- _ ��, f _ �#yrt" ��,", .?"•... � �
1.5. Existing interchanges are located at the following: (From Northwest to Southeast�
Y Jones Sausage Road Y US Highway 70 (Clayton Bypass)
Y US Highway 70 Business Y NC 42
1.6. Other qrade separated crossinqs include: (From Northwest to Southeast)
v Rock Quarry Road v White Oak Road
Y East Garner Road
v N.C. Railroad bridge
Y New Bethel Church Road
Y Swift Creek
December 2015 Merger Team Update Meeting 2

2.0 PURPOSE & NEED
2.1. Purpose
The Project Purpose is to improve the Level of Service on I-40 within the limits of the project study area,
providing a Level of Service (LOS) "D" or better, on all sections of I-40 from Exit 301 (Beltline in Raleigh) to Exit
312 (NC 42) in Johnston County, through the year 2035 (Design year). Improving travel conditions on I-40 to a
Level of Service "D" or better throughout this portion of the freeway from the Beltline in Raleigh to NC 42 in
Johnston County, will have a direct and positive impact on mobility experienced by the public using this
corridor and allow for more efficient long range travel and daily commuting between Raleigh and NC 42 with
fewer delays. (CP1, 2/17/2011)
2.2. Need
Current traffic conditions on I-40 throughout the proposed project limits are often very congested and subject to
frequent delays due to regional commuting patterns, particularly during morning and evening rush hours. With
Raleigh and Research Triangle Park serving as employment centers for the region, many people commute into
the Raleigh area and live in outlying towns and surrounding counties. This section of I-40 serves suburban
communities in Wake and Johnston Counties and also connects to the I-95 corridor. In addition, this leg of I-40
ultimately serves as a primary route to the North Carolina beaches and during the summer months tends to
experience heavy traffic volumes Friday through Sunday.
The Capacity Analysis shows 2015 No Build (Existing) peak hour traffic conditions in portions of the
corridor operating at Levels of Service "D", "E" and "F". Public comments from a 2009 Citizens
Information Workshop support this information, with many attendees conveying frustration with the congestion
and delays experienced on a daily basis when traveling this segment of I-40. (See Attachments)
2015 2040
Freeway Segment Forecasted Forecasted
AADT AADT
(No-Build)
I-40/440 to Jones Sausage Rd 103,200 139,100
Jones Sausage Rd to US 70 Bus 100,000 134,700
US 70 Bus To Clayton Bypass 80,600 103,400
Clayton Bypass to NC 42 64,100 86,400
Southeast of NC 42 47,400
Previous signed concurrence was achieved on Concurrence Points 1 and 2 during the February 17, 2011
meeting. The minutes from that meeting are attached.
December 2015 Merger Team Update Meeting

3.0 TWO BUILD ALTERNATIVES ARE BEING CARRIED FORWARD FOR DETAILED STUDY
NCDOT TIP Project I-5111 involves widening and capacity improvements to existing I-40 from the I-440
interchange in Wake County to south of NC 42 in Johnston County. The general scope of this project involves
widening to accommodate two additional travel lanes in each direction. As part of the preliminary design, two
alternatives are under consideration by the Department, in addition to the No Build.
3.1. Build A�ternative 1
Widening to accommodate the addition of 2 general purpose lanes in each direction throughout the project
limits. (see example below)
ie� ia._o,. �$,_o. 12,_�., 1z,_Q. ��,-0„
FpPS
t � � 7
� -L-
76'-0" MEdEAN
iz-o„ � I ax-o
FDPS F�PS
12._4� �2,_�,
� �
sr-o° �a-o mz,-o
FPP4
! �
0
o—H �, -
oo+ ooa � ' aoxo o.oso ' ' i' ' 0.020_ a.oxo
6'�
. _ �_—�_—_"—_-- ' '--_—��—_` --"---
T 6—^I ---�, _J I� �in�c ur.e �_
TYPICAL SECI�ION NO. 4
ALTERI�ATE 1: WtlDENING FROM US 7fl BU5INESS TO 50UTH OF NC 42
FROM -L- STA. 215 + 00 TO STA. 615 + QO
3.2. Build Alternative 2
Widening to accommodate the addition of 2 general purpose lanes in each direction, but with only 1 general
purpose lane in each direction from south of US 70 Clayton Bypass to NC 42.
3.3. Additional Tvpical Section Considerations
An additional concept is being considered that would include a full typical section with graded outside grass
shoulders to accommodate potential future widening, without requiring future grading or right-of-way impacts.
This design would generally allow a future lane to be constructed by adding outside paved shoulders and re-
striping the existing pavement within the footprint of the I-5111 project. (see example below)
� -L-
I
I
va•pvwtiq ze•pq, y_�
ie-m ta-0' > >a �I z�a' z-o' iz-o' is
� � � � � � �rs -� � � T T T �
da
Y= � �e
� , -� `�, — -- -- -- -- — — —
��,E�.,aN � I _... � J�
Ei�GI
December 2015 Merger Team Update Meeting 4

4.0 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
At the February 2011 Concurrence Point 1/2 Meeting, the Team agreed there was no need to conduct a
Concurrence Point 2A meeting, "since the project is on existing alignment and the existing bridges will be
expanded in-place". The next planned meeting was the LEDPA (CP 3) Concurrence Meeting.
4.1. MPO - Lonq Ranqe Transportation Plan
The Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization's (CAMPO) 2040 Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP)
shows that improvements to this section of I-40 are included on CAMPO's Priority Project List. In addition, the
Roadway Project List from CAMPO's 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan shows that the MPO proposed 8-
lanes along I-40. The plan assumes that the project will be in place by 2030.
4.2. Tvpical Section
The proposed cross-section for I-5111 is to add two lanes in each direction from I-440 (Exit 301) to NC 42 (Exit
312). In addition, NCDOT's Division 5 Office has requested 12-foot wide full-depth paved shoulders for the
project. Additional travel lanes will be accommodated on a"best fit" scenario—a combination of widening to
the inside and widening to the outside of the existing alignment.
4.3. Preliminarv Plans
As the I-5111 project is over 11 miles long, and the proposed work is so close to the existing alignment, the
preliminary plans showing proposed improvements are quite lengthy when shown at a reasonably useful scale.
Additionally, they are still being drafted by designers. A planset will be available for review at the meeting. The
preliminary design plans will also be available when finalized in Spring 2016.
4.4. Bridqe Constraints
Based on preliminary analyses, the typical section of Alternative 1 would potentially require replacement of
several of the existing structures along the project corridor. The typical section shown above in Section 3.3
would potentially require replacement of additional structures under a future build-out scenario.
4.5. Bridging Decisions
Two bridges carry I-40 over Swift Creek, between US 70 Clayton Bypass and NC 42 in the southern portion of
the project. During a November 2, 2011 field meeting to discuss the bridging scenarios, an area on the
southwest (upstream) side of the eastbound lanes was designated as the "Swift Creek Minimization Area". The
intent of this designation is to minimize the widening to that side of the interstate and push the widening to the
east where prudent.
December 2015 Merger Team Update Meeting

� — ,�; �—:
_ , �� ,:
�, N�=a3oN3� _;, ��� ,
�
.. . As13s 5'�! 6 . .. . � '• J��x,--� �� t� TO
r� f�
° � �� \ � � l
� � �� �
__
o v
� TO RALEIGH �� � �� � . /P�,JI � :.. :�l
. ,..., / .�/ i i:. -
.. . .. _. I� .. . �....._...� � ( ���.. ._ ..J,._ . 1 ......: . . ... . . ....._..
, .._... �._..-.. . . \ �
_'__ �. � s � _-' . � _...
J ��' r _. � V�� .
� � �-\ \ ,: �, .
` \ �, �
"i +��` " / � �� � ��� ��: r�``.
�,� .�` SWIFf CR£EK MINIMIZATION AREA � ��
9 J�� N�Stl30N3H A5130 9 1 9 �\� �3yJ 4 531YI�055� 5_N3Nitltld'tl b3NE109
..1 :\ � :.: �.....
,����, �TI�L��TUI�E TYPI�A►L �E�Tl�hl�
``� , � �40 C?VER 51rYIFT CREEK
�;; �:. �. ��. ,�,ti..
es
i a
.______ ._"______ ._____
: - =� y -C �
W6L
��
E7�.ISTIN� RpA�wAY 5ECrION
�- il-d'a'i CVER 5Yl�IFi CREEIL
��
,
,�:� �1�- ��-0� �;;��
FS '�
r i
�' "f ��___ �_}"_____r -"'_____'
.1 J� .1� "__.i '-T-__"
a_
EBL
WBL EBL
GENER.4L �U0.PC}SE L,Ah1E R�A.p'�AY SE�TI�N
�- fl-6'�i c]VER 5S°11FT CREEI{
4.6. Crash/Accident Data
Crash rates and critical crash rates for I-40 within the project limits are below the average statewide for similar
types of facilities. The crashes that occurred were randomly distributed in the project limits.
4.7. Community Context
Raleigh, surrounding suburbs and nearby towns have experienced vigorous population growth in recent years.
The population of the Demographic Study Area grew by almost 25 percent between 2000 and 2010.
Commercial and office development within the project area along I-40 is concentrated around the NC 42 and
US 70 Business interchanges. Industrial development is located in areas near Jones Sausage Road (SR
5220), with residential communities located in northern portions of the project area around Rock Quarry Road
December 2015 Merger Team Update Meeting 6

(SR 2542) and in southern portions near White Oak Road (SR 2700). I-40 through the project study area is
used by commuters traveling between Garner, Clayton, Research Triangle Park and Raleigh, as well as for
regional travel between Raleigh and points east, including coastal areas and I-95. The I-40 corridor is also a
major east-west route across North Carolina that is heavily used by truck traffic.
4.8. Local Area Pians Tarqetinq Future Growth & Development
There are numerous local plans to guide development and growth for towns and cities in the project area,
including the Johnston County Future Land Use Map from the 2030 Comprehensive Plan (March 2009), Wake
County Fuquay-Garner Area Plan (March 2004), Wake County Zoning Map (February 2008), Town of Garner
Zoning (October 2003), City of Raleigh Zoning (July 2010), and City of Raleigh Future Lane Use Map from the
2030 Comprehensive Plan (October 2009).
4.9. Nearby Transportation Projects
The most notable project in the vicinity is Complete 540 (Southeast Extension), which the NC Turnpike
Authority is studying as a toll project. This project would complete an outer ring around the Raleigh region if
constructed. Two of the proposed routes have interchanges at/near the location of the existing I-40 / US 70
(Clayton Bypass) interchange. Such an interchange would likely be closed to outside access, allowing
freeway-to-freeway high speed movements between I-40, US 70 (Clayton Bypass) and the proposed 540 toll
facility. A third proposed route ties into I-40 farther north, closer to US 70 Business. The current schedule is
for the Southeast Extension to select a preferred alternative by Spring 2016, with construction tentatively
scheduled for 2018.
Another project which may have some influence on the design of I-5111 is TIP I-4739, which proposes to
improve access and traffic conditions on NC 42 (Exit 312) around its interchange with I-40. This project is
currently funded for construction in fiscal year 2019. NCDOT is closely coordinating I-5111 and I-4739, as they
may have a joint construction letting.
4.10. Public Involvement
A Citizens Information Workshop (CIW) was conducted in October of 2009 at the Comfort Inn near the
interchange of I-40 and NC 42. The CIW attracted approximately 40 members of the public, with many
attendees indicating that they lived near I-40 and use it on a daily basis for commuting purposes. Many of the
attendees indicated that delays from high traffic volumes and congestion negatively impacted their travel times
and accordingly, they would prefer to have the project constructed as soon as possible. These conversations
with members of the public at the meeting revealed that the project appears to be well supported among those
using this segment of I-40 on a regular basis.
Information at the CIW was available in both English and Spanish, with interpreters available as well. Notice of
the Workshop was extended beforehand in Spanish to those areas identified as Latino Communities in order to
convey notice as widely as possible.
It is anticipated that there will be considerable and ongoing public support for the project as traffic congestion
and delays increase over time throughout the limits of the proposed project. The next proposed meeting is
anticipated to be the Public Hearing in 2017. An interim newsletter may be published to provide a project
update to the public.
4.11. Water Resources
Because the project is located in the Neuse River Basin, state riparian buffer rules will apply (15A NCAC
2B.0233). Stormwater runoff must be addressed in accordance with the most recent version of the NC DWQ
December 2015 Merger Team Update Meeting 7

Stormwater Best Management Practices. Sedimentation and erosion control must be addressed in
accordance with the most recent version of the NCDOT Manual.
There are no Water Supply Watersheds in the general vicinity of the proposed project. Walnut Creek north of
the I-40/I-440 interchange is on the state's 2014 303(d) list because of its impaired biological integrity due to
agricultural and urban runoff and land development. All streams in the study area are class C nutrient
sensitive waters.
December 2015 Merger Team Update Meeting

ATTAC H M ENTS
ATTACHMENT A Proposed Project Limits
ATTACHMENT B Final Minutes from February 17, 2011 Merger Meeting
December 2015 Merger Team Update Meeting

� �F �OflTH C�qO�y NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT
��w 9 OF TRANSPORTATION
p o DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND
�gT�e�'T�FTRpH54��~e ENVIRONMENTALANALYSIS BRANCH
TIP I-5111
I-40 Widening (Exit 301) to
NC 42 (Exit 312)
Project Vicinity Map
Wake & Johnston Counties
Figure 1

BEVERLY EAVESPERDUE
GOVERNOR
Memorandum To:
From:
Subject:
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
June 24, 2011
I-5111 Merger Team Members & Meeting Attendees
Robert Deaton - NCDOT
Project Development & Environmental Analysis
I-5111 FINAL Meeting Minutes for CP-I & II
EUGENE A. CONTI, JR.
SECRETARY
A Project Scoping Meeting was held on February 17, 2011 at 1:00 p.m. at the NCDOT Transportation Building in
Raleigh. The following persons were in attendance:
Merger Team Members:
Eric Alsmeyer - US Army Corp Engineers
Felix Davila - FHWA
Chris Militscher — EPA
Gary Jordan — US FWS
Other Attendees:
Greg Price — NCDOT NEU
Rachelle Beauregard — NCDOT NEU
Chris Murray — NCDOT Division 5
Dennis Jernigan — NCDOT Division 5
Ben Schoenbauer — NCDOT Work Zone Safety
Betsy Cox — NCDOT Structure Design
Kristy Alford — NCDOT Structure Design
Tris Ford — NCDOT Community Studies
Randy Henegar — NCDOT Hydro
Mohammed Mulla — NCDOT Geotech
Linwood Stone — NCDOT PDEA
Eric Midkiff — NCDOT PDEA
Renee Gledhill-Early — SHPO
Travis Wilson — NCWRC
Rob Ridings — NCDENR-DWQ
Robert Deaton — NCDOT
Doumit Ishak — NCDOT Congestion
Management
Olivia Pilkington — NCDOT PDEA — TEA
Mike Stanley — NCDOT TIP
Mark Staley — NCDOT Roadside
Environmental Unit
Wally Bowman — NCDOT Division 5
W.M. Petit — NCDOT — TIP
Gene Tarascio — NCDOT PDEA
Kenneth Withrow — Capital Area MPO
Hardee Cox — Project Management
Wendi Johnson — NCDOT Division 4
Brenda Moore — NCDOT Roadway Design Greg Thorpe — NCDOT PDEA
Thad Duncan — NCDOT Roadway Design
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

Attendees introduced themselves.
Bob Deaton introduced the project and gave a short description of the study area and scope of the
proposal. A slide-show with photos of the entire project was viewed in order to familiarize the
attendees with the project.
Review of CP-I information: After reviewing project information for the proposed purpose and need,
there were no questions on the information as presented.
Purpose: To improve the level of service throughout the project limits to Level Of Service (LOS) "D"
or better, in the design year of 2035.
Need: Both the current and projected levels of traffic and congestion along this section of I-40 cause
significant delays for travelers.
In response to a question about an associated project I-4739, Brenda Moore indicated that I-4739
(improvements to NC 42) is funded for PE but not for construction at this time. The I-4739 project is
intended to address the congestion and traffic on NC 42 in the vicinity of the interchange with I-40.
With no other questions or comments, the focus of the discussion moved to review of the information
for Concurrence Point 2.
Review of CP-2 information:
Information for Concurrence Point 2(Alternatives to Carry Forward), was reviewed.
There are three proposed alternatives to carry forward for detailed study:
Alternative 1: No build
Alternative 2: Build 8 lanes throughout the project limits, from the beltline in Raleigh
to NC 42, 4lanes in each direction.
Alternative 3: Build 8 lanes from the beltline in Raleigh (Exit 301) to Clayton Bypass
(US 70), then build 6lanes from Clayton Bypass to NC 42.
After reviewing project information related to CP-2, Chris Militscher ( EPA) asked a question related
to the proposed Alternatives and Purpose and Need, specifically; If NCDOT has two alternatives that
meet the purpose and need, then would that dictate that the alternative with the least amount of impacts
become the LEDPA ?
Bob Deaton indicated that the department's intention is to implement the alternative that best meets the
purpose and need, suits future traffic conditions and has as few impacts as possible. With both
proposed build alternatives taking place within the existing right-of-way, the impacts from either of the
build alternatives are anticipated to be minimal. However, as the environmental analyses proceed,
additional traffic studies will be undertaken and those studies will update the anticipated future traffic
conditions, providing more guidance as to which alternative will provide the most appropriate solution
to the problems associated with I-40.
Ken Withrow (CAMPO) mentioned that the MPO is getting ready to update the long range
transportation plan, which will provide additional data and analysis to more fully describe expected
growth trends in the area for the future.
Gary Jardan (USFWS) asked that if the SE Extension Loop that the NC Toll Authority is studying
were to connect to I-40 in a different location than Clayton Bypass, would NCDOT still have two
proposed alternatives? Bob Deaton indicated that, yes, NCDOT would keep the same two alternatives
to study.

Mr. Jordan also noted that the presence of freshwater mussels in Swift Creek (Dwarf Wedge Mussel)
may present certain issues for the Southeast Extension Loop, with the possibility of changes or delays
to that project. Such issues could also have some effect upon the I-51 ll project, so NCDOT should
take care to remain aware of those issues.
Felix Davila (FHWA) asked for clarification as to where the project limits are on the southern end.
Bob Deaton noted that the project ends where the ramps begin on the north side of the NC 42
interchange. It was also noted that the Division requested 12-foot paved shoulders as part of the
project. Wally Bowman (NCDOT Division 5 Engineer) confirmed that the Division wants 12-foot
shoulders throughout the project and he also noted that this has already been worked into the design.
Bob Deaton noted that the White Oak Road overpass will need to be rebuilt to afford the additional
lanes along I-40. Ken Withrow (CAMPO) said that he thought that White Oak Road may be
identified to be widened to 4-lanes in the long range transportation plan.
Another major structure needing replacement is the flyover bridge which brings traffic from I-440
(Raleigh Beltline) onto I-40 south/east. This structure will have to be relocated in order to allow far
the lanes beneath it (bringing traffic northwards onto the beltline from I-40) to be expanded. This
work will be conducted within the existing right-of-way.
Rob Ridings (NCDENR-DWQ) discussed his concern that I-40 should not be widened beyond the
number of lanes which are needed to meet the projected growth in traffic, otherwise, if additional lanes
are added unnecessarily, the highway would tend to spur additional population growth in surrounding
areas, leading to greater growth in traffic congestion.
Chris Militscher (EPA) asked if the proposals would add lanes symmetrically or in a best-fit method ?
Bob Deaton replied that yes, while the lanes will be added symmetrically along the length of the
project, they would be added in a combination to both the median and along the outside of existing
lanes where they can be accommodated in the best manner.
Brenda Moore (Roadway Design) confirmed that the proposed designs are primarily symmetrical
along the length of the project.
Chris Militscher (EPA) asked the other Merger Team members if they thought that there was any need
to go through Concurrence Point 2-A (Bridging Decisions), since the project is on existing alignment
and the existing bridges will be expanded "in-place" to accommodate the proposed alternatives
(meaning, no new bridging in new locations) ? The other members of the Merger Team concurred
with Mr. Militscher's proposal that there really did not appear to be any need to conduct the
Concurrence Point 2A meeting in light of these conditions.
This would make the next Merger Meeting to be conducted, the CP-3 LEDPA meeting (Least
Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative).
With no further discussion or questions, the Concurrence forms for CP-1 (Purpose & Need) and CP-2
(Alternatives Carried Forward) were passed around to the Merger Team Members for signatures.
With the concurrence forms signed and no further questions, the meeting was adjourned.

Project:
Meeting
Location:
Meeting Summary
NCDOT I-5111, I-40 Widening from I-440 to NC 42
NCDOT Structures Design Conference Room CCA
MeetingSubject NCDOT I-5111 MergerTeam Update Meeting
/ oate' December 16, 2015 @ 3:15 PM
N°tes By: J. Jamison, J. Dayton
�ob 219635
No:
Meeting Purpose: This meeting is to update the Merger Team on the project and gather feedback on
the current approach.
Attendees:
Felix Davila
Eric Alsmeyer
Rob Ridings
Cynthia Van Der Wiele
Renee Gledhill-Earley
Alex Rickard
Bret Martin
Wendi Johnson
Mike Stanley
Rob Hanson
Brian Yamamoto
Bob Deaton
Nora McCann
Summary:
FHWA
USACE
NCDWR
USEPA
SHPO (via phone)
CAMPO
CAMPO
NCDOT Div 4 (via phone)
NCDOT STIP
NCDOTPDEA
NCDOTPDEA
NCDOTPDEA
NCDOTPDEA
Tony Houser
Bill Elam
Mark Staley
Mack Bailey
Gordon Cashin
Clarence Bunting
Herman Huang
Ed Reams
Donna Jackson
Kirk Stull
John Jamison
Jeff Dayton
Phillip Rogers
NCDOT Roadway
NCDOT Hydraulics
NCDOTREU
NCDOT SMU
NCDOT NES
NCDOT Congestion
NCDOT HES
NCDOT Utilities
NCDOT Utilities
HDR
HDR
HDR
HDR
Bob Deaton began the meeting with introductions and a brief history of the project since 2009. He
noted that Gary Jordan (USFWS) and Travis Wilson (NCWRC) would be unable to attend today, but a
meeting is scheduled with them the following day to garner their input. John Jamison presented a
summary of previous Merger discussions, work completed, and anticipated next steps. The following
are key discussion topics from the meeting:
• In the presentation, John Jamison noted that the purpose and need statement may need to be
updated to reflect the 2040 design year and the LOS threshold. The study area will likely be
revised as well to include slightly wider areas at the I-440 interchange and US 70 Business
interchange. Bob Deaton also reiterated that the two alternatives agreed upon at CP 2 are still
the two alternatives currently under development.
• Cynthia Van Der Wiele asked whether the traffic forecasts included future projects, such as
Complete 540. The traffic forecasts do include projects that are fiscally constrained in the Long
Range Transportation Plan.
I-5111 Merger Team Update Meeting Summary Page 1 of 3

• Alex Rickard asked about the proposed design change at the US 70 Business interchange.
Preliminary plans show the removal of the loop in the southeast quadrant, replaced with a two-
phase signal for traffic to now go from EB US 70 Business to WB I-40.
• Eric Alsmeyer indicated that previous notes from the CP2a field visit showed that the team
preferred to avoid any non-perpendicular crossings of Swift Creek, where possible. The
preference was to widen more to the east side, away from the "Swift Creek Minimization Area".
Tony Houser believes that all widening will occur to the outside in this area due to the presence
of an existing 46' median.
• Wendi Johnson asked what the difference in LOS is along I-40 between US 70 Bypass and NC 42.
The 2040 traffic analysis generally projects LOS C if I-40 is 8 lanes and LOS E if I-40 is 6 lanes.
• Felix Davila provided comments asking for clarification on the alternatives and the lanes to be
added under each alternative. Due to the existing "auxiliary lanes" between US 70 Business and
the I-440 interchange, some confusion has arisen based on the past alternative descriptions and
typical sections. A clarification of the alternatives will be provided with the revised purpose
statement and revised study area map, all of which will be distributed shortly for review and
concurrence. FHWA and CAMPO will assist in coordinating the laneage. Mike Stanley noted
that the STIP language will be revised to include the number of lanes once a preferred
alternative is selected.
Eric Alsmeyer asked the Team if anyone had issues or concerns with formalizing a new Purpose
and Need Statement and Study Area, and distributing changes via email. Others agreed that
seemed appropriate. Precoordination will be needed with the group first to get consensus on
the language. The new Purpose and Need statement may include a new set of ineasurables.
FHWA and CAMPO will assist in crafting new language, then the documentation will be
distributed to the Team for review and signature.
• In summary, Brian Yamamoto noted that NCDOT will make the revisions as discussed and
provide the Team updated information for review. The group agreed that since there were no
changes to CP 2 and CP2a, the next anticipated Merger meeting would occur at CP 3. With no
further discussion or questions, the meeting was adjourned.
Subsequent Meetin� with USFWS and NCWRC, December 17 @ 2:30 PM
Meeting Purpose: To update USFWS and NCWRC Team members on the project and gather feedback
on the current approach.
Attendees:
Gary Jordan
Travis Wilson
Brian Yamamoto
Bob Deaton
John Jamison
Jeff Dayton
USFWS
NCWRC (via phone)
NCDOTPDEA
NCDOTPDEA
HDR
HDR
I-5111 Merger Team Update Meeting Summary Page 2 of 3

Summary:
NCDOT and HDR staff began the meeting with introductions and a brief history of the project since 2009
as well as an overview of the previous day's meeting. The following are key discussion topics from the
meeting:
• Gary Jordan stated that, in all likelihood, I-5111 would require formal Section 7 consultation.
• Gary noted the previously 21-mile section of Swift Creek with potential habitat for dwarf
wedgemussel had been reduce to 11 miles.
• The Swift Creek minimization area noted in the 2011 field meeting was discussed.
o Travis noted the sharp meander on the upstream (west) side of I-40 was of primary
concern, and that the existing fill slope ran down near the top of bank.
o Previous discussions had been focused around the potential for bank stabilization or
channel relocation to be necessary for the widening of I-40.
• Gary stated there was potential for I-5111 and Complete 540 to be considered cumulatively for
impacts, and since 540 would likely begin consultation first that I-5111 may have a"new
baseline" to work under, one in which 540's impacts are already included.
• Complete 540 and its proposed formal Section 7 consultation should start next Spring for dwarf
wedgemussel, once they select a Preferred Alterative.
• Complete 540 could culminate with a Jeopardy opinion, although good coordination is already
occurring that may be able to end with conservation measures sufficient to avoid a Jeopardy
biological opinion.
o Conservation measures may include capture/propagation/augmentation of the existing
population in the 11 miles of Swift Creek with documented habitat.
o Will be based on the outcome of Phase 2 of the species viability study currently
underway (see Phase 1 report at
https://xfer.services.ncdot.�ov/PDEA/Web/Complete540/reports/C540 DWM PH1 03
14.pdf)
Other species are currently under study by USFWS and may be listed within the next 1-2 years
(may include Atlantic pigtoe, triangle floater, brook floater, yellow lance, Neuse River waterdog,
Carolina madtom).
o Atlantic pigtoe and triangle floater may already have documented occurrences near the
I-40 Swift Creek crossing.
Gary did not know whether critical habitat is under consideration for listing, but it was noted the
rulemaking process would give notice (12-month finding notification) to interested parties like
NCDOT.
I-5111 Merger Team Update Meeting Summary Page 3 of 3

ATTA C H M E N T 6
���

/ V�,p
.a� ¢ �' _
, ����� ;
' !IR,y �
y� 4
�q � �
s G.raurrnanl Rd
,.., ta
�.-r•4 - :
�n,ith
�
�� �°rainuti
CraeF:
- � .,rV '>-+oirh
�
�idffl2� � N
p `'!�`
� �yv '_ - �"-,` -,
6� c `��hr
'9 G
� a _ �W'y' ''t' :
a
a'� a = �
�.
T�heq 4ta
n �,h •
,z� -. .-. rm-- i
m[:,,i.en7a,� .i�l�
�5
H �
�
p Leke
8ensan '
arc
R nn d fYd
:.v w
'°��„p' LEGEND
� Additional Study Area
- Original Study Area
t3:.�Ni �
R�c4
4��'�.� 0 Miles 1.25
^�
DATA SOURCE: World Street Map
h iaa�.
1i4�) t�ll�
�44
S
_ �n'�4�4,�
a
1x y. ,Q
'gl? �„�8.�d .
$q
�
i
$� i
��� - . Prtw3 Fj�lb�x
� �` ' , GalfCluG
t
t �
; r�s�
fi-17S:-70xr -
___`��
��
wl ADDITIONAL STUDY AREA
;�; NCDOT STIP I-5111
ATTACHMENT B
PATH: 11CLTSMAINIGIS OATA\GISIPROJECT51000166 NORTHCAROLINA�EPTOFTftANSPORTATION10219635 NCDOTI-S111TASKOftDERk11MAP DOCSIMXDIWOftKING\I-S1115TUDYAREA2015.M%D - USER: JJAMISON - DATE: TI51]016

ATTA C H M E N T C
���

,�,w�
r , ��,�"ry, �1�+ ��• " � �� * r.. Y
r +, i z� r; ex a4 €#=4.t � }�
z,���� ����,. �,i� �°�1.+ .4��'.
� ��� � i. �
�. ��,, ( �� �
� ""� ��.;�� � ;:,� `,�' 3 �; �„r
r �
i4 � � � � e� • ���
�k
� �:.� ,' '� � t ��7`�� ��
�,.�, ` �;�, �- �t�►`��
�.r� �' �,;', � r ��,-�
! . _ �������„;�"
r -. . • � � ,
�� �' �aTk�
a .e � � ���' _".� _k e %1..�
40, �
. .�..
� � �`� ' y : � � `�- - � ��-�
�� �
�gc�.._ � � '�� .� �}�u,,`��w,s�
y�y,�,p\ '' `'+_
LpYlS~�a p �� `„�
,� � .,. ,� ` r
� `�` � � ��
����� �- . ,��' 1 "�
««� �� ' � 9
� �+� " r ' ��' ' �!
� �.,�� �� Y � _:F K'bq d .�„ `;� ` �. -
♦�
, . ' i �
�N
. ._, - ,.1 ,.n., .r t _ �.F � . ] -
` , � . ,� �
Legend -
*,
.- . y�:�� �� ^` ,��, �.}� _
', �T Existing L� � " � .,,� �
` r
w� ._,., ,{: ,. -
�, � , � �:` �, � �
Proposed Lar� � �
`;
� � .��.a"� � �'�' �',
�. ,,
Interch�� � � �.� " �
��,� • ,��.
� � ",�� �,�' •� r }.,
� �
. . _ �. _ .��' z �� � � .. • . .
� � j�
�
.�. ..
cr .
��
ier .. ':"� .�`

,�,w�
r , ��,�"ry, �1�+ ��• " � �� * r.. Y
r +, i z� r; ex a4 €#=4.t � }�
z,���� ����,. �,i� �°�1.+ .4��'.
� ��� � i. �
�. ��,, ( �� �
� ""� ��.;�� � ;:,� `,�' 3 �; �„r
r �
i4 � � � � e� • ���
�k
� �:.� ,' '� � t ��7`�� ��
�,.�, ` �;�, �- �t�►`��
�.r� �' �,;', � r ��,-�
! . _ �������„;�"
r -. . • � � ,
�� �' �aTk�
a .e � � ���' _".� _k e %1..�
40, �
. .�..
� � �`� ' y : � � `�- - � ��-�
�� �
�gc�.._ � � '�� .� �}�u,,`��w,s�
y�y,�,p\ '' `'+_
LpYlS~�a p �� `„�
,� � .,. ,� ` r
� `�` � � ��
����� �- . ,��' 1 "�
««� �� ' � 9
� �+� " r ' ��' ' �!
� �.,�� �� Y � _:F K'bq d .�„ `;� ` �. -
�
. - ,. � ' " ;!� '
Legend ' - � /
�,;='
�.�; � ,�_ -
..� , � .;,� � ,'� �� � �� �;� m��, � � , .
� Existing L � .,,� � � �
w-' _,., —
� �: :
.,
�, � , � �:` �, � �
Proposed Lar� � �
`;
� � .��.a"� � �'�' �',
�. ,,
Interch�� � � �.� " �
��,� • ,��.
� � ",�� �,�' •� r }.,
� �
. . _ �. _ .��' z �� � � .. • . .
� � j�
�
.�. ..
cr .
� ��
. . �`
��..��