U-2519CA_B-5516_4B Meeting Minutes-Final

TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Paul Atkinson, PE
NCDOT Hydraulics Unit
James R. Rice, PE
December 21, 2016
SUBJECT: STIP U-2519CAB-5516 Fayetteville Outer Loop
Cumberland County, North Carolina
Future I-295 from south of US 401 to south of SR 1400 (Cliffdale Road); and
Replacement of Bridge No. 14 on SR 3569 (Raeford Road) over Bones Creek
(Lake Rim Runof�
Meeting Date: December 14, 2416
Merger Team Attendees:
Travis Wilson
Gary Jordan
Dr. Cynthia Van Der Wiele
Liz Hair
Joanne Steenhuis
Ron Lucas
4B Meeting Minutes
NC Wildlife Resources Commission
US Fish and Wildlife Service
US Environmental Protection Agency (via phone)
US Army Corps of Engineers (via phone)
NC Department of Environmental Quality
FHWA (absent)
Support Staff and Meeting Attendees:
Brook Anderson NCDOT-Hydraulics
Paul Atkinson NCDOT-Hydraulics
Mark Staley NCDOT-REU
Jim Rerko NCDOT- Division 6 Division Environmental Officer
Tyler Stanton NCDOT- Natural Environmental Section
Michael Penney NCDOT-Design Build
Michael Taylor Barnhill Contracting
Sara Easterly HDR
Eric Reardon HDR
Josh Massrock HDR
James Rice HDR
Paul Meehan HDR
Brian Watson HDR
Phillip Rogers HDR
The meeting was opened with introductions and the following agenda items were discussed with
James Rice facilitating the 4B merger meeting. The PDF drawings were projected on the screen
and the following agenda items were presented to all in attendance.
The italicized text indicates notes from the meeting discussion.

U-2519CAB-5516
4B Meeting
December 14, 2016
Page 2
General
Introductions and sign-in sheet
Future I-295- Fayetteville Outer Loop from South of US 401 to South of SR 1400
(Cliffdale Rd). Approx. 3.2 miles of a four lane divided highway in new location.
1 majar interchange: US 401/ I-295.
3 proposed bridges: I-295 over Little Rockfish Creek, I-295 over Bones Creek, and I-295
over Tributary to Lake Rim
Bridge replacement: Bridge 14 on SR 3569 over Bones Creek (B-5516 project)
Culvert Extension: Extending Triple 10' x 10' RCBC under US 401 for Bones Creek
Due to anticipated development around the project corridor drainage systems have been
sized using urban discharge methods.
PSH 4
No impacts to jurisdictional features
o Proposed location of Dry Detention Basin #1
■ Received boring logs and water table was found to be approx. 2' below
ground elevation. DDB requirement not met.
PSH 5
Jurisdictional stream — Little Rockfish Creek
o Bridge over Little Rockfish Creek
■ Temporary work bridge being used for construction method
■ 6" Vertical Deck drains over wetlands (No drains over open water or
bridge abutments)
Wetland (Z7)
o Bridge and roadway impacts
■ 3:1 side slopes w/ guardrail used to minimize impacts
■ Minimum 15' offset from wetland boundary to toe of slope
o Proposed location of Dry Detention Basin #2
■ Consider taking outlet ditch all the way to Little Rock Fish Creek
■ Received boring logs and water table was found to be approx. 2' below
ground elevation. DDB requirement not met.
o Impacts due to 36" steel encasement for sanitary sewer line
James Rice mentioned that all of the dry detention basins had high ground water present based
on recent geotechnical investigations and other alternatives would be explored for these outfalls.
It was also mentioned that due to the wetland boundary elevation at the south east side of bridge
site 1; the DB Team would prefer to ditch to the stream bank rather than stopping at the wetland
boundary to minimize future ditch or wetland instability and erosion. There was also discussion
that the steep topography could result in channels being lined with rip rap in the wetlands; the
DB Team will try to minimize the use of rip rap lined ditches in the wetlands without
jeopardizing channel stability.

U-2519CAB-5516
4B Meeting
December 14, 2016
Page 3
The question was asked if the team could relocate the ditch to a small swale. The team will visit
the site to see if the existing swale can be located in the field and check for stability.
PSH 6
Jurisdictional stream — Bones Creek
o Bridge over Bones Creek and Wetland Z6
■ Temporary work bridge being used for construction method
■ 6" Vertical Deck drains over wetlands (No drains over open water,
railroad RW, or bridge abutments)
■ Raised footings at specific bents in wetland areas
No questions or comments on this page.
PSH 7
Jurisdictional stream — Bones Creek
o Bridge over Bones Creek and Wetland Z6
■ Temporary wark bridge being used for construction method
■ 6" Vertical Deck drains over wetlands (No drains over open water or bridge
abutments)
■ Special foundation design to eliminate footings in the stream
Proposing "Hammerhead" bent design at select locations near
Bones Creek to avoid additional Stream Impacts
Wetland (Z6)
o Proposed location of Dry Detention Basin #3
■ Received boring logs and water table was found to be approx. 2' below
ground elevation. DDB requirement not met.
o Raised footings at select locations over wetlands
o Roadway Fill- 3:1 slopes and guardrail being proposed
■ Bridge abutment slope = 1.5:1 and is armored to the 2.75:1
0 30" Sewer Relocation- Open cut through wetland
o Energy Dissipator Basin @ outlet of 48" RCP
o Area being excavated for Bones Creek CLOMR
The question was asked if the DB Team had the work bridge layout. Preliminary work bridge
sketches were shown to the attendees. The bridge layout will be finalized for the 4C meeting.
The topic of clearance between the wetland surface and the bottom of the raised footings was
discussed. The Team brought up the benefits of having the footing as low to the wetland surface
as possible without having to excavate. It was also mentioned that the exposed H pile
foundation raises concerns of blockage and scour therefore the lower the footing to the ground
the better. The Team will see if there is any guidance on minimum clearances for the footings.
Travis Wilson asked if the Team had enough ROW to tie excavated area back within limits shown
on plans. The Team is able to acquire additional easement to tie excavation back using 3:1
slopes; this easement (if needed) will be added to plans.

U-2519CAB-5516
4B Meeting
December 14, 2016
Page 4
PSH 8
Jurisdictional Stream — UT to Bones Creek
o Bridge over UT to Bones Creek and Wetland ZS
■ 6" Vertical Deck drains over wetlands
■ Minimum 15' offset from wetland boundary to toe of slope
o Future Greenway (Const. by Others) adjacent to south bridge abutment
■ 15' Wide located adjacent to abutment
■ 5' offset from wetland boundary
Wetlands (ZS)
o Bridge bent impacts
o RR pad from 42" RCP under greenway
■ Cannot discharge outside the wetland
o RR pad from 24" RCP
■ Need to discharge at bottom of slope (inside wetland) for stability
No questions or comments on this page.
PSH 9
Jurisdictional stream — UT to Bones Creek
o JS line was extended beyond RW limits. Provided WET file shows it stopping
inside wetland boundary
■ 60" RCP-IV Buried 1'
o Roadway fill in Wetland Z4
It was stated that the .7S line depicted on the 4B plans was extended beyond the limits shown in
the WET file by the DB Team under the assumption the JS line continued through the project
limits. The topic of extending the .7S beyond the ROW limits was discussed and it was decided
that the JS likely dissipates before the ROW limit as shown by the provided wetland file. The
Team will utilize the .IS line in the WET file for this crossing.
UPDATE: Tyler Stanton looked into the .7S line break for this site and concluded that it was
likely a terrain break exists severing the .IS connection and that more than likely the channel
goes underground at the wetland boundary as depicted in the WET file.
PSH 10
No impacts to jurisdictional features
No questions or comments on this page.
PSH 11
Jurisdictional stream — UT to Bones Creek
0 66" RCP-N Buried 1'

U-2519CAB-5516
4B Meeting
December 14, 2016
Page 5
o JS stream and wetland boundary are conflicting
Travis Wilson inquired about the need to place rip rap at the pipe outlet since the Team is
calling for the pipe to be buried. James indicated that the plans are showing the rip rap in the
channel to prevent scour in the stream since these are larger pipes that convey large flows
through the project and that the rip rap would be placed flush with the natural stream bed. The
Team was asked to provide a detail; this will be included in the 4C concurrence meeting plans
for the project.
UPDATE: TyleY Stanton followed up with the design-build team that based on his information,
the jurisdictional stream line was an error and it should just be a wetland boundary line, since
the site is no longer a.7S the DB Team will not propose to bury the pipe. The design-build team
will work with NCDOT to get the files updated accordingly.
PSH 12
No impacts to jurisdictional features
No questions or comments on this page.
PSH 13
Jurisdictional stream — UT to Bones Creek
0 54" RCP III Buried 1'
o Bank Stabilization on streams banks to stabilize 2' Base Lateral Ditch confluence
Wetland Z2 — 71+80 LT
o Roadway fill
James pointed out that this was another case on the project where the JS stopped just beyond the
fill lirnit.
UPDATE.• Tyler Stanton suggested using what is being shown in the final survey since this is
still the active JD.
PSH 14
No impacts to jurisdictional features
No questions or comments on this page.
PSH 15
Wetland Zl
o Roadway Fill
0 4' Base Special Cut Ditch 90+'75 —SR1- LT widened to 10' base to reduce velocity
before entering wetland
Tie in to U-2519CB Project-Paving only beyond Sta. 745+08.65 —L-

U-2519CAB-5516
4B Meeting
December 14, 2016
Page 6
No questions or comments on this page.
PSH 16 (U-2519CB Proiect)
No impacts to jurisdictional features
Paving only
No questions or comments on this page.
PSH 17
Bones Creek
o Triple 10' x 10' Culvert extension
Wetland Z6
o Roadway Fill and Proposed Lateral Ditch Impact
■ Replacing existing ditch
Liz asked the DB Team to explore other options besides ditching through wetlands for the lateral
ditch on the south side of US 401; if ditching through the wetlands is unavoidable than the DB
Team will explain this in the SMP. James indicated that the team is proposing to relocate the
existing ditch due to the roadway widening and the existing ditch flows to the stream bank. The
pNoposed ditch is located in steep terrain and requires rip rap to stabilize the ditch based on
velocity calculations. The team has flattened the last section of the ditch to eliminate the need
for rip rap in the wetland and reduce velocities. An additional benefit for ditching to the stream
is to reduce the concern that the steep terrain would cause unintended erosion of the wetland if
the ditch stopped at the wetland boundary.
PSH 18
No impacts to jurisdictional features
No questions or comments on this page.
PSH 19 (U-2519CB Proiect)
No impacts to jurisdictional features
Paving only
No questions or comments on this page.
PSH 20 (U-2519CB Proiect)
No impacts to jurisdictional features
Paving only
No questions or comments on this page.
PSH 4 (B-5516 Proiect)
Bridge 14 Replacement over Bones Creek

U-2519CAB-5516
4B Meeting
December 14, 2016
Page 7
No impacts to jurisdictional features
No questions or comments on this page.
Design Considerations/ Additional Information
CA fence limits to address roadway comments
o Clearing and installation impacts for installing fence parallel along mainline
through wetlands form beginning of project to US 401 and I-295 interchange.
Borrow pit investigations to begin in January
A discussion was opened up about addressing the roadway comment involving running CA fence
parallel to bridge crossings. It was mentioned by the attendees that standard practice was to tie
the CA fence to the bridge abutments to avoid additional environmental impacts, blockage of
wildlife passage, and issues with debris blockage in the floodplain. Everyone in attendance
unaniinously agreed that the CA fence should be tied into the bridge abutments.
The DB Team was asked if we had identified potential borrow area and how far away the pits
are from the project. The Team stated that the likely borNow location is directly adjacent to the
project and identified this area on plan sheets S and 6.
4C will tentatively be held in February of 2017
**ACTON ITEM: James Rice asked that all parties investigate the required minimum
clearance between the bottom of the raised footings and the wetland surface. The current
minimum clearance is 3 feet, but the team would like to investigate constructing footings
outside the standing wate� flush with the existing ground to limit floodplain impacts due to the
footings. If anyone has any objections, please comment on the minutes. After minutes are
finalized, the team will begin investigations on clearances for each individual footing based on
field conditions. A summary of footings and clearances will be presented at 4C.