20111075 Ver 1_Meeting Minutes_20111020

MEETING NOTES �INTB
Date October 20 2011
HNTB Pro�ect No 55694
Meeting Name R 2583 (Design Build) CP 4C Permit Drawing Review Meeting
Location Structures Conference Room C
Purpose CP 4C Permit Drawing Review Meeting
Attending David Wainwright NCDWQ Bill Zerman NCDOT Hydraulics
Bill Biddlecome USACE Khaled AI Akhdar NCDOT TPMU
Chandrakant Sura NCDOT CM Kerry Morrow NCDOT TPB
Gary Jordan USFWS Ron Wilkins NCDOT Utilities
Travis Wilson NCWRC Chris Manley NCDOT NEU
Bob Capehart NCDOT- Div 1 Chris Rivenbark NCDOT NEU
Jonathan Bivens ST Wooten Mark Laugisch NCDOT REU
Michael Alford ST Wooten Mark Staley NCDOT REU
Enrico Roque HNTB Ben�amin Henegar HNTB
Phillip Rogers HNTB Robert Lepsic ARCADIS
The following is a summary of the discussions and decisions reached dunng the CP 4C Meeting held on
October 20 2011 for the US 158 Widening Design Build Pro�ect
• Introduction
o Khaled provided a brief overview and turned it over to the Design Build Team
o The Design Build Team provided revised hard copies of the Impact Summary Sheet
o Phillip Rogers stated that the main purpose of the revised Impact Summary Sheet is due to
the change in how permanent and temporary stream impacts were tabulated In general
temporary stream impact was added approximately 10 from the end of the rip rap outlet or
channel improvements In addition this change was also included in the permit drawings
presented at the meeting even though the previous copy provided to the agencies did not
include it
o Mr Rogers provided a bnef summary of each permit site In addition agency questions and
concerns were discussed as noted below
� �
�
�
I
I
I
�
I
F
�
�

• Site 1
o Mr Rogers discussed how lateral ditches that drain toward wetlands will be tapered down
to zero depth in order to diffuse flow before enterinq the wetlands In addition swale outlet
data has been provided on the permit drawings The same general approach is being used
at multiple sites There were no questions for this site
• Site 2
o Mr Wainwright asked about how stormwater is being treated before entering the culvert
through a 15 RCP Mr Henegar stated that most of the runoff will receive grass swale
treatment before discharging into the box culvert Mr Henegar also noted that the
discharge would be relatively low (approximately 5 6 cfs) at this location
• Site 3
o Mr Wainwright inquired about the alignment of the proposed 48 RCP outlet as well as the
outlet velocity and the depth of the existing channel downstream Mr Henegar stated that
the V�o is 6 cfs and that the channel is approximately 1 ft deep The agencies agreed that
the proposed alignment is okay and no further action is required
• Site 4
o The question was asked as to why we are showing hand clearing in the existing easement
left of Sta 177+50 Since the existing easement is already likely cleared in this location
Mr Rogers stated that some clearing appeared to be needed in this area based on survey
and that due to rounding to the nearest hundredth acre all of the wetland within the
easement was shown hatched as impact
• Site 5
o Mr Biddlecome inquired about why we are showing so much hand clearing right of Sta
190+00 where we are proposing trenchless installation of utilities Mr Rogers stated that
�
hand cleanng was shown to the limits of the PUE due the placement of overhead power
lines in this easement
• Site 6
o There were no questions for this site
• Site 7
o There were no questions for this site
• Site 8
o There were no questions for this site
• Site 9
o Mr Biddlecome inquired about utilizing hand clearing instead of inechanized clearing in the
wetland left of Sta 241+00 Mr Bivens stated that he felt that it would be unlikely that the
D B team would be able to construct this area without mechanically cleanng due to
topography
�

• Site 10
o An inquiry was made regarding the temporary work bridge vertical clearance It was also
stated that The D B team should coordinate with DCM concerning minimum horizontal and
vertical clearance since Potecasi Creek is often used for canoeing Mr Rogers stated that
the approximate work bndge elevation currently noted on the roadway profile sheet is 7 5
Mr Bivens stated that the work bridqe design has not been finalized and that the D B team
will work to accommodate the required horizontal and vertical clearances
o Mr Biddlecome requested that the D B team account for mechanized clearing in the
� wetlands where the proposed piers will be located in addition to the hand cleanng already
I , shown These bndge impacts will be mcluded as a note on the impact summary table
o Mr Capehart stated that the limits of hand clearing off the proposed bridges does not look
sufficient The current hand clearing limits are offset at 10 The D B team agreed with this
comment and will revise the hand clearing offset to 30
o Mr Jordan inquired about the proposed bridge length over Potecasi Creek as he recalled a
pro�ect commitment to a minimum bridge length of 390 Mr Rogers stated that the lonqer
of the two dual bridges is approximately 370 and that the design does span the wetland
Mr Bivens reiterated that the proposed profile has been lowered from the original design
and that this would make a difference in the estimated bridge length Gary stated that he
agrees that the intent was to span the wetlands which the D B team is accomplishing
� however for future reference it may be better to define the toe of slope when setting span
i commitments and also asked that NCDOT notify the agencies of any deviation from future
� commitments
• Site 11
o There were no questions for this site
• Site 12
o Mr Wainwright requested that the D B team provide an additional scaled detail for this site
as well as other similar sites in order to show impacts more clearly The D B team aqreed
to include this detail for a few sites as needed
• Site 13
o There were no questions for this site
• Site 14
o There were no questions for this site
• Site 15
o Mr Biddlecome requested that the area right of Sta 339+00 include excavation in wetlands
where trenching will be required in order to install utilities It was also requested that
wetland impacts be shown accordingly for all similar sites The D B team agreed to revise
the permit drawings and update the impact summary accordinqly

• Site 16
o There were no questions for this site
• Site 17
o There were no questions for this site
This is our understanding of items discussed and decisions reached Please contact us if there are
changes or additions
Submitted by
HNTB CORPORATION
Phillip E Rogers PE
Pro�ect Engineer
cc Attendees