HomeMy WebLinkAbout20080737 All Versions_Monitoring Report_20080114
Ecos r4d~j
Stem
PROGRAM
January 14, 2008
Mr. Bruce Ellis, CLM, PWS
Assistant Unit Head, Natural Environment Unit
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1598 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1598
Dear Mr. Ellis:
Subject: Transfer of Stream and Wetland Mitigation Credits for Case by
Case Mitigation Negotiations
U-2519 and X-211 and C, Fayetteville Outer Loop, Cumberland
County
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (EEP) has received your request dated January 4, 2008 for additional riparian.
wetland assets. In response, EEP has transferred the additional mitigation assets from the
Privateer Mitigation site to NCDOT in support of your efforts to negotiate the use of
these assets to meet requirements associated with the above referenced project. Based on
the information provided in your revised request, EEP has updated the amount of
mitigation assets and credits transferred. The following amount of mitigation assets and
credits has been transferred to NCDOT:
Project Identification Mitigation Type Quantity Credits
Name Number Feet or Acres
Privateer 293 Warm Stream Restoration 25,676 feet 25,676
Privateer 293 Rip arian Wetland Restoration 125.62 acres 125.62
Concurrently, the stream, riparian wetland and non-riparian wetland impacts associated
with these TIP numbers will be removed from the NCDOT's Impact Projection Database
(mitigation order) and EEP is no longer responsible for generating the mitigation credits
to offset these stream and non-riparian impacts.
K;WA
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1652 / 919-115-0476/ www.nceep.net
D
EEP understands that if the NCDOT does not require the full amount of stream
and wetland mitigation assets listed above to satisfy the mitigation requirements for these
TIP projects, then the unused amount will be transferred back to the EEP for utilization
on future mitigation needs within cataloging unit 03030004 in the Cape Fear River basin
per the Memorandum of Agreement between the North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources, the North Carolina Department of Transportation,
and the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. If the NCDOT needs additional stream and/or
wetland mitigation credits from the Privateer Mitigation site in order to complete
negotiations, an additional request to transfer mitigation credits will be necessary.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Ms. Beth
Harmon at 919-715-1929.
Sincerely,
James"B. Stanfill
Strategic Planning Supervisor
cc: dreg Thorpe, Ph.D., NCDOT - PDEA
Phil Harris, P.E., NCDOT - PDEA - NEU
Jim Stanfill, NCDENR - EEP
Linda Fitzpatrick, NCDOT - PDEA - NEU
Tyler Stanton, NCDOT - PDEA - NEU
LeiLani Paugh, NCDOT - PDEA - NEU
File: U-2519 and X-2
Subject: Minutes from the Interagency 4B Hydraulic Design Review Meeting on
December 14, 2005 for X-0002B in Cumberland County
Participants:
Team Members: Marshall Clawson, NCDOT Hydraulics
Richard Spencer-USAGE (present) Vincent Rivers, NCDOT Hydraulics
Brian Wrenn-NCDWQ (present) Tracey Pittman, NCDOT DIV 6
Travis Wilson-NCWRC (present) Jim Rerko, DEO-NCDOT DIV 6
Gary Jordan-USFWS (present) Lonnie Brooks, NCDOT Structures
Chris Militscher-EPA (present) Thomas Payne, NCDOT Structures
Jake Riggsbee-FHWA (present) Chad Ham, PWC
Tyler Stanton-NEU (present) Roy Girolami, NCDOT Structures
Tim Bassette-NEU (present) Andy McDaniel, NCDOT Hydraulics
Jamie Byrd, Transite
Joe Glass, PWC
Mark Staley, NCDOT-REU
Michael Penney, NCDOT-PDEA
Gerald Barbour, Ralph Whitehead Associates
General Introduction was iniatated by Marshall Clawson. Introductions were made by all
in attendance.
Sheet 4:
Pipe outlets to the preformed scour hole before the wetlands. The Hazardous Spill Basin
will be filled in by the fill slope of TT7. No alternatives have been confirmed by Mike
Penney.
It was mentioned that there are two, 42" pipes draining the Hazardous Spill Basin. The
basin is to be relocated. The medians in this area are grass medians.
It was noted that the fill slope line runs along the control access. The preformed scour
hole mentioned earlier has a 3-m perimeter around it. The wetland area mentioned earlier
will not be impacted.
Sheet 5:
No comments
Sheet 6:
Jamie said that there are no potential impacts.
Sheet 10:
It was discussed that fill should be placed in the low area, in order to produce positive
drainage. The additional fill could cause the toe of fill to be changed.
Jamie explained that the low area was originally a borrow pit.
It was mentioned that the low area is connected to a jurisdictional stream.
It was stated that the wetland at the bottom of the page is not an actual wetland. The
ponded area is a jurisdictional pond with a stream connected to it.
The pond is jurisdictional.
It was stated that the pond and the stream are jurisdictional.
A discussion was held concerning the drainage for the ponded area. It was suggested that
a small amount of fill, on the up and down stream side of the stream, and a cut base ditch,
will get the drainage out of the flat, quarry area.
Originally, natural flow patterns existed in this area. The natural drainage patterns should
be maintained.
It was purposed that the natural feature be filled in and drained, from one side, by a base
ditch.
The non jurisdictional wetland in the area has been graded out and it contains growth.
Sheet 11:
It was mentioned that the entire wetland should be spanned. It was stated that a hectare of
offset and median drainage would be discharged into the scour hole.
It was also mentioned that the left side will be graded out and discharged into temporary
sediment trap.
Jamie mentioned that right now, the sediment trap is under the bridge and some of the
drainage is cut off.
A temporary silt ditch would be shown on the EC plans.
Jamie states that on the other side of the bridge (shown on Sheet 12), the drainage is
picked up and piped to where it would flow naturally.
Sheet 20:
It was mentioned that riprap is needed in order to dissipate velocity in grassed median.
Sheet 21:
It was mentioned that the natural flow patterns should be maintained.
It was also suggested that reinforcement be used to prevent the erosion of sandy soil.
Sheet 22:
No impacts
Sheet 23:
No wetland impacts.
Additional comments:
It was stated that special consideration should be made for the ponds.
The sediment basin on Sheet 7 was mentioned and was referred to as being able to handle
all necessary construction drainage.
The Skimmer Basin on sheet 7B was discussed.
Hazardous Spill Basins were discussed. It was stated that these basins could be installed
with sluice gates, as long as additional R/W in not needed. Additional discussions
concerning the Hazardous Spill Basins were planned. It was said that the addition of
sluice gates to the basins would be inexpensive.
It was mentioned that on the other side of Little Creek, the majority of the discharge
flows towards Murchison Road. It was said that Sluice gates should be used in this area.
Meeting Adjourned.
Minutes from the Interagency 4B Hydraulic Design Review Meeting
X-0002C in Cumberland County
February 22, 2006
2:00 pm - 3:30 pm
Team Members:
Richard Spencer, USACE (present)
Brian Wrenn, NCDWQ (present)
Travis Wilson, NCWRC (present)
Gary Jordan, USFWS (present)
Chris Militscher, EPA (present)
Donnie Brew, FHWA (present)
Tyler Stanton, NEU (present)
Tim Bassette, NEU (present)
Chris Rivenbark, NEU (present)
Michael Penney, NCDOT-PDEA (present)
Participants:
Vincent Rivers, NCDOT Hydraulics
Betsy Cox, NCDOT Structures
Doug Petrey, NCDOT Structures
Mark Staley, NCDOT-REU
Randy Wise, NCDOT DIV 6
Tracey Pittman, NCDOT DIV 6
Jim Rerko, DEO-NCDOT DIV 6
Will Hines, Sungate Design
Doug Taylor, NCDOT Roadway Design
Davidian Byrd, NCDOT Roadway Design
Minutes:
General Introduction was initiated by Vincent Rivers. Introductions were made by all in
attendance.
General Comments:
Bury all cross-pipes and RC Box Culverts located on Jurisdictional Streams.
Show on Permit Drawings (which have not been prepared at this time) sill locations and
slope of cross-pipes
Sheet 4:
No Comments.
Sheet 20:
Minimize slope of cross-pipe located at Station 129+90-L- using a Junction Box near the
inlet. It was also strongly suggested that the Pedestrian Box Culvert (the location has not
been shown on the plans at this time) be kept out of the wetlands.
Sheet 21:
No impacts.
Sheet 22:
Place sill at outlet of cross-pipe located at Station 136+55-L-. Investigate using an Energy
Dissipator left of Station 136+80-L- where the lateral ditch ends before flowing into the
wetlands.
Sheet 23:
No impacts.
Sheet 24:
Use Class I riprap at outlet of cross-pipe located at Station 141+70-L-.
Sheet 25, 26, and 27:
No impacts.
Sheet 28:
Place sills in RC Box Culverts (general comment).
Sheet 29, 30, and 31:
No impacts.
Meeting adjourned.
Subject: Minutes from the Interagency 4B Hydraulic Design Review Meeting on
December 14, 2005 for U-2519DA in Cumberland County
Team Members: Participants:
Richard Spencer-USACE (present) Marshall Clawson, NCDOT Hydraulics
Brian Wrenn-NCDWQ (present) Vincent Rivers, NCDOT Hydraulics
Travis Wilson-NCWRC (present) Tracey Pittman, NCDOT DIV 6
Gary Jordan-USFWS (present) Jim Rerko, DEO-NCDOT DIV 6
Chris Militscher-EPA (present) Lonnie Brooks, NCDOT Structures
Jake Riggsbee-FHWA (present) Thomas Payne, NCDOT Structures
Tyler Stanton-NEU (present) Chad Ham, PWC
Tim Bassette-NEU (present) Roy Girolami, NCDOT Structures
Mark Staley-NCDOT/REU (present) Andy McDaniel, NCDOT Hydraulics
Lynn Smith-NEU (present) Joe Glass, PWC
Leilani Paugh-NEU (present) Mark Staley, NCDOT-REU
Michael Penney, NCDOT-PDEA
Gerald Barbour, Ralph Whitehead Associates
Clayton Walston, NCDOT Roadway
Robert Stroup, NCDOT Roadway
Tim Coggins, NCDOT Structures
Henry Wells, Sungate Design
Josh Dalton, Sungate Design
General Introduction was iniatated by Marshall Clawson. Introductions were made by all
in attendance. Josh started the review.
Sheet 4:
No wetlands or jurisdictional streams.
Sheet 5:
No comments
Sheet 6:
Josh mentions a jurisdictional stream that outlets from a 1300mm pipe (he passes out
photos).
Josh states that wetlands in this area will be filled in.
Sheet 7: cont.
The possibility of a channel relocation along the toe of fill was mentioned.
Marshall said that guidance on this issue was available. If the fill slope was not shifted,
one and a half to one slope would be recommended, in order to reduce the footprint.
A discussion about R/W negotiations with Ft. Bragg was made.
The presence of wildlife was mentioned. It was said that no clearing limits have been
changed. The lines have not been overlaid yet. It was requested that the current
information be used so that even if a shift occurs,.the necessary limits will be maintained.
Sheet 8:
Josh states that the bridge will span wetland and jurisdictional stream.
It was stated that this area gets inundated at times. The area contains a perennial channel.
Current weather conditions were considered as a reason for the inundation of the area.
It was mentioned that there is an existing wooden structure neat the tank trail. It was said
that this wooden structure always had water up to the timbers.
It was said that a natural stream design was considered in this area, but because of sandy
soil conditions, this option was declined. Piping the discharge in this area would spare the
vegetation. It was mentioned that it is important to minimize foraging habitat in this area.
It was stated that more wetlands were on the other sheet.
Sheet 9:
It was mentioned that bridges could be made shorter in order to stay out of wetlands.
It was said that excavation could be done in order to drain storm water. It was decided
that construction bridges should be discussed with the Construction office.
A discussion concerning the preliminary layout began. Josh stated that Hammer Head
piers would be used on all bridges.
Marshall said that HammerHeads would be used on ramps, but not all main line bridges.
Sheet 14:
No comments
Sheet 15:
No comments
Sheet 16:
Josh mentioned that there is a small wetland area and that we are not impacting the
largest one.
Josh stated that there is no jurisdictional stream that ties to Sheet 9.
(Sheet 9 is requested) It's said that the existing grade is not being changed. The possible
increase in discharge volume in discussed. The affect of structures on wetland hydrology
is discussed.
Sheet 17:
No wetlands, No jurisdictional streams
Sheet 18:
No wetlands, No jurisdictional streams
Sheet 19:
No wetlands, No jurisdictional streams
Sheet 20:
No wetlands, No jurisdictional streams
Sheet 21:
No wetlands, No jurisdictional streams
Sheet 22:
No wetlands, No jurisdictional streams
Subject: Draft Minutes from Interagency 4C Permit Drawing Review
Meeting on June 13, 2007 for X-0002B in Cumberland County
Team Members:
Richard Spencer-USACE (present) Participants:
Gary Jordan- USFWS (present) Marshall Clawson, NCDOT Hydraulics
Travis Wilson-NCWRC (present) Vincent Rivers, NCDOT Hydraulics
Rob Ridings-NCDWQ (present) James Byrd, TranSite Consulting Engineers
Chris Militscher-EPA (present) Roy Girolami, NCDOT Structures
Kathy Matthews-EPA (present) Tracy Pittman-NCDOT-DIV 6
Donnie Brew-FHWA (present) Doug Taylor-NCDOT-RDU
Michael Penny-NCDOT-PDEA (present) Mark Stanley-NCDOT-REU
Elizabeth Lusk-NCDOT-NEU (present)
David Harris-NCDOT-REU (present)
After introductions, James Byrd proceeded with review.
General
• Prior to reviewing the individual Permit Sites, Brian Wrenn (NCDWQ) had several
questions concerning the drainage designs:
o Plan Sheet 5
Brian questioned rip rap or some other form of protection should be installed at
the ditch / pipe entrance confluence due to the angle of the ditch entering the pipe
from line ahead left of -CDR- Sta. 53+30.
James Byrd (TCE) reviewed the area in question and advised that rip rap will be
added to the plans.
o Plan Sheet 6
Brian questioned at what point downstream of the 750 RCP pipe outlet right of
-CDR- Sta. 13+40 does the stream shown become jurisdictional.
James Byrd provided a photo of the area in question and advised that while the
plan symbology shows a stream, the feature is not a stream.
Richard Spencer (USACE) stated that if is not a stream, the symbology should be
revised because it is confusing.
Marshall Clawson advised that the base sheets are provided by the
Photogrammetry Unit and generally other units do not make revisions.
James Byrd advised that TCE will revise the symbology at this location.
Page I of 4
• Marshall Clawson advised that only standard rip rap outlet protection was
proposed at the outlet. Marshall added that if these concerns would have been
expressed at the 4B Meeting and before RAV was purchased, we might have been
able to do something different at the outlet like an energy dissipater basin or
another stormwater basin.
• Brian Wrenn requested that we revisit this outfall to see if any improvements can
be made.
o As a follow-up to Brian's comment and per post meeting discussions with
Hydraulics, TCE will investigate relocating the outlet of the 900RCP from its
current location right of -RPC- Sta. 11+50 to the area between the -CDR- and
-FLYOVER-. Should this relocation be feasible, it will require that the Type
`A' Basin and Stormwater Management Facility currently designed for the
area be redesigned. Additional information on this issue will be forwarded to
all Team Members and Participants under separate cover.
• James Byrd advised that there may be some area inside of -LPC- that could be
used to improve water.
• Tracy Pitman advised that since the inside of the loop is not protected by
guardrail, any measure that includes extended periods from ponded water is not
recommended.
• TCE will investigate additional measures inside -LPC-.
Permit Site 2
• James Byrd advised that this site is the existing Crowell Constructors borrow pit
and outfall channel.
• James Byrd added that in order to obtain positive drainage in the area, the outfall
channel left of -L- is being filled and then reconstructed through the placed fill.
• James Byrd also added that the outfall currently discharges into a small wetland
area left of -L- Sta. 73+90 that will not be impacted.
Page 3 of 4
Minutes from the Interagency 4C Hydraulic Design Review Meeting
X-0002C in Cumberland County
January 13, 2007
2:00 pm - 3:00 pm
Team Members: Participants:
Richard Spencer, USACE (present) Marshall Clawson, NCDOT Hydraulics
Gary Jordan, USFWS (absent) Vincent Rivers, NCDOT Hydraulics
Travis Wilson, NCWRC (absent) Will Hines, Sungate Design
Rob Ridings, NCDWQ (present) Betsy Cox, NCDOT Structures
Chris Militscher, EPA (absent) Doug Petrey, NCDOT Structures
Kathy Matthews, EPA (present) Andy Young, NCDOT Roadway
Donnie Brew, FHWA (present) Michael Bright, NCDOT Utilities
Doug Taylor, NCDOT Roadway (present) Lee Puckett, NCDOT Construction
Greg Perfetti, NCDOT Structures (absent) Tyler Stanton, NEU
Michael Penney, NCDOT-PDEA (present) Chris Rivenbark, NEU
Elizabeth Lusk, NEU (absent) Jeremy Goodwin, REU
David Harris, REU (absent) Mark Staley, NCDOT-REU
Tracy Pittman, NCDOT DIV 6 (present) Jim Rerko, DEO-NCDOT DIV 6
Davidian Byrd, NCDOT Roadway
Brian Wrenn, NCDWQ
Minutes:
General Introduction was initiated by Marshall Clawson. Introductions were made by all
in attendance.
General Comments:
The wetland boundary will be shown using the correct line symbology.
Sheet 4:
No Comments.
Sheet 5:
No Comments.
Sheet 6:
No impacts.
Sheet 23:
No impacts.
Sheet 24:
No Comments.
Sheet 25, 26, and 27:
No impacts.
Sheet 28:
No Comments.
Sheet 29, 30, and 31:
No impacts.
Meeting adjourned.
Subject: Draft Minutes from Interagency Hydraulic Design Review Meeting
on June 13, 2007 for U-2519DA in Cumberland County
Team Members:
Participants:
Richard Spencer-USACE (present) Marshall Clawson, NCDOT Hydraulics
Rob Ridings-NCDWQ (present) Vincent Rivers, NCDOT Hydraulics
Brian Wrenn-NCDWQ (present) Josh Dalton, Sungate Design Group
Travis Wilson-NCWRC (absent) John Frye, NCDOT Structures
Gary Jordan-USFWS (present) Roy Girolami, NCDOT Structures
Chris Militscher-EPA (absent) Mark Staley, NCDOT REU
Kathy Matthews-EPA (present) Jeremy Goodwin, NCDOT REU
Michael Penny-NCDOT PDEA (present) Clayton Walston, NCDOT Roadway
Tyler Stanton, NCDOT NEU (present) Jim Rerko, NCDOT DEO
Tracey Pittman, NCDOT DCE
Lee Pucket, NCDOT BCE
Tim Coggins, NCDOT Structures
Omar Azizi, NCDOT Structures
John Nigro, NCDOT Proj. Services Utilities
Elizabeth Lusk, NCDOT NEU
After introductions, Josh Dalton proceeded with review.
General
• Enlarge areas where impacts occur.
• Fort Bragg has requested to widen All American Freeway to the median. This will not
affect any permitted areas.
Sheet 7
• Make sure non-erosive velocities at all ditch and pipe outlets to the wetlands.
• Brian Wrenn asked if there were stream impacts at this site.
o According to delineations provided by NEU, this site only has wetlands.
Sheet 8
• Brian Wrenn asked in there were stream impacts at this site.
o According to delineations provided by NEU, this site only has wetlands.
• The footing for the peir for the bridge on Ramp IA will be a permanent impact.
o Structures to provide estimate of size.
• Add riprap to outlet of structure #75 to diffuse velocity.
Sheet 9
0 Add impacts for riprap at outlet of structure #85.
Subject: Draft Minutes from Interagency Hydraulic Design Review Meeting
on June 13, 2007 for U-2519E in Cumberland County
Team Members:
Richard K. Spencer-USACE (present) Participants:
Rob Ridings-NCDWQ (present) Marshall Clawson, NCDOT Hydraulics
Brian Wrenn-NCDWQ (present) Vincent Rivers, NCDOT Hydraulics
Travis Wilson-NCWRC (absent) Josh Dalton, Sungate Design Group
Gary Jordan-USFWS (absent) Mark Staley, NCDOT REU
Chris Militscher-EPA (absent) Jeremy Goodwin, NCDOT REU
Kathy Matthews-EPA (present) Robert Stroup, NCDOT Roadway
Donnie Brew-FHWA (present) Tracey Pittman, NCDOT DCE
Michael Penny, NCDOT PDEA (present) Lee Pucket, NCDOT BCE
Tyler Stanton, NCDOT NEU (present) John Nigro, NCDOT Proj. Services Utilities
Chris Rivenbark, NCDOT NEU
After introductions, Josh Dalton proceeded with review.
General
• Enlarge areas where impacts occur.
Sheet 4
• Is the median on -Y2- Bragg Boulevard grass?
o The median is grass.
Sheet 6
• Is this a stream or wetland impact?
o According to delineations provided by NEU, this site has a jurisdictional
stream and wetlands.
• Show velocities at ditch outlets. Ensure non-erosive velocities.
Sheet 7
• No comments.
Sheet 12
• No comments.
Meeting adjourned.