Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutR5763_Final CP4B Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 6 R-5763 CP-4B MEETING MINUTES (FINAL) Interagency 4B Hydraulic Design and Permit Review Meeting State Project: R-5763, Wilson Rd (SR 1540) Meeting Date: September 16, 2020 Location: Virtual Go to Meeting Attending: = Minutes Mike Sanderson, NCDOT EPU, gave a quick introduction to the meeting and made sure everyone was able to access the meeting via the “Go To Meeting” platform. James Byrd, HNTB Hydraulics Section Manager, welcomed everyone to the meeting and handled introductions of the project team. He began by confirming attendance and then notified the meeting participants that the plans had recently been submitted to NCDOT Hydraulics and there are a few outstanding comments that would be discussed as pertinent to the CP-4B discussion. Then he began discussion on a plan sheet (PSH) by PSH basis. Digital pdf copies of the R-5763 plan set were provided to meeting attendees on the NCDOT xfer site at this link: https://xfer.services.ncdot.gov/pdea/4B4CMtgPkgDraw/R-5763/ James Byrd also shared his screen of the plan set using the Go to Meeting platform to facilitate discussion. General Comments • James Byrd noted there will be a lot of jurisdictional Stream (JS) features on the plans due to the number of seeps and springs along the Wilson Road corridor. HNTB Hydraulics has piped those as needed. • Crystal Amschler stated that when comparing the set of plans to the preliminary jurisdictional determination (PJD) there are quite a few discrepancies between the plans and PJD. Crystal Amschler noted that the discrepancies will be noted on a PSH by PSH basis. Participants: Wanda Austin, PE (NCDOT – Div. 14 Project Development Engineer) Barry Mosteller, (NCDOT – Div. 14 Design Construction Engineer) Josh Deyton, PE (NCDOT – Div. 14 Project Team Lead) Dave McHenry (NCDOT – Div. 14 DEO) Garrett Higdon (NCDOT – Div. 14) Jon Moore, PE (NCDOT – Hydraulics) John Jamison (NCDOT – EPU) Mike Sanderson (NCDOT – EPU) Mark Staley, EI (NCDOT – REU) James Byrd, PE (HNTB Hydraulics) Paul Cameron, PE (HNTB Hydraulics) Joe Olson, PE (HNTB Roadway) Roy Tellier, PE (HNTB Roadway) James (Jim) Mason (Three Oaks Engineering) Team Members: Crystal Amschler, USACE (present) Kevin Mitchell, NCDWR (present) Robert Patterson, NCDWR (present) Marla Chambers, NCWRC (present) Vicki Eastland, Land of Sky RPO (present) Monte Matthews, USACE (not present) Amy Chapman, NCDWR (not present) Amanetta Somerville, USEPA (not present) Janet Mizzi, USFWS (not present) Page 2 of 6 • Dave McHenry will coordinate with Three Oaks Engineering on JS determinations. Jim Mason stated that Three Oaks Engineering will also coordinate with NCDOT Location and Surveys to make sure that final survey file is updated with correct JS determinations. Crystal Amschler will send Dave McHenry her notes from comparison of presented plans to PJD. • Jurisdictional linework shown by NCDOT Location and Surveys convention. On permit drawings Streams with single line representing Stream will show hatching beginning of field verified limits of Stream width and not to blue line. • Dave McHenry asked about the use of geotextile and if the agencies wanted them removed from the details. Crystal Amschler stated that USACE is not a fan of geotextile in channels where rocks shown to be keyed-in. Jon Moore stated that NCDOT Hydraulics has no preference. • At the end of the meeting, Dave McHenry asked the agencies if his professional judgement will suffice regarding aquatic passage determinations. Kevin Mitchell responded yes if slope is documented. Crystal Amschler echoed similar sentiments along with emphasis on existing conditions being documented to show why or why not aquatic passage is feasible. • Kevin Mitchell asked if a stormwater management plan (SMP) will provided at the 4C Meeting. James Byrd responded that yes it will be provided since it is a requirement for the permit package. PSH 4 • Crystal Amschler stated that PGD shows JS feature between Str.’s 0404 and 0409. • Crystal Amschler stated that PGD shows JS feature around -L- Sta. 22+00 as being right of driveway between Str.’s 0406 and 0407 while plan set shows JS feature left of driveway being picked up by the open-ended pipe (OEP) 0403. HNTB will vet those areas. PSH 5 • James Byrd discussed the 54” pipe crossing at the -L- and -Y3- intersection with the pipe being a skew to meet JS linework at inlet and outlet. There were no objections. • James Byrd noted that the plans show rip rap in Stream bottoms in locations where velocities warranted protection against Stream degradation. • Crystal Amschler noted that the 30” RCP cross pipe (Str. 0508) does not line back up with wetland on downstream side. Her recommendation is to realign the outlet to the wetland to keep from drying out the wetland. HNTB Hydraulics does not see any issues with the request from a hydraulic prospective and will realign as requested. • Kevin Mitchell asked how the special lateral 4’ base ditch -Y3- LT will be stabilized. He mentioned coir fiber or live staking as a good option. HNTB Hydraulics will investigate the options and believe coir fiber to be the best alternative based on the discussion. • Crystal Amschler asked if utility impacts are included in this 4B plans. James Byrd responded that nothing shown on the plans considers the utility impacts and they will be providing their own permit drawings at a later date. • Marla Chambers noted that there was a lot of blue lines on the plans. There is blue dotted linework and flow arrows in addition to the blue JS feature linework. James Byrd responded that the blue dotted linework are the proposed delineated drainage areas. PSH 6 • James Byrd noted that the only feature on PSH 6 being picked up is a spring at -L- Sta. 38+00 RT. that is being picked up by a Berm Drain Outlet (BDO) at the top of the cut section and conveyed with a cross line towards the French Broad River. • No additional comments. Page 3 of 6 PSH 7 • James Byrd led of the discussion noting that Str. 0707 is a special design 2GI that will provide split flows. The design maintains normal flows into the pond until the depth of flow in Str. 0707 exceeds 1.0’. Above 1.0’, flows are divided into pond flow (Outlet 0724) and overflow (Outlet 0701). This design was implemented to minimize potential impacts to the pond and minimize impacts to the Historical Property. James Byrd added that this particular crossing has a documented history of overtopping 5-6 times annually. • Crystal Amschler noted that she had previously seen the design and had been involved with discussions with Division 14 about this location. Though not ideal, she feels as though the design can be permitted and helps to solve the issues. • Kevin Mitchell asked for further clarification at what are the elevations with which water is rerouted. James Byrd stated the based on the inverts shown that the design maintains existing drainage patterns to the maximum extent practical without further damage to pond. It was found that the existing condition is undersized. Other issues such as OEP 710 providing a large amount of system runoff proved to be challenging to design. Jon Moore also added that the 54” RCP crossline is buried 1.0’ to match the 48” RCP out to Str. 0706 with the 0707 to 0706 48” RCP connection set at 1.0’ above the 0707 to 0724 54” RCP connection. • James Byrd stated that expressway gutter is included throughout the plans to minimize ROW impacts. This is prominent on the last half of PSH 7. • Crystal Amschler echoed Marla Chambers’ PSH 5 comments about plan clarity with the various line styles and colors. HNTB Hydraulics will investigate plan cleanup and if JS linework can be more easily identifiable. • James Byrd mentioned that the impacts at Outlet 0719 are unavoidable due to design constraints and maintaining existing drainage patterns. He further mentioned that the existing JS Stream from approximately -L- Sta. 63+00 LT to end of PSH could not be relocated without condemnation of properties. Crystal Amschler recognized the design constraints and mentioned design is not ideal but provides a feasible alternative. • Kevin Mitchell mentioned that areas such as Outlet 0719 should be blown up for clarity. James Byrd responded that 4C permit drawings will include the PSH and then each site will be blown up. • Crystal Amschler mentioned that the existing 24” CMP that connects to proposed Str. 0715 shows as JS Stream in the PJD. She stated that pipes carrying live flow and carry Stream through project limits need to be noted for permit drawings so that the agencies can make note of conveyance patterns. • Josh Deyton noted if the 24” CMP does carry live flow then the system will be difficult to construct and dewater. Crystal Amschler said that ideal situation would be temporary dewatering at inlet. HTNB added that additional easement will need to be obtained for a ny impervious dike and pump around option. Temporary Drainage Easement (TDE) would have to be obtained within the driveway of the Perras property. • Jon Moore mentioned that offset boxes for Str. 0715 and 0717 maybe an option to help keep live flow during construction. • Kevin Mitchell stated that NCDWR will require area to be dewatered and Crystal Amschler stated that NCDOT will need to chase down an appropriate option. Josh Deyton stated that most work can be done without any diversion until last connection made and that should only take a couple of hours to complete. HNTB will show TDE up to inlet and coordinate with Three Oaks Engineering and NCDOT Location and Surveys on showing JS linework at inlet of ex isting 24” CMP. Page 4 of 6 PSH 8 • James Byrd continued conversation from PSH 7 about JS needing to be piped from Open End Pipe (OEP) 0805 along -L- LT from match line to Sta. 66+75. There were no additional comments. • James Byrd noted that rip rap kept out of channel bottoms for features designated as channel relocations unless velocities warranted channel protection. • Crystal Amschler stated that based on the PJD the JS Stream show on the last half of PSH 8 is not a JS and only the wetlands are shown. Plans will need to be scrubbed for JS continuity between PJD and plan set. • Crystal Amschler stated that the site numbers on the 4C drawings will be a big benefit in plan readability. • Crystal Amschler asked how transition will occur from existing 30” CMP at approxi mately -L- Sta. 75+50 RT to proposed channel change. James Byrd responded that the inverts match for from existing channel to proposed channel and slope stakes and ditch linework will be cleaned up to show better transition in plan view. PSH 9 • Crystal Amschler stated that feature downstream of Outlet 0901 is not a JS in PJD. • James Byrd stated that there is a comment from the NCDOT Hydraulics Unit about rip rap being extended all the way to top of standard 4’ base ditch upstream of inlet 0903. The comment asked for rip rap to be shown to calculated normal depth. Comment will be incorporated, and coir fiber will be shown on detail channel banks not stabilized by rip rap. • Dave McHenry stated that NCDOT is finding that they need grade control stabilization where channels have shown tendencies to head cut. James Byrd confirmed that HNTB will coordinate with NCDOT for those locations • James Byrd stated that the cross pipe 0905 (duplicate Structure numbers will be cleaned up) will be checked for stability. The junction box was added to the pipe to flatten the end of the pipe and get the pipe under the wall. He noted that HNTB has not confirmed wall type, so configuration is best guess. • Crystal Amschler noted that according to the PJD the JS shown flows through the existing 15 RCP cross pipe and not down the left side of the driveway as shown. HTNB will confirm once final survey file updated. • Kevin Mitchell stated that NCDWR is concerned with aquatic life passage through wall design and other cross pipes. Crystal Amschler and Marla Chambers added there will need to be more fish passage discussions. The existing conditions will need to be documented with one option being using junction boxes to flatten pipes for fish passage. Dave McHenry added that junction boxes to functionally create weirs. After some more discussion Jamie Byrd added HNTB will vet designs and verbiage to stormwater management plan (SMP) will added regarding aquatic passage. • Marla Chambers stated that NCWRC doesn’t necessarily want to mimic existing conditions. Existing conditions are man made and should be fixed if possible. She also asked what is the value in connecting to upstream resources? • James Byrd asked who is the ultimate decision maker on the various requirements between the agencies? Crystal Amschler stated that USACE and NCDWR will issue permits with consultation and consideration from comments with other agencies. PSH 10 • Crystal Amschler stated no comments outside of JS determinations previously discussed on other plan sheets. • No additional comments. Page 5 of 6 PSH 11 • Crystal Amschler stated that feature downstream of Str. 1102 at L 114+00 LT not considered as jurisdictional in PJD. PSH 12 • James Byrd stated that the JS shown at the beginning of PSH 12 is spring fed and will be wiped out by the proposed alignment fill. Crystal Amschler stated that this feature is not considered jurisdictional in the PJD. This also includes the feature at the 1201 cross pipe. • James Byrd stated that the length of the Williamson Creek bridge is dictated by FEMA requirements of keeping the increase in water surface elevation (WSE) below 1.0’. PSH 13 • James Byrd asked about the determination of the Stream feature along -DRW3- LT. Crystal Amschler stated that she had no PJD notes on that feature and it is not seen in the PJD. James reiterated that Three Oaks Engineering and NCDOT Location and Surveys will need to verify JS linework in final survey file. PSH 14 • Crystal Amschler noted that features downstream of Str. 1401 and Str. 1402 should remain as jurisdictional. • Crystal Amschler reaffirmed that existing condition info needed for permit approval with regards to aquatic passage for pipes such as 1401 and 1402. PSH 15 • Crystal Amschler asked what is plan for existing roadbed upstream of Str. 1502. USACE would like to see existing pipes removed and this will help with favorable determination s • Josh Deyton stated that utilities will remain in existing corridor so not all utility pipes can be removed due to existing conflicts or access concerns. The utility companies will need to be able access utilities from both sides. If this is achievable then pipes can be removed. PSH 16 • Crystal Amschler confirmed jurisdictional features along approach to proposed bridge when compared to PJD. Also, wetlands shown on PSH 16 do seem to match what was previously identified and delineated. • James Byrd stated the bridge survey report (BSR) has not been submitted to NCDOT Hydraulics yet. The existing roadbed will be called for to be graded to natural ground with no anticipated impacts to jurisdictional features sandwiching existing roadbed. • Crystal Amschler wanted confirmation that the French Broad River is being fully spanned and that vertical clearance is not an issue. James Byrd confirmed that the river is being spanned by a 135’ MBT and there is an increase to about 18’ from low chord to river. • Robert Patterson asked for confirmation that proposed deck drains are located outside of water limits. HNTB Hydraulics confirmed appropriate spacing. PSH 17 • James Byrd noted that there are no jurisdictional features on PSH 17 and there no additional comments • James Byrd stated for the information of meeting attendees that there is a potential for a roundabout at the end of the project where Wilson Rd ties into Old US 64. Asked about potential impacts, he responded he is unsure at this time. • Crystal Amschler advised that potential impacts to Environmental Justice Communities should be considered when evaluating the round-about. Page 6 of 6 This is our understanding of items discussed and decisions reached. Please contact us if there are changes or additions. Submitted by, HNTB North Carolina, P.C. James A. Byrd, PE