Acheological Background Studyftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot/get-involved/hou/sl-336/... ·...

The environmental review, consultation, and other actions required by applicable Federal environmental laws for this project are being, or have been, carried-out by TxDOT

pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 327 and a Memorandum of Understanding dated December 16, 2014, and executed by FHWA and TxDOT.

Archeological Background Study for Loop 336 in Conroe, Montgomery County, Texas CSJ: 0338-11-056

Prepared by: AmaTerra Environmental, Inc.

Date: August 2016

I 69 Bridge over the Harris County Flood Control District Canal CSJ: 0027-13-220 2

Introduction

The Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) proposes to improve approximately 2.5 miles of

Loop 336 South from Interstate Highway (IH) 45 to Farm-to-Market (FM) 1314 in Conroe, Montgomery

County, Texas (Figure 1). The proposed project would create a divided 4-lane highway by constructing

a 2 lane roadway to the south of the existing roadway. The new lanes would serve as the east bound

lanes with the existing lanes being converted to serve west bound traffic. The existing Loop 336 (from

East of Cypress Lane Boulevard to West of FM 1314) consists of one 13.5-foot lane (west bound lane)

and one 12 foot lane (east bound lane) with an 8-foot outside shoulder, within a 300-foot right-of-way

(ROW).The proposed Loop 336 westbound lanes would consist of one 13.5-foot lane and one 12 foot

lane with an 8-foot outside shoulder. The proposed eastbound lanes would consist of two 12-foot

lanes, a 15-foot outside shoulder, and a 10-foot hike and bike trail. The hike and bike trail would be off-

set from the shoulder by 10-foot. An approximate 192-foot grassy median would be located between

the eastbound and westbound lanes.

Similarly, the existing Loop 336 at FM 1314 consists of one 13.5-foot lane and one 12-foot-lane

(westbound lanes), a center left turn lane, two 12-foot lanes (eastbound lanes) and an 8-foot outside

shoulder. The proposed Loop 336 at FM 1314 westbound lanes would consists of one 13.5-foot lane,

two 12-foot lanes, one 12-foot left turn lane, and a 20-foot inside shoulder. The eastbound lanes

would consist of one 12-foot left turn lane, two 12-lanes, a 15-foot outside shoulder, and a 10-foot hike

and bike trail. The hike and bike trail would be off-set from the shoulder by 10-foot. An approximate

142-foot grassy median would be located between the eastbound and westbound lanes (see Attached

Project Schematics).

The proposed project is being funded by the TxDOT using federal funds. Since the project is being

built with federal transportation money on land owned or controlled by the State of Texas, it is

considered an undertaking subject to the provisions outlined under Section 106 of the National

Historic Preservation Act (Section 106) and the Antiquities Code of Texas (ACT).

The Area of Potential Effects (APE) for archeological resources for this undertaking is defined as the

footprint of the proposed project to the maximum depth of impact, including all easements, and

project specific locations. Therefore, the APE for archeological resources will cover a total distance of

approximately 6.4 miles and encompass an area of approximately 105 acres, all of which will take

place entirely within existing ROW (Figure 2). The vertical APE (depth of impacts) is estimated to

extend no more than three to five feet into the subsurface. Project schematics provided by the

Houston District are attached.


Physical Setting

The APE is located within the Southern Tertiary Uplands, a sub region of the South Central Plains

ecoregion (Griffith et al. 2007). This ecoregion, which is locally known as the “piney woods”, is

characterized by irregular plains and “represents the western edge of the southern coniferous forest

belt” (Griffith et al. 2007:87). The Southern Tertiary Uplands encompasses approximately 7667 square

miles and consists of “dissected irregular plains with some low, rolling hills; low to moderate gradient

streams with sandy and silty substrates” (Griffith et al. 2007:91). Historically, natural vegetation

consisted of upland longleaf pine-bluestem (Pinus palustris-Schizachyrium spp. and Andropogon spp.)

woodlands, shortleaf pine-hardwood forests (Pinus echinata-Quercus spp.), mixed hardwood-loblolly

pine (Pinus taeda) forests, American beech (Fagus grandifolia) or magnolia-beech-forests, bogs, and

sandstone glades. Bog plant species include southern sweetbay (Magnolia virginiana), hollies or

gallberry (Ilex spp.), wax-myrtles (Morella spp.), insectivorous plants, orchids, and wild azalea

(Rhododendron spp.). Today, pine forest is the dominant vegetation type with National Forest land

making up large parts of this region (Griffith et al. 2007).

The APE is underlain by the Tertiary-age Willis Formation (Pow), which is composed mostly of clay,

silt, sand, and siliceous granule to pebble gravel (BEG 1992). According to the United States

Department of Agriculture – Natural Resources Conservation Service (USDA-NRCS 2016) Web Soil

Survey (2016), soils within the APE consist of eight soil groups (Table 1). Soils are characterized by

loam to very fine sandy loam with restrictive features, such as clay, encountered as shallow as 36

centimetres below the ground surface.

Table 1. Soil Groups Found within the Project Area (USDA-NRCS 2016; Abbott 2001).

Soil Slope Landform/Topographic

Position Parent Material

Solum

Thickness

Geoarch.

Potential

Atasco fine

sandy loam 2 to 5 Terraces/Upland

Loamy alluvium derived from igneous,

metamorphic and sedimentary rock >60 Low

Conroe

gravelly

loamy fine

sand

0 to 5 Interfluves/Upland

Sandy and gravelly fluviomarine

deposits over clayey fluviomarine

deposits

60-100+ Low

Conroe

loamy fine

sand

0 to 5 Interfluves/Upland Clayey marine deposits 60-100+ Low

Hatliff-Pluck-

Kian complex 0 to 1

Flood Plains/Forested

Floodplain

Loam alluvium of Holocene-age 10 High

Loamy alluvium - -

Loamy alluvium - -

Landman

fine sand

0 to 3

Stream Terraces/- Loamy alluvium and/or sandy alluvium - -

Lilbert loamy - Interfluves Loamy marine deposits - -


Soil Slope Landform/Topographic

Position Parent Material

Solum

Thickness

Geoarch.

Potential

fine sand

Sorter-

Tarkington

complex

0 to 1 Flats/Upland

Loamy fluviomarine deposits derived

from igneous, metamorphic and

sedimentary rock

60-100+ Low

- -

Splendora

fine sandy

loam

0 to 2 Flatwoods/Upland Loamy fluviomarine deposits of Early

Pleistocene-age 60-100+ Low

Current Setting Located in southeast Conroe, Texas, the APE is within and surrounded by undeveloped woodland. The

existing two-lane undivided FM 336 roadway parallels an approximately 100-foot wide cleared area

(Figure 3) for much of its length. Topographically, the APE is hilly with elevations ranging from 141 to

184 feet above mean sea level. The APE crosses Stewarts Creek and abuts Little Caney Creek at its

easternmost terminus. Both creeks empty into the West Fork of the San Jacinto River located roughly

3.5 kilometers to the south and southwest of the APE. Disturbances within the APE are minimal and

include land clearing activities and those associated with the construction of roads, such as artificially

levelled and paved surfaces (Figure 4).

Archeological Background and Previous Archeological Studies

Background research for this project consisted of an online records search through the Texas

Historical Commission’s Archeological Sites Atlas (Atlas; 2016) and a review of historical maps and

aerial photographs. Research focused on the identification of archeological sites, sites listed as State

Antiquities Landmarks (SALs), Recorded Texas Historic Landmarks (RTHLs), sites listed on the

National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), cemeteries, and previously conducted archeological

surveys within one kilometer (0.62 mile) of the APE (Figure 5). The search revealed that no previously

recorded archeological sites, SALs, RTHLs, or sites listed on the NRHP fall within one kilometer (0.62

mile) of the APE. However, one cemetery and 12 previously conducted archeological surveys (Table 2)

are near or transect the APE.

The Conroe Memorial Park Cemetery (Cemetery ID Number: MQ-C011) is situated approximately 825

meters to the north of the APE. The cemetery opened in 1944 and reportedly contains over three

thousand internments. It is still active. The proposed undertaking will not have any foreseen effects on

the cemetery.

A total of 12 previously conducted archeological surveys fall within one kilometer (0.62 mile; Table 2).

Of these, only three intersect with the project area and none of the archeological surveys resulted in

the recording of new archeological sites within or near the APE.

Table 2. Archeological Surveys that intersect the APE.


Fieldwork

Year Contractor

Sponsor or

Agency

TAC

Permit

Type (Linear or

Area)/Size

Newly

Recorded

Sites

1980 Unknown EPA Unknown Linear/Unknown None

1983 Unknown EPA – TWDB Unknown Linear/Unknown None

2007 Blanton & Associates, Inc. FHWA/TxDOT 4314 Area/5,280 Feet None

Historic Land Use

Conroe, the county seat of Montgomery County, was established when Houston lumberman Isaac

Conroe moved his sawmill from Stewarts Creek to the International-Great Northern Railroad’s (I-GN)

Houston-Crockett line. Conroe’s sawmill became a station along the I & GN Railroad and by 1884.

Around this time, the Gulf, Colorado and Santa Fe Railway’s Navasota-Montgomery spur was built

through Conroe forming the only major junction of rail lines in Montgomery County. Settlers moved

to the region with the prospect of profiting from the region’s lumber boom. As a result, in 1889, the

population had reached 300 residents. Situated along a major rail line junction, By 1892, Conroe also

supported five steam-powered saw and planning mills, several brickyards, a cotton gin, a gristmill,

several hotels and general stores, and supported a population of 500 residents. Conroe became an

important shipping point for lumber, cotton, livestock, tobacco, and bricks (Jackson 2016). Both the

agricultural and timber industries continued to thrive through the early twentieth century, but was

curtailed with the dwindling supply of local timber and the Great Depression. In 1931, George W.

Strake discovered oil seven miles to the southeast of Conroe, which temporarily stimulated the local

economy. A revival of the lumber industry, the construction of Interstate Highway 45, and the

impounding of the West Fork of the San Jacinto River forming Lake Conroe all helped to promote

growth within the community. Today, the City of Conroe supports 63,322 residents (Jackson 2016).

According to a 1901 General Land Office Map of Montgomery County, Texas, the APE crosses land

originally patented by Hansom House and A. M. Folks (Figure 6). A 1938 USDA Map of the Sam

Houston National Forest depicts the APE as devoid of development with the exception of a pipeline

owned by the Prairie Pipe Line Company, which intersects FM 336 near its current intersection with

Stewarts Forest Drive (Figure 7). By 1953, two additional pipelines are visible transecting the APE and

FM 1314 is present at the project area’s easternmost end. However, the rest of the project area

remained forested and relatively free of development at this time (Figure 8). Urban development

began to encroach upon the project area by the late 1970s (Figure 9) with Loop 336 constructed prior

to 1989. The actual APE and its immediate surrounding, however, remain forested.

Archeological Site Potential

Historic aerial photographs and maps depict no residential or commercial development within the

APE at any time during the nineteenth to mid-twentieth century. Therefore, based on the information

provided above, there is low potential for historic-period archeological materials to be present within


the APE. However, the potential for prehistoric archeological sites is considered to be high. The

Potential Archeological Liability Mapping of the Houston District (PALM; Abbott 2001), classifies the

project area as Map Units 1, 2, and 4 (Figure 10). While no survey is recommended for those areas

located within Map Unit 4, survey is recommended for areas classified as Map Units 1 and 2. In

addition, the presence of sandy terraces overlooking natural waterways increases the potential for

intact prehistoric sites within the project area. Finally, the landscape has remained relatively

unchanged and lacks any major disturbances. Therefore, a survey for archeological sites is

recommended within the APE.

Summary and Recommendations

To summarize, historical maps and aerial photographs indicate that the potential for historic-period

archeological sites within the APE is low. On the other hand, topographic and soils maps, the presence

of natural waterways, a lack of disturbances, and the Houston PALM all suggest that there is a good

potential for intact prehistoric archeological remains to be present within the APE. This background

study recommends that an archeological survey is warranted for the APE. The survey should include

shovel testing and backhoe trenching at Stewarts Creek, where there is potential for deeply buried

archeological materials.


References Cited

Abbott, J. T.

2001 Framework for Archeological Investigation, Interpretation, and Cultural Resource

Management in the Houston Highway District. Archeological Studies Program Report 27.

Texas Department of Transportation, Environmental Affairs Division.

Bureau of Economic Geology (BEG)

1992 Geologic Map of Texas. The University of Texas, Austin.

Jackson, Charles Christopher

2016 Conroe, Texas – The Handbook of Texas. Electronic document,

https://tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/HEC03, accessed July 2016.

Omernik, Glenn, James Griffith, Anne Rogers

2007 Ecoregions of Texas (EPA). Project report submitted to the Texas Commission on

Environmental Quality.

Texas Historical Commission

2016 Texas Historic Sites Atlas. Electronic document, http://nueces.thc.state.tx.us/, accessed on July

2016.

United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (USDA-NRCS)

2016 Montgomery County, Texas – Web Soil Survey. Electronic document,

http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.asp, accessed on May 2016.

University of Missouri Extension

2016 Ag Site Assessment Tool. Electronic document,

http://www.communitycommons.org/groups/agsite/, accessed July 2016.


Figure 1. The project location in southeast Conroe, Montgomery County, Texas.


Figure 2. The APE depicted on 2016 aerial imagery.


Figure 3. The approximately 30-meter wide cleared area that parallels Loop 336, photographed facing

west (Source: Google Earth).

Figure 4. Typical disturbances observed within the APE, photographed facing east (Source: Google

Earth).


Figure 5. Results of the Atlas search with one kilometer (0.62 mile) buffer around the APE.


Figure 6. Detail from a 1901 General Land Office Map of Montgomery County, Texas depicting

the approximate location of the APE.


Figure 7. The project area overlain onto a 1938 USDA Map of Sam Houston National Forest.


Figure 8. A 1953 aerial photograph depicting the location of the APE.


Figure 9. The APE depicted on a 1977 aerial photograph.


Figure 10. Map Units within the APE as defined by the Houston PALM.


This report was written on behalf of the Texas Department of Transportation by

4009 Banister Ln., Austin

TX, 78704 www.amaterra.com

1

LOOP

336

LOOP

336

LOOP

336

PA

RK D

ALE D

R.

FM 1

314

END PROJECT

EXISTING ROW

EXISTING ROW

EXISTING ROW

EXISTING ROW

CY

PR

ES

S L

AN

E B

LV

D.

.R

D T

AB

RA

HK

DE

.R

D T

SE

RO

F S

TR

AW

ET

S

BEGIN PROJECT

RE STRIPED WB FRONTAGE RD.

OAK

KAS

HMIE

RS

KY

O'CONNOR

MAGNOLIA

1.1

LILLY

GAY

SEMANDSMcMIL

LENCHAMBERSFRYER

ADKINS

DALLAS

9T

H8T

H7T

H

3R

D

PAULINE

EDGAR

TURNERREEVES

WEBB

COLLEGE

PHILLIP

S

CemeteryOakwood

MURRAY

PINE

6T

H

SHERMAN

A

MO

RG

AN

E

F

6T

H5T

H4T

H

G

H

J

K

J PL

WELLS

K

L

7T

H

JESSUP

M

5T

H

4T

H3R

D

2N

D

1ST

GLADIOLA

VINE

HILLCREST

IRISH

NORTHPINE

KIMBERLY

WEST

VIE

W

SEMANDSWILSON

WILSON

COWAN

THOMAS

CALLAHAN

BETTES

HU

NTE

R

AD

AM

S

STEVENS

MAPLE

HOLLOWOAK

DALLAS

WACO

AUSTIN

GALVESTON

LEWIS

NUGGENT

COCHRAN

SIMONTON

COLLINS

PHILLIPSDAVIS

WACO

AUSTIN

McCALL

LESTE

R

CABLE

WAYNE

MA

DLE

Y

OLD MONTGOMERY

McDADE

HICKS

PECAN

OA

K

URQUHART

WEST YORK

HICKERS

ON

SHADY

HUNT

MILLG

AR

RETT

JE

WEL MIL

LIE

CLIN

TO

N

GROVE

PIT

TS

DELT

A

OD

D FELLO

WS

HAIL

EY

RO

BE

RTS

ON

HILLIARD

EVERETT

CRESTHIL

L

PINECREST

PINE H

ILL

LAKE VIEW

TIM

BER

HIL

L

MA

GN

OLIA

BAY

ELM

HOLLY

MAP

LE

EAST

WO

OD

AIR

PO

RT-B

EAC

H

SEMANDS

BYBEE

WOODLA

ND

LA

ZY

ESTATES

WOODSHADY-

HUNTERS

SH

AD

OW

OO

D

FAIR

WA

Y

WR

OX

TO

N

PA

RK

GA

TE

GR

EE

NW

AY

RIV

ERS

HIR

E DOVE

WINDSOR

IREDEVONSRIVERSHIRE

BA

RO

N

CAMBRIDGE

SC

AR

BO

RO

UG

H

RIVERSHIRE

RIVERSHIRE

LA

NCELO

T

POST OAK A

LM

A

AUSTIN

RHODES

GLADSTELL

OLD

MA

GN

OLIA

G

FR

AZIE

R

MAIN

PA

RK

Park

Lewis

CR

OO

KE

CR

OO

KE

WAGERS

LO

NG

SILVERDALE

IVE

YBE

RT

RA

ND

MARILYN

REAVES

VALWOODS

RIDGEWAY

MONTROSE

HALO

FOST

ER

SOUTHMORE

PA

RK

MA

NO

R

PATRICIA

RIGGS

WELLWOOD

TUPELO

AR

TESIA

AR

TESIA

N

OA

K

OA

K

GR

OVE

MAPLE

Cemetery

Park

MemorialConroe

BIG

OA

K

PIN

OA

KRED

OA

K

LIV

E

OA

K

PINEY P

OINT

PIN OAK

WHITE O

AK

CREIGHTON

CREIGHTON

ALB

ER

T

MO

OR

EH

EA

D

ROCKY

ROY

EXXON

SHOOTCITY

LIM

IT

DOUGET

GER

RYGEORGE

PAT

KLINE

6T

H Lake

The

Pop 27,610

2.2

4.5

2.1

0.5

1.7

1.3

1.0

0.8

0.5

1.1

1.3

2.2

2.0

1.2

CORNERS

FOUR

2.6

0.3

OA

KF

OR

EST

1.6

PR

ESS

WO

OD

DEF

OU

R

OR

CH

AR

D

MA

GN

OLIA

LO

NG

VIE

W

AVE M AVE M

2.2

2.1

JOHNSON

RIV

ER

POIN

T

2.2

HA

LL

0.5

0.2

0.5

PA

CIFIC

PIN

E

SH

AD

OW

S

CONROE

WILKINS

TH

OM

PS

ON

0.30.5 0.1 0

.1

0.1

0.1

LEWIS

1.6

FOREST

WA

Y

Club

Country

Conroe

GREENLEAFRED

OAK

1.3

I

CRYSTAL

WA

AK

BURLINGTON

Crawford

LAKESH

ORE

PIN

EW

OO

D

DAVIS

H

BELVIDERE

CONROE

CR

EE

K

WEST

STE

WA

RTS

CREE

K

Creek

Creek

Grand

Lake

ALLIGATOR

Creek

CR

EE

K

SA

N

CemeteryRosewood

JA

CIN

TO

LON

GMIR

E

1.5

CUTAND

MAGNOLIA

CR

EE

K

OA

K

BN SF

RUSTLIN

G

OA

KS

BILLIE

BESS

13T

H

12T

H11TH

10T

H

PRIN

CE

OF

WA

LES

Park

Cane

Candy

Club

Country

Jacinto

San

Club

Country

Jacinto

San

Cemetery

State

Golden

WHITE

OA

K

CR

EE

K

SA

N

336

336

3083

2854

2854

336

336

336

336

105

105

105

105

105

45

75

75

1485

VICINTY MAP

336

336

336

45

45

1314

SU

BJE

CT T

O C

HA

NG

E

PR

ELIM

INA

RY

SCHEMATIC LAYOUT

LP 336

,P.E.

TBPE NO.

NOT A BIDDING DOCUMENT

LEGEND

TRAFFIC COUNT YEAR ( ) DHV

EXISTING LANE INDICATOR

EXISTING ROADWAY TO BE REMOVED

EXISTING ROADWAY

EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY

PLANIMETRIC

CONTROL OF ACCESS

PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY

PROPOSED LANE INDICATOR

PROPOSED STRIPING

PROPOSED SIDEWALKS

PROPOSED NOISE WALL

PROPOSED BRIDGE BENTS

PROPOSED RETAINING WALL

PROPOSED EMBANKMENT

PROPOSED DIRECT CONNECTOR

PROPOSED RAMPS

PROPOSED FRONTAGE ROADS

PROPOSED TOLL LANES

PROPOSED MAIN LANES

1

1

1

2

1

1

2

5

1

1

2

5

2

6

2

2

2

5

2

2

BLACK -0

BLACK -0

BLACK -0

GREEN -2

BLACK -0

GREEN -2

RED -3

BLACK -0

BLACK -0

ORANGE -6

MAGENTA -200

MAGENTA -37

RED -3

RED -3

RED -3

ORANGE -6

BLUE -1

BLUE -1

PURPLE -60

BLACK -0

DESCRIPTION SYMBOLOGY WEIGHT COLOR CODE

000000

COLORFILL LEGENDMAIN LANES

FRONTAGE ROAD/RAMPS

BRIDGE

DESIGN CRITERIA

SCALE

PR

EP

AR

ED B

Y: {Y

OU

R N

AM

E H

ER

E}

FIL

E L

OC

ATIO

N: {FIL

E P

AT

H}

PR

OJE

CT D

EV

EL

OP

ME

NT

HO

US

TO

N DIS

TRIC

T

SU

BJE

CT T

O C

HA

NG

E

PR

ELIM

INA

RY

PR

EP

AR

ED B

Y: {Y

OU

R N

AM

E H

ER

E}

FIL

E L

OC

ATIO

N: {FIL

E P

AT

H}

PR

OJE

CT D

EV

EL

OP

ME

NT

HO

US

TO

N DIS

TRIC

T

4003002001000

APPROVED: / /

DATE: 02/12/2016

CSJ: 0338-11-020

LP 3

36

LIMITS TO: .2 MI EAST OF FM

LIMITS FROM: IH-45

COUNTY: MONTGOMERY

FRONTAGE ROAD DESIGN SPEED: 45 MPH

FRONTAGE ROAD DESIGN CRITERIA: RURAL COLLECTOR

FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION: URBAN PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL

1

1

1

1

LIM

ITS T

O: E O

F F

M 1

314

LIM

ITS F

RO

M: E.

OF I

H 4

5

CO

UN

TY: M

ON

TG

OM

ER

Y

RO

AD

WA

Y: L

P 3

36

LP 3

36

LIM

ITS T

O: E.

OF F

M 1

314

LIM

ITS F

RO

M: E.

OF I

H 4

5

CO

UN

TY: M

ON

TG

OM

ER

Y

RO

AD

WA

Y: L

P 3

36

KE

ER

C Y

EN

AC

EL

TTI

L

INTERSTATE

45

PROPOSED EB FRONTAGE RD.

KEERC SRAW

ET

S

PO

T294

+33.62

295+00

300+00

305+00

310+00

315+00 P

C317

+39.64

320+00

325+00

330+00

335+00

340+00

PT344+35.44

345+00

350+00

355+00

360+00

PC361+49.52

365+00

370+00

375+00

380+00

385+0

0

PT388+91.13

390+0

0

PC392+59.37

395+0

0

400+00

PT400

+18.84

405+00

PC405

+26.03

410+0

0

PT413+19.73

415+0

0

PC419+12.54

420+0

0

425+00

PO

T294

+33.62

295+00

300+00

305+00

310+00

315+00 P

C317

+39.64

320+00

325+00

330+00

335+00

340+00

PT344+35.44

345+00

350+00

355+00

360+00

PC361+49.52

365+00

370+00

375+00

380+00

385+0

0

PT388+91.13

390+0

0

PC392+59.37

395+0

0

400+00

PT400

+18.84

405+00

PC405

+26.03

410+0

0

PT413+19.73

415+0

0

PC419+12.54

420+0

0

425+00

300' RIGHT-OF-WAY

EXISTING TYPICAL SECTION

12'

2%3%

123'

6:1 4:1

27'CL

13.5' 8'

E. OF CYPRESS LANE BLVD.TO W. OF FM 1314 LOOP 336

300' RIGHT-OF-WAY

PROPOSED TYPICAL SECTION

2%

12'

CL

4:1 max

6:1 usual4:1

123'

12'

2%

12' 15'

4:1 ma

x6:1 us

ual

4:1

102'

FROM STEWARTS FOREST DR. TO 1400' E. OF W. OF FM 1314 LOOP 336

3%

13.5' 8'

RE STRIPED WB FRONTAGE RD.

10'10'

48'27'

1'

LANE LANE SHDLR

BIKE

AND

HIKE

PROPOSED EB FRONTAGE RD.

300' RIGHT-OF-WAY

EXISTING TYPICAL SECTION

12'

2%

3%

123'

6:1 4:1

27'CL

AT FM 1314 LOOP 336

12' 12'12'

TURNLEFT

13.5'2' BERM

8'

300' RIGHT-OF-WAY

PROPOSED TYPICAL SECTION

2%3%

123'

6:1 4:1

27'CL

AT FM 1314 LOOP 336

12' 12'12'13.5'2' BERM

12'

2%

12' 15'

4:1 ma

x6:1 us

ual4:1

102'

10'10'

48'

12'

TURNLEFT

1'

LANE LANE SHDLR

BIKE

AND

HIKE 20'

TURNLEFT

RE STRIPED WB FRONTAGE RD. PROPOSED EB FRONTAGE RD.

END PROJECT

BEGIN PROJECT

Acheological Background Studyftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot/get-involved/hou/sl-336/... ·...

Documents

Transcript of Acheological Background Studyftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot/get-involved/hou/sl-336/... ·...