US 701 (2)

a
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
SUN f .:: ?
u.arF Oy
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION NI Q,
p
Ti n-
'%;
BEVERLY EAVES PERDUE EUGENE A. I, JR.
GOVERNOR SECRETARY 'y
May 11, 2009
MEMORANDUM TO: Merger Team Members
FROM: Kim L. Gillespie, PE
Project Planning Engineer
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
SUBJECT: Interchange Construction at the NC 87 Bypass/US 701
Intersection, Bladen County, NCDOT Division 6, Federal-
Aid Project NHF-87(15), State Project 40226.1.1,
TIP Project R-4903
A concurrence meeting for the subject project was held on April 21, 2009. The
objective of the meeting was to discuss the project purpose and need, alternatives to be
studied in detail, and bridging decisions (Concurrence Points 1, 2 and 2A, respectively).
The following persons were in attendance:
Jim Rerko NCDOT Division 6 Environmental Officer
Tracey Pittman NCDOT Division 6 Construction Engineer
Jerry Snead NCDOT Hydraulics
John Merritt NCDOT PDEA-NEU
Jay McInnis NCDOT PDEA
Kim Gillespie NCDOT PDEA
Rob Hanson NCDOTPDEA
Tristram Ford NCDOTPDEA-HEU
Anthony West NCDOT Roadway Design
Gary Levering NCDOT Roadway Design
William Petit NCDOTTIP
Renee Gledhill-Earley DCR-State Historic Preservation Office
Rob Ridings NCDENR - DWQ
Ron Lucas FHWA
Joel Strickland Mid-Carolina RPO
Travis Wilson NC WRC
Chris Militscher US EPA
Gary Jordan US FWS
MAILING ADDRESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF rRA\SPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPVFNI ?`!G F_WIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
1548 MAIL SERVICE CE P::
RALEIGH NC 27699-1543
TELERCONE: 919-733-3141
FAX. [phone]
NEBSTE: W'PPN.UUH.UOT.STATE.NC.US
LOCATION:
r IISIORTATION BUILDING
1 S[;'.:' WILMINGTON STREET
RALEIGH NC
R-4903 April 21,0009 Merger Team Meeting Minutes
Page 2 of 5 , --: t
Kim Gillespie opened the meeting by reviewing items in the meeting handout.
CONCURRENCE POINT 1: PURPOSE AND NEED
Ms. Gillespie discussed the project need. She stated the project is intended to
address the following needs:
• the number of angle and left-turn accidents occurring at this intersection
between January 2003 and December 2005, resulting in serious injuries or
fatalities
• the fatal crash rate at the intersection is over 6 times the statewide average and
twice the critical rate between January 2003 and December 2005
• the intersection will operate at capacity (LOS E) in 2030
• NC 87 is designated as a Strategic Highway Corridor, with a vision for an
expressway
• there is more traffic on US 701 than on the NC 87 Bypass for 2006 and 2030
• NC 87 will provide a direct connection to the North Carolina International
Port (NCIP)
Chris Militscher stated he did not believe the proposed NCIP should be included
as a part of the project need. He cited multiple reasons, including the proposed port's
lack of funding, and lack of environmental analysis. Jay McInnis noted that the purpose
of Project R-4903 is to increase capacity and safety at this intersection, and that the port is
merely a footnote. Ms. Gillespie restated the project's purpose and need, and requested
concurrence. The Merger Team concurred with the following purpose statement:
The purpose of the proposed project is to improve the safety and capacity of the NC 87
Bypass/US 701 intersection.
CONCURRENCE POINT 2: ALTERNATIVES TO BE CARRIED FORWARD
FOR DETAILED STUDY
. Ms. Gillespie discussed various project alternatives, including countermeasure
alternatives (flashers with warning signs, rumble strips, etc.) and a directional crossover.
Flashers with warning signs reading "Be Prepared to Stop" were installed on NC 87.
However, the percentage of angle accidents increased from 42% to 53%. A directional
crossover would require the larger amount of traffic on US 701 to make a u-turn. The
large amount of traffic traveling through the intersection would require a traffic signal,
which may still violate driver's expectations on NC 87. For these reasons, these two
alternatives were not recommended.
Four alternatives were developed for an interchange. Each of the four alternatives
relocates US 701 east of its existing location. Each alternative also constructs an
overpass on NC 87 Bypass. The grade of US 701 would become too steep to construct an
overpass on this route.
.R-4903 April 21, 2009 Merger Team Meeting Minutes
Page 3 of 5
Alternative 1 is a partial cloverleaf interchange with loops and ramps only in the
northwest and southeast quadrants of the interchange. NC 242 is relocated approximately
1000 feet south of its existing location.
Alternative 2 is similar to Alternative 1 in that the loops and ramps of the partial
cloverleaf interchange are in the northwest and southeast interchange quadrants.
However, NC 242 would be relocated to the north a few hundred feet to tie into the
southeast ramp.
Alternative 3 is a diamond interchange. This interchange also allows for loops
with a 250-foot radius. NC 242 is relocated approximately 1000 feet south of its existing
location. This relocation allows for enough space between the southern interchange
intersection and the new US 701/NC 242 intersection for safety.
Alternative 4 is a partial cloverleaf interchange with loops and ramps only in the
northeast and southwest quadrants of the interchange. NC 242 is relocated approximately
1000 feet south of its existing location. It eliminates the weaving challenge for eastbound
traffic wanting to turn onto Mercer Mill Road.
Table 2 depicts the impacts of the interchange alternatives.
Table 2
Alternative Comparisons
Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4
Residential 4 4 6 4
Relocatees
Business 0 0 1 2
Relocatees
Wetlands 1.39 0.89 1.94 1.77
Affected (Acres)
Stream Impacts 0 0 256 188
(Linear Feet)
Habitat for No No No No
Federally
Protected
Species?
Historic None are None are None are None are
Properties? considered eligible considered eligible considered eligible considered eligible
for the National for the National for the National for the National
Register Register Register Register
Ms. Gillespie noted that Alternative 3 has the greatest impacts to wetlands,
streams, and residential relocations, and therefore recommended dropping Alternative 3
from future consideration.
Ms. Gillespie pointed out that Altemative 2 has the lowest impacts of the four
alternatives, but the loop in its southeast quadrant takes a greater amount (d land than the
R-4903 April 21, 2009 Merger Team Meeting Minutes
Page 4 of 5
others. Mr. Militscher asked if a prime farmland impact analysis has been conducted.
Ms. Gillespie replied that one has not.
Renee Gledhill-Earley observed that the original NC 87 bypass included
additional right of way to accommodate a future interchange. Mr. McInnis confirmed
this, but explained that the amount of extra right of way is insufficient to accommodate
current interchange geometry standards.
Tracey Pittman requested that the vertical alignment of the interchange be
clarified. Ms. Gillespie explained that the steep grade of US 701 would have made
carrying US 701 over NC 87 more costly due to increased earthwork, therefore NC 87
will be carried over US 701 in all of the interchange alternatives.
Mr. Militscher inquired as to the purpose of the new location connector road south
of NC 242. Mr. McInnis explained that NC 242 was relocated south to avoid the
interchange's control-of-access. Mr. Militscher asked why it had to be moved into the
wetland. Mr. McInnis explained the connector road was located in the wetland in order to
avoid the Hess Oil facility. Ms. Gledhill-Earley asked why the connector road is not
further north, to which Mr. McInnis replied that Alternative 2 shows the connector road
further north. He further explained that intersections are ideally placed either together or
far apart, to prevent operational problems.
Ron Lucas expressed concern over the weaving area between the ramps and
Mercer Mill Road (shown as College Street on Figures 5 through 8) and Martin Luther
King Drive. Gary Lovering noted the larger loop of Alternative 2 moves the southbound
ramp onto NC 87 closer to the nearby intersection, which exacerbates the weaving
problem for the interchange. From a design standpoint, he stated Alternative 4 is the best
option.
Ms. Gledhill-Earley asked if the bridges would be wide enough for a four-lane
section. Mr. Lovering confirmed they would be wide enough.
Mr. Militscher recommended dropping Alternative 3 from future study. Ms.
Gillespie requested concurrence for dropping Alternative 3. The merger team concurred.
Mr. Militscher then recommended dropping Alternative 1, due to its higher
impacts to wetlands. He also stated that he cannot base a decision on land use since no
prime farmland analysis has yet been completed. He saw little difference in safety
between Alternative 1 and the other alternatives. The new location of NC 242 is the
prime difference between Alternative 1 and Alternative 2. Mr. Lovering noted the
difference in safety between Alternatives 1 and 2 is the increased weaving distance of
Alternative 1.
Travis Wilson asked why the northeast quadrant loops of Alternative 4 were not
placed in the southeast quadrant in order to reduce wetland impacts. Mr. McInnis
explained that doing so would create additional weaving sections between the two loops,
and that this partial cloverleaf interchange design is no longer used.
'R-4903 April 21, 2009 Merger Team Meeting Minutes
Page 5 of 5
Ms. Gillespie requested concurrence on moving forward with Alternative 2 and
Alternative 4. Mr. Militscher expressed interest in hearing from the public conceming
the currently proposed alternatives. Mr. McInnis said that Alternatives 2 and 4 both meet
purpose and need. The Merger Team concurred on carrying Alternatives 2 and 4 forward
for detailed study.
CONCURRENCE POINT 2A: BRIDGING DECISIONS
Ms. Gillespie noted that Bridge Number 3, carrying US 701 over Brown's Creek,
was previously to be replaced under TIP Project B-4710, but is now included in this
project. The proposed alignment for each of the interchange alternatives ties back in to
existing US 701 just north of Brown's Creek. Bridge Number 3 is 46.9 feet long. The
proposed length of the replacement bridge is 55 feet. Ms. Gillespie noted a typo in the
handout showed the proposed length as 120 feet, when it is actually 55 feet. Mr.
Militscher asked if the 55-foot length is for hydraulic requirements. Ms. Gillespie
confirmed it is. She also noted that traffic will be maintained on the existing bridge
during the new bridge's construction.
Mr. Militscher asked if there are wetlands impacted by the new bridge. Mr.
McInnis confirmed there are wetland impacts due to the bridge. Mr. Militscher asked
about the cost difference in bridging the entire wetland area. Mr. McInnis responded that
he believed the impacted wetland area to be less than I/10th of one acre.
Ms. Gillespie requested concurrence on the bridging decision. The merger team
concurred on a length of 55 feet for the proposed bridge over Brown's Creek.
Mr. Militscher recommended noting that the area depicted on Figure 1 represents
the defined study area as part of purpose and need.
Copies of the signed concurrence forms are attached to these minutes.
NEPA/404 MERGER TEAM MEETING AG VED
Concurrence Point No. 1: Purpose and Need APR 9 4 2009
RFGULATOFW
tN1LM,FLp.0FC.
PROJECT NOYFIP NOJ NAME/DESCRIPTION:
Federal Aid Project Number: NHF-87(15)
State Project Number: WBS Element 40226.1.1
TIP Project Number: R4903
TIP Description: Interchange Construction at the NC 87 Bypass/US 701 intersection,
Bladen County
The Project Team concurred on this date of April 21, 2009 with the purpose of and need
for the proposed project as stated below and the project study area as described below and
shown in the attached exhibit.
Purpose and Need of Proposed Project
The purpose of the proposed project is to improve the safety and capacity of the NC 87 Bypass/
US 701 intersection.
AGENCY
lac;
U s rws

Usti FPr
wv'
NC DOT
D'fi¢GZF-
NEPA/404 MERGER TEAM MEETING AGREEMENT
Concurrence Point No. 2: Alternatives to be Carried Forward for
Detailed Study
PROJECT NO./TIP NOJ NAME/DESCRIPTION:
Federal Aid Project Number: NHF-87(15)
State Project Number: WBS Element 40226.1.1
TIP Project Number: R4903
TIP Description: Interchange Construction at the NC 87 Bypass/US 701.
intersection, Bladen County
Alternatives to be studied in detail in the NEPA Document:
The Section 404/NEPA Merger Project Team has concluded that the following Build
Altematives are to be studied in detail in the NEPA document:
Alternative I
Altemative 2
Altemative 3
Alternative 4
The Project Team concurred on this date of April 21, 2009 with the alternatives to
be studied in detail in the NEPA Document as stated above.
AGENCY
us FWs
NC acsT

NEPA/404 MERGER TEAM MEETING AGREEMENT
Concurrence Point No. 2A: Bridging Decisions
PROJECT NO./TIP NO? NAME/DESCRIPTION:
Federal Aid Project Number: NEF-87(15)
State Project Number: WBS Element 40226. 1.1
TIP Project Number: R-4903
TIP Description: Interchange Construction at the NC 87 Bypass/US 701 intersection,
Bladen County
Bridging Decisions: The merger team concurred on the following minimum bridge length and
culvert replacement for the project:
Bridge #3, which is 46.9 feet long, will be replaced with a new structure 55 feet long.
The project team has unconditionally concurred on this date of April 21, 2009.
AGENCY

.,?/ct??nc?
L)
D
1) sl;-:f

NC -DOT