20080737 All Versions_Meeting Minutes_20070613 (3)

Subject:
Team Members:
Draft Minutes from Interagency 4C Permit Drawing Review
Meeting on June 13, 2007 for X-0002B in Cumberland County
Richard Spencer-USACE (present)
Gary Jordan- USFWS (present)
Travis Wilson-NCWRC (present)
Rob Ridings-NCDWQ (present)
Chris Militscher-EPA (present)
Kathy Matthews-EPA (present)
Donnie Brew-FHWA (present)
Michael Penny-NCDOT-PDEA (present)
Elizabeth Lusk-NCDOT-NEU (present)
David Harris-NCDOT-REU (present)
Participants:
Marshall Clawson, NCDOT Hydraulics
Vincent Rivers, NCDOT Hydraulics
James Byrd, TranSite Consulting Engineers
Roy Girolami, NCDOT Structures
Tracy Pittman-NCDOT-DIV 6
Doug Taylor-NCDOT-RDU
Mark Stanley-NCDOT-REU
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 np 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 np rap will be
added to the plans
o Plan Sheet 6
Bnan questioned at what point downstream of the 750 RCP pipe outlet nght 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 1 of 4
A
t
Permit Site 1
• Marshall Clawson advised that Plan Sheet 7 had been split into 4 quadrants for the
permit drawings so the features and impacts could be more legible
• Brian Wrenn questioned what measures other than the Pre-Formed Scour Hole
were proposed to improve water quality since this stream (Little Cross Creek) is
within the Water Supply Watershed for Fayetteville
• James Byrd acknowledged that the while Little Cross Creek is within the Water
Supply Watershed, it is not within the Critical Area
• Brian advised that the City of Fayetteville had recently expended a great deal of
money recently to remove sediment from the upstream creeks and improve their
water quality
• Marshall Clawson advised that only a small portion of the project drains into
Little Cross Creek approaching the bridge Marshall added that a large volume of
runoff passes through an A-Basin located between the -CDR- and -FLYOVER-
that will be converted into a stormwater basin
• James Byrd added that a level spreader is proposed right of -CDR- Sta 57+80 that
will provide treatment for runoff from -CDR- and -FLYOVER- that is not shown
on the plans
• James Byrd advised that all the proposed bridges will be constructed from "Work
Bridges" except for the -CDR- bridge which can be accessed without wetland
impacts
• James Byrd also advised that there will only be "Hand Clearing" at all Site 1
locations
• Roy Girolami (Structure Design Unit) advised that the bridges will be constructed
on pile foundations with a cap located approximately 10' above ground level and
then columns up to the superstructure
• Brian Wrenn questioned what if any treatment was being provided for discharges
from the 900 RCP right of -RPC- Sta 11+50 Brian also asked how far
downstream of the outlet does the stream become j unsdictional
• James Byrd provided a photo taken near the proposed outlet and noted that no
stream was present yet
Page 2 of 4
r ?r
% 6 )
• Marshall Clawson advised that only standard np rap outlet protection was
proposed at the outlet Marshall added that if these concerns would have been
expressed at the 4B Meeting and before R/W 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
1
4 - If • +
Permit Site 3
• James Byrd advised that the proposed bridges will be constructed from a work
bridge
• James Byrd added that runoff approaching both ends of the bridge is being treated
in Pre-formed Scour Holes
• I addition to the Pre-formed Scour Holes, James Byrd advised that an existing
roadway ditch right of -L- Sta 78+60 will be used as a level spreader
Page 4 of 4