JAIL SITE ASSESSMENT PICKETT COUNTY, TENNESSEE… · 2017-04-12 · JAIL SITE ASSESSMENT For...

JAIL SITE ASSESSMENT For PICKETT COUNTY, TENNESSEE MARCH 2016 JAMES C. HAILEY & COMPANY Consulting Engineers 7518 Highway 70 South Suite 100 Nashville, Tennessee 37221 (615) 883-4933

JAIL SITE ASSESSMENT For PICKETT COUNTY, TENNESSEE MARCH 2016

JAMES C. HAILEY & COMPANY Consulting Engineers 7518 Highway 70 South Suite 100 Nashville, Tennessee 37221 (615) 883-4933 JCH Project No.: 15181

TABLE OF CONTENTS DESCRIPTION BEGINNING PAGE

1.0 PURPOSE & NEED OF PROJECT ............................................................... . 1 2.0 DESCRIPTON OF POTENTIAL SITES .......................................................... . 1 2.1 Mitchell Property .................................................................................. 1 2.2 Fitzgerald Property .............................................................................. 2 2.3 Sutton Building ...................................................................................... 2 2.4 Winningham Property ........................................................................... 2 2.5 EMS Lot ................................................................................................ 3 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS ....................................................... 3 3.1 Land Use .............................................................................................. 3 3.2 Floodplains ........................................................................................... 3 3.3 Wetlands ............................................................................................... 4 3.4 Cultural Resources .............................................................................. 4 3.5 Biological Resources ........................................................................... 4 4.0 NEGATIVE SITE CHARACTERISTICS ......................................................... 5 4.1 Mitchell Property .................................................................................. 5 4.2 Fitzgerald Property .............................................................................. 5 4.3 Sutton Building ...................................................................................... 5 4.4 Winningham Property ........................................................................... 6 4.5 EMS Lot ................................................................................................ 6 5.0 POSITIVE SITE CHARACTERISTICS ........................................................... 6 5.1 Mitchell Property .................................................................................. 6 5.2 Fitzgerald Property .............................................................................. 7 5.3 Sutton Building ...................................................................................... 7 5.4 Winningham Property ........................................................................... 7 5.5 EMS Lot ................................................................................................ 8 6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION ............................................... 8 7.0 EXHIBITS ......................................................................................................... 10 Location Map Farmland Classification Map Flood Insurance Rate Map Wetlands Inventory Map Site Characteristics Table Site Photos

i

1

1.0 PURPOSE

This report was written in order to convey to the Pickett County Corrections

Partnership and the Board of Commissioners of Pickett County findings from an

assessment of five (5) properties cited as potential locations for the future Pickett

County Jail. It is the intention of this report to address current site conditions and

potential obstacles associated with the acquisition of property, as well as the

construction and operation of the proposed facilities.

Please note that though there are some aspects presented in this report that are

similar to that of an Engineering or Environmental Report, this document does

not constitute an in-depth Engineering or Environmental analysis. If the County

requires further Engineering or Environmental analysis, similar to what is

required for federal funding of projects, James C. Hailey & Company would be

happy to coordinate with the County. Please note that James C. Hailey &

Company does not provide design services for jail or criminal justice facilities.

2.0 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL SITES

2.1 MITCHELL PROPERTY

The Mitchell property consists of two (2) parcels totaling approximately 35

acres located near the intersection of North Main Street, Parker Road

(State Route 325), and State Route 111. This property has approximately

1,250 linear feet of road frontage along Parker Road and approximately

1,550 linear feet of road frontage on North Main Street. According to

water system maps provided by the Town of Byrdstown, there is a 6”

water main that parallels Parker Road, adjacent to the Mitchell property.

Byrdstown’s sewer system maps indicate that sewer service is available

at the southwestern most property corner. Current use of the property

appears to be agricultural. The elevation across the site appears to vary

by almost 100 feet from the center of the property to the northeastern

most edge. It is estimated that roughly 25% of the property is covered

with trees and shrubs. There currently exist multiple structures in various

locations on the property, including what appear to be mobile homes,

barns, and sheds. A small pond exists in the southwestern most property

corner.

2

2.2 FITZGERALD PROPERTY

The Fitzgerald property consists of approximately 3.5 acres and is located

just west of the intersection of Olympus Drive and State Route 325. This

property has approximately 215 linear feet of road frontage along SR 325.

According to water system maps provided by the Town of Byrdstown,

there is a 6” water main that parallels SR 325, adjacent to the Fitzgerald

property. Byrdstown’s sewer system maps indicate that sewer service is

available at the northern most property line, along SR 325. It appears that

the current use of the property may be the fill or borrow of soil. The

elevation across the site appears to slope from front to back and back to

front, forming a bowl which retains water at the center of the property.

Vegetation appears to consist of mostly grass, with the southernmost

portion of the property being barren due to earthwork. It appears that the

only structure present on the property is a small 16’ x 16’ brick utility

building assumed to belong to Volunteer Electric.

2.3 SUTTON BUILDING

The Sutton Building consists of approximately 5.4 acres and is located

just south of the Pickett County Courthouse on South Main Street. This

property has approximately 1,300 linear feet of road frontage along South

Main Street. According to water system maps provided by the Town of

Byrdstown, there is a 6” water main that runs through the parcel that the

Sutton Building is located on. Byrdstown’s sewer system maps indicate

that sewer service is available at the northern and eastern most property

lines, along SR 325. The ground appears to slope from the southwest to

northeast approximately 60’ across the property. According to the County,

the property is not currently being used for anything other than storage.

An abandoned 42,000 square foot factory building exists onsite. Outside

of the factory building, the site is predominantly covered with trees and

shrubs.

2.4 WINNINGHAM PROPERTY

The Winningham Property consists of approximately 4.38 acres and is

located on State Route 325, between Tulip and Highland Avenues. This

property has approximately 540 linear feet of road frontage along SR 325.

According to water system maps provided by the Town of Byrdstown,

3

there is a 6” water main that runs along SR 325, adjacent to the

Winningham Property. Byrdstown’s sewer system maps indicate that

sewer service is available at the southernmost property lines, along SR

325. The site appears to slope from north to south, with a change in

elevation of about 40’. The property is currently considered residential,

with one house and one barn located onsite. Vegetation at the site is

mainly comprised of grass, with a few trees dotted throughout the

property.

2.5 EMS LOT

The EMS Lot consists of approximately 3.5 acres and is located on State

Route 111, just north of Beason Boulevard. This property has

approximately 200 linear feet of road frontage along SR 325. According to

water system maps provided by the Town of Byrdstown, there is an 8”

water main located within the vicinity of the site. Byrdstown’s sewer

system maps indicate that sewer service is available at the southeastern

most property line, along SR 111. The EMS Lot appears to slope from

northwest to southeast with an elevation change of approximately 20’

across the site. Multiple structures are located onsite including buildings

for County fire and ambulance services. It is estimated that approximately

50% of the site is covered with pavement, stone, or concrete. There are

small areas of densely populated trees at the north and west sides of the

site.

3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS

3.1 Land Use

Developments are often evaluated on their likelihood of converting “Prime

Farmland” to alternate classifications. The National Resources

Conservation Service Web Soil Survey was used in order to produce a

map which illustrates that, of the sites being considered, only the

Winningham Property is anticipated to affect an area considered “Prime

Farmland”.

3.2 Floodplains

A Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) was generated from the Federal

4

Emergency Management Agency’s website and included in this report.

According to the FIRM, none of the sites being considered are within a

significant flood risk area. The closest property to any flood risk area is

the Sutton Building, located near Town Creek. Please see the FIRM,

located in the Exhibits section of this report.

3.3 Wetlands

According to information gathered from the United States Fish and

Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetlands Inventory, there is only one

site which boasts a true emergent wetland. At the southern corner of the

Mitchell property, there exists a pond which is considered a wetland by

USFWS. This is not anticipated to be a problem, since the site is so large

and the wetland appears to only affect an area that is less than 1 aerial

acre. Please see the Wetlands Inventory Maps, located in the Exhibits

section of this report.

Even though it is not shown on the National Wetlands Inventory, a site

visit made to the Fitzgerald property revealed what appears to be a pond

or low area that retains water. A review with the appropriate State and

Federal officials should be made regarding whether the County would be

allowed to fill in this area, particularly if federal funds are used in the

construction of the jail facility. Additionally, because the site is relatively

small, this could create a foundation problem for any structure built in the

vicinity of the area that retains water.

3.4 Cultural Resources

There are not anticipated to be any cultural resources affected regardless

of which site is ultimately chosen. It is recommended that the Town work

with the State Historical Preservation Officer (SHPO) in order to

determine if there will be any effect on historical or cultural resources prior

to committing to the purchase of any of the sites.

3.5 Biological Resources

USFWS was contacted in order to request information regarding any

threatened and/or federally listed endangered species. USFWS noted

that Indiana Bats (a federally listed endangered bat species) have been

5

observed within the vicinity of the Town of Byrdstown. The more trees on

a site, the greater the probability of finding Indiana Bats.

There appear to be more trees on the Mitchell property than any other,

but it is likely that this will not be a problem since there is a vast amount

of open area as well. Conversely, there is a large percentage of the

Sutton Building site which is covered with trees, and it is anticipated that a

large percentage of them will require removal in order to utilize the site.

There are not a significant number of trees on the remaining properties

considered in this study.

4.0 NEGATIVE SITE CHARACTERISTICS


Potential cost: Because the Mitchell property is much larger than the

other properties being considered, cost could be an important factor in its

feasibility.

Difference in elevations across property: These differences could

make site work and utility installation difficult. Similarly, access and travel

across the site could be more difficult for this site than others.


Slope on property: The site slopes form a bowl near the center. The

slope causes ponding of water which could be difficult to mitigate.

Similarly, this ponding could cause foundation issues for any structures

built on the site if fill is not properly compacted.

4.3 SUTTON BUILDING

Building on site: The factory building onsite would have to be

demolished in order for this property to be feasible. It is anticipated that

the proper demolition and disposal of the factory building would cost

hundreds of thousands of dollars, since there are hazardous materials

that will require abatement. It is not anticipated that there will be any

portion of the factory building that will be usable for the construction of a

jail facility (i.e. walls, foundation, slab, etc…). It is expected that the stone

base under the existing building’s floor could be

6

used for parking or as the initial grade to build a foundation on, but

geotechnical testing is recommended.

Dense trees: The trees located onsite could be home to the Indiana Bat

which could require mitigation prior to tree removal and site preparation.

Location: This site is the farthest from any state highway, which limits

access. Also, the site is very near to a residential area which could

receive some criticism from residents.

Potential flooding: Even though the FIRM shows that the site is just

outside the 100 year flood zone, it is still the closest to a flood zone.


Location: This site located in the heart of a residential area, and it is

anticipated that it would be difficult to obtain community support.

Access: The site has ample road frontage on SR 325, but sight-distance

is affected with hills in the road located on the east and west side of the

property. It is anticipated that there could be some concerns associated

with traffic when vehicles are pulling into and out of the highway.

4.5 EMS LOT

Buildings on site: The EMS Lot has the least available space to be

converted to other uses. In order for a jail to be constructed on this site, it

might be necessary to demolish some structures.

Odd property shape: The shape of the property is long and narrow.

With the other buildings on the site, the shape of the property makes

finding a good location for a jail facility difficult.

5.0 POSITIVE SITE CHARACTERISTICS


Property size: Because the property is large, it is expected that this

would allow several different possibilities for the placement and

configuration of jail facilities. It is also expected that with all the open

7

space, minimal damage to trees would be required in order to build a jail

facility.

Access: This property is located at the intersection of SR 295, North

Main Street, and SR 111, which provides the best access of any site

considered.

Low residential population: The site is located in an area that is less

populated than the other sites considered. It is expected that County and

Town residents would be more supportive of this site than any other.

Future use: The property would allow the County the ability to locate

other County facilities (e.g. future EMS, Fire, Transportation, etc…) or

industrial facilities on the remaining property if desired in the future.

Proximity to emergency services: County emergency service facilities

are located nearer to this site than any other (besides the EMS Lot). In

the event of a medical or fire emergency, the location of this site would be

highly beneficial.


Open space: The majority of the clearing has already been performed at

this site. This means that the chance of disturbing trees that could provide

a habitat for the Indiana Bat is low.

Low residential population: The site is located in an area that has a

similar residential population density to that of the Mitchell Property.

5.3 SUTTON BUILDING

Ownership: The County already owns this site, so acquisition would not

be an issue.


Open space: Similar to the Fitzgerald Property, the majority of the

clearing has already been performed at this site. This means that the

chance of disturbing trees that could provide a habitat for the Indiana Bat

is low.

8

5.5 EMS LOT

Emergency facilities: Facilities located onsite could provide immediate

assistance during a medical or fire emergency.

Ownership: The County already owns this site, so acquisition would not

be an issue.

6.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

Along with the discussion provided in previous sections, a table was developed to

provide additional site characteristics, which includes information regarding utility

service to each site, along with a summary of other characteristics that were

deemed important. Characteristics that are considered desirable for a site are color

coded “green” and those that are not are color coded “red”. This table can be

observed in the Exhibits section of this report.

After careful consideration, and with the information provided in this report, it is

recommended that Pickett County further investigate the Mitchell Property as a

potential site for future jail facilities. The Mitchell Property appears to be the most

viable option, particularly when considering the size and location of the site.

Because the Mitchell Property is large, it would be less costly for designers to layout

a jail site, as the configuration would not be dictated on the shape or size of the

property. Similarly, if the County wished to relocate other facilities (emergency,

transportation, etc…) to this site, there would be space. Further, it is anticipated that

community support for the use of this property would likely be more positive than

others considered, due to the limited number of residential households nearby.

The sites that are believed to be the least viable are the two that are owned by the

County. The Sutton Building site would require a great deal of demolition work to be

performed prior to site layout and construction of a jail facility. Similarly, the size,

shape, and number of existing buildings on the EMS Lot make it a difficult site to

coordinate the placement of a jail facility.

The Winningham and Fitzgerald properties are considered to be more feasible than

the Sutton Building and EMS Lot due to the fact that there are no existing facilities to

contend with. Additionally, both have a decent level of site access, and are

characterized by a majority of open space, meaning that any required clearing

would be minimal. The Fitzgerald property is a little less desirable because water

9

appears to pond at the center of the property. This would not be considered a

problem if the site were larger, but since it is not, the ponding raises concerns. As

discussed previously, the site distances associated with traffic on SR 325 could

cause issues with access to the Winningham Property. Also, the location of the

Winningham Property in a densely populated residential area is expected to raise

concerns with community members.

10

7.0 EXHIBITS

Location Map

Farmland Classification Map

Flood Insurance Rate Map

Wetlands Inventory Map

Site Characteristics Table

Site Photos

Farmland Classification—Fentress and Pickett Counties Area, Tennessee(Jail Site Assessment Prime Farmland)

Natural ResourcesConservation Service

Web Soil SurveyNational Cooperative Soil Survey

3/2/2016Page 1 of 5

4048

100

4048

500

4048

900

4049

300

4049

700

4050

100

4050

500

4050

900

4048

100

4048

500

4048

900

4049

300

4049

700

4050

100

4050

500

4050

900

664500 664900 665300 665700 666100 666500 666900 667300 667700 668100 668500 668900

664500 664900 665300 665700 666100 666500 666900 667300 667700 668100 668500 668900

36° 35' 23'' N85

° 9

' 45'

' W36° 35' 23'' N

85° 6

' 41'

' W

36° 33' 47'' N

85° 9

' 45'

' W

36° 33' 47'' N

85° 6

' 41'

' W

N

Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 16N WGS840 1000 2000 4000 6000

Feet0 300 600 1200 1800

MetersMap Scale: 1:21,000 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet.

MAP LEGENDArea of Interest (AOI)

Area of Interest (AOI)

SoilsSoil Rating Polygons

Not prime farmland

All areas are primefarmlandPrime farmland if drained

Prime farmland ifprotected from flooding ornot frequently floodedduring the growing seasonPrime farmland if irrigated

Prime farmland if drainedand either protected fromflooding or not frequentlyflooded during the growingseasonPrime farmland if irrigatedand drainedPrime farmland if irrigatedand either protected fromflooding or not frequentlyflooded during the growingseason

Prime farmland ifsubsoiled, completelyremoving the rootinhibiting soil layerPrime farmland if irrigatedand the product of I (soilerodibility) x C (climatefactor) does not exceed 60Prime farmland if irrigatedand reclaimed of excesssalts and sodiumFarmland of statewideimportanceFarmland of localimportanceFarmland of uniqueimportanceNot rated or not available

Soil Rating LinesNot prime farmland



Prime farmland if drainedand either protected fromflooding or not frequentlyflooded during the growingseasonPrime farmland if irrigatedand drainedPrime farmland if irrigatedand either protected fromflooding or not frequentlyflooded during the growingseasonPrime farmland ifsubsoiled, completelyremoving the rootinhibiting soil layerPrime farmland if irrigatedand the product of I (soilerodibility) x C (climatefactor) does not exceed 60

Prime farmland if irrigatedand reclaimed of excesssalts and sodiumFarmland of statewideimportanceFarmland of localimportanceFarmland of uniqueimportanceNot rated or not available

Soil Rating PointsNot prime farmland



Prime farmland if drainedand either protected fromflooding or not frequentlyflooded during the growingseason

Prime farmland ifirrigated and drainedPrime farmland ifirrigated and eitherprotected from floodingor not frequently floodedduring the growingseasonPrime farmland ifsubsoiled, completelyremoving the rootinhibiting soil layerPrime farmland ifirrigated and the productof I (soil erodibility) x C(climate factor) does notexceed 60Prime farmland ifirrigated and reclaimed ofexcess salts and sodiumFarmland of statewideimportanceFarmland of localimportanceFarmland of uniqueimportanceNot rated or not available

Water Features




3/2/2016Page 2 of 5

MAP INFORMATION

Streams and Canals

TransportationRails

Interstate Highways

US Routes

Major Roads

Local Roads

BackgroundAerial Photography

The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000.

Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for mapmeasurements.

Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation ServiceWeb Soil Survey URL: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.govCoordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)

Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercatorprojection, which preserves direction and shape but distortsdistance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as theAlbers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accuratecalculations of distance or area are required.

This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as ofthe version date(s) listed below.

Soil Survey Area: Fentress and Pickett Counties Area, TennesseeSurvey Area Data: Version 9, Sep 16, 2015

Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000or larger.

Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Oct 8, 2011—Oct 22,2011

The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines werecompiled and digitized probably differs from the backgroundimagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shiftingof map unit boundaries may be evident.




3/2/2016Page 3 of 5

Farmland Classification

Farmland Classification— Summary by Map Unit — Fentress and Pickett Counties Area, Tennessee (TN701)

Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOI

BeB Bewleyville-Dicksoncomplex, 2 to 6percent slopes

All areas are primefarmland

56.1 3.5%

CbD2 Christian-Baxtercomplex, 5 to 20percent slopes,eroded

Not prime farmland 695.7 43.9%

Gu Guthrie silt loam, 0 to 3percent slopes,depressional


SnB Sullivan-Sequatchie-Egam complex, 1 to 6percent slopes, rarelyto occasionally flooded

All areas are primefarmland

40.6 2.6%

SuF Sulphura channery siltloam, 20 to 75 percentslopes (20-50%)


uBouF Bouldin very cobbly finesandy loam, 15 to 40percent slopes, verystony


uHadF Hayter-Donahuecomplex, 15 to 40percent slopes, veryrocky


W Water Not prime farmland 3.2 0.2%

WaC2 Waynesboro-Etowahcomplex, 5 to 12percent slopes,eroded


WaD2 Waynesboro-Etowahcomplex, 12 to 20percent slopes,eroded


Totals for Area of Interest 1,586.5 100.0%

Description

Farmland classification identifies map units as prime farmland, farmland ofstatewide importance, farmland of local importance, or unique farmland. It identifiesthe location and extent of the soils that are best suited to food, feed, fiber, forage,and oilseed crops. NRCS policy and procedures on prime and unique farmlandsare published in the "Federal Register," Vol. 43, No. 21, January 31, 1978.

Farmland Classification—Fentress and Pickett Counties Area, Tennessee Jail Site Assessment Prime Farmland



3/2/2016Page 4 of 5

Rating Options

Aggregation Method: No Aggregation Necessary

Tie-break Rule: Lower

Farmland Classification—Fentress and Pickett Counties Area, Tennessee Jail Site Assessment Prime Farmland



3/2/2016Page 5 of 5

Wetlands Exhibit -1 of 2

Mar 2, 2016

This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife Service is notresponsible for the accuracy or currentness of the base data shown on this map. Allwetlands related data should be used in accordance with the layer metadata found onthe Wetlands Mapper web site.

User Remarks:

Wetlands Exhibit 2of 2

Mar 2, 2016

This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife Service is notresponsible for the accuracy or currentness of the base data shown on this map. Allwetlands related data should be used in accordance with the layer metadata found onthe Wetlands Mapper web site.

User Remarks:

PROPERTY NAME TAX MAP PARCEL ACREAGE 3 PHASE POWER GAS WATER SEWER STATE HWY ACCESS PRIME FARMLAND FLOODPLAINS WETLANDS

Sutton Building 24 009.00 5.4 YES NO YES YES NO NO NO NO

Fitzgerald Property 23 090.05 3.5 NO YES YES YES YES NO NO YES

EMS Lot 24 080.00 3.5 YES YES YES YES YES NO NO NO

SITE CHARACTERISTICS

24

24

047.01

047.0235 YES

014.00

013.004.38 NO

YES YES

NO

YES

YESNO YES

Mitchell Property

Winningham Property YES NO

YES YES NO NO

YES

SITE PHOTOS

MITCHELL PROPERTY, LOOKING EAST (FROM N. MAIN STREET)

MITCHELL PROPERTY, LOOKING SOUTHEAST (FROM N. MAIN STREET)

FITZGERALD PROPERTY, LOOKING SOUTH (FROM S.R. 325)

WINNINGHAM PROPERTY, LOOKING NORTH (FROM DRIVEWAY IN FRONT YARD)

JAIL SITE ASSESSMENT PICKETT COUNTY, TENNESSEE… · 2017-04-12 · JAIL SITE ASSESSMENT For...

Documents

Transcript of JAIL SITE ASSESSMENT PICKETT COUNTY, TENNESSEE… · 2017-04-12 · JAIL SITE ASSESSMENT For...