20201515_Meeting Minutes_20100831

NC 87 IMPROVEMENTS (TIP NO. R-2561)
- WOO NEPA/404 MERGER TEAM MEETING
Stantec CONCURRENCE POINT NO. 2A
Meeting Date: August 31, 2010
Place/Time: Town Hall, Elizabethtown / Project Study Area
9:30 am

Attendees: Ronnie Smith, US Army Corps of Engineers
Gary Jordan, US Fish and Wildlife Service
Rob Ridings, NC Division of Water Quality
Mason Herndon, NC Division of Water Quality
Travis Wilson, NC Wildlife Resources Commission
Don Eggert, Cape Fear RPO
Jim Rerko, NCDOT Division 6
Bill Zerman, NCDOT Hydraulics Unit
Amy James, NCDOT Natural Environment Unit
Jim Speer, NCDOT Roadway Design Unit,
Nya Boayue, NCDOT Roadway: Design Unit
Jay McInnis, NCDOT PDEA Branch
Kim Gillespie, NCDOT PDEA Branch-
Matt-Carlisle, NCDOT PDEA.Branch,
Andrea; Dvorak-GrantZ Stantec'
Paul Koch, Stantec.
.'.'Amy Sackaroff, Stantec ,?
Jim•D9Vis, Wetherill Engineering Y r
Michael Woods; The Catena.Group%.
Distribution .' Attendees
Chris Militscher, US Environmental Protection 'Agency
Renee Gledhill-Earley ; NC Department; of Cultural Resources
PURPOSE OF MEETING: To obtain concurrence on the proposed major drainage structures
(Concurrence Point 2A)
ITEMS OF DISCUSSION: The following paragraphs summarize the discussion and decisions
resulting from this meeting: '
The meeting opened with a brief introduction by Kim Gillespie who then turned the meeting over
to Paul Koch. Mr. Koch reviewed the CP2A information packet and noted that after consulting
with NCDOT Bridge Maintenance Unit, the recommendations for Sites 4, 9, and 10 were to
replace the existing culverts rather than extend them. Bill Zerman added that these culverts
received special attention because they are up for evaluation this year, but that there may be
others in need of replacement.
Mr. Koch noted that Chris Militscher would not be attending the meeting but that he, Jay McInnis
and Kim Gillespie had met with Mr. Militscher on 8/25/10 to discuss the CP2A materials. Mr.
Koch stated that Mr. Militscher had flagged Sites 4, 9, and 10 for discussion due to the size of the
drainage areas. Mr. Militscher stated the proposed culverts were acceptable to him, but that he
would defer to the decisions made by the group.
It was decided that all but two of the eleven major drainage structure sites would be visited during
the field survey. Sites 5 and 7 were not visited. The following table includes NCDOT's hydraulic
recommendations presented at the meeting.
AUGUST 26, 2010 MEETING MINUTES
Page 2 of 5
Reference: NC 87 Improvements -Concurrence Point 2A
PROPOSED BRIDGE/CULVERT LOCATIONS AND LENGTHS

"J

JLdIILCC
Proposed Structure'
Site Stream Existing Structure
East West
Hammond Bridge # 14
Bladen Replace bridge with
'
1 Creek ,
County, 28'x 180' dual bridges (40
x
'
'
'
200
, 36
x 200
Double RCBC Extend culvert
'
'
' 5' x 7'x70' (inlet)
2 Drunken Run 5'x7'x125' w/5
x7
x95 5' x 7' x 13' (outlet)
outlet
Single RCBC Extend culvert

'
'
'
-
3 Donoho Creek 10'xTx50' x114
(inlet),
w/10
x7
10'x7'x132' outlet
Triple RCBC Replace
'
'
'
4 Carvers Creek 10'x 12'x 55' w/10
x14
x150
triple
RCBC
Double RCBC Extend culvert
'
'
' Extend culvert
'
'
'
5 Plummers Run 10'x9'x80' vv 10
x9
x10
(inlet); w/10
9
00
(inlet),
.10'x9'x90' (outlet) 10'x9'x10' (outlet)
Extend culvert '' %
t'=Double RCBC< w/7'x7'x10' (inlet); .'- Extend culvert
6 Steep Run ..,;,7'x7'x65' with. 7'x7'x14' extension. w/7'x7'x82' (inlet),
_
O'x20'.extension;
7x1
(sheathing),
TxTx30',(outlet)
" i 4e 7'xTx100outlet)
'"Extend culvert, Extend'culvert
7 Bndge-8rain; ch Single RCBC
'1
'
'
' w/10'x8'x20',(inlet) w/10x& 0- (inlet),
-
10
x8
05
, O'x8'x90' (outlet) 10'x8'x10' (outlet)
averdam
Be Double RCBC Extend culvert.
w
8'
e
"
8 Creek 8'x9'x50 /
x9x10t(Inl
t)
'
'
'
g
x9
x80
outlet

'"

.•Tnple' :Replace. .;

'
' Replace
.
'
„
'
'
9 Weyman Creek "'"
2'.x
.
10'x1 55'' w)8
x14 x260
triple x14
x255
triple
.
w/8
,.,,
,, RCBC RCBC
Double RCBC Replace' „• Replace
'
'
'
10 Weyman Creek.
12'x12 x47 w/12 x12'x1.40'. w/12
x12
x145
.
'
. double RCBC RCBC
double
Livingston Bridge # 14, ".
' Replace bridge with
' x f;
11
Creek Columbus County; 28 dual bridges (36
x
'
x 180' 200
)
NOTES: 1 Recommended structure dimensions show culvert extension lengths only. The eastern widening scenarios
for Sites 2, 4, & 10 are also likely to require headwall work at opposite culvert ends.
The following table summarizes comments made at each of the major drainage structures visited
during the field survey.
Site Comments
1 Members of the team requested that the bridge length be extended to provide a 30-foot
wide animal passage on each bank between the water's edge and toe of slope.
2 Team members agreed with proposed culvert extension. Ronnie Smith asked about
realigning the widening scenarios by shifting from the west to the east for a short segment
in the vicinity of this crossing and potentially bridging. Mr. Koch replied that option could
be considered at CNA, but at this stage widening for each segment was being evaluated
as either all on the west or east side. [The stream impacts shown in Table 2 were
revisited after the field meeting. Impacts for the east side are revised to 138 feet.

AUGUST 26, 2010 MEETING MINUTES
Page 3 of 5
Reference: NC 87 Improvements - Concurrence Point 2A
Site Comments
3 Travis Wilson requested that NCDOT examine constructing a cross-pipe under the
driveway on the west side of NC 87, which could allow drainage on the south side of the
driveway to pass under the driveway and flow through the culvert under NC 87 on the
north side of the driveway. The addition of the cross-pipe would eliminate the need for
the pipe under NC 87 on the south side of the driveway. Jim Rerko noted that there may
be constructability issues associated with this modification. It was agreed that NCDOT
would examine the feasibility of this modification.
4 Team members agreed with proposed culvert extension after considering the proximity of
Grimsle Road, adjacent wetlands, and an upstream impoundment.
5 Team members agreed with proposed culvert extension.
6 Team members agreed with proposed extension after considering the grade issues
associated with removing the existin culvert.
7 Team members agreed with the proposed culvert extension.
8 Team members a reed with proposed culvert extension.
9 Members of the team requested that NCDOT examine the use of a bridge at this location.
10 Members of the team requested that NCDOT examine use of a bridge at this location.
11 Members of the team requested that the bridge length be extended to provide a 30-foot
wide animal passage on?each bank between the'.water's edge and toe of slope.
Elimination of Widening Scenarios,,
Several small group discussions-were held on,the possibility of eliminating some sections
originally carried forward at-&2' . At the .8/25110. meeting with Mr. 'Militscher, it was noted that
Section 6 West, Section 12 Vilest, Sect ioh ,.l4 East; Section•,19 West, 'and Section 20 West-could
be eliminated from additional, study. Mr. Sriith-also recommended these sections for elimination-,:-,.
.
at the CP2A field meeting: [It is'noted that,the-Preliminary Hydraulic Report recommendations for. :
Section 12 include widening to the west for 8ites.5 and 6: and to the east for Site 7. Elimination of
any additional widening scenarios should also' consider. the results of historic architecture-,
surveys, which are still in progress.] _ , :. s•= .
CONCLUSIONS:-The meeting concluded with`the Merger Team agreeing that alternate hydraulic=.-
structures would be examined for Sites 1-,'3, 9;':10; and 11.. i ±• ...
ACTION ITEMS:' NCDOT-to examine hydraulic structure options for Sites 1, 3, 9, 10, and-11.
NCDOT to'complete historic architecture surveys and coordinate with the Team to eliminate
some widening scenarios originally carried forward at CP2.
CORRECTIONS & OMISSIONS: This summary. is the writer's interpretation of the events, .
discussions, and transactions that took place: during-the meeting. If there are any additions
and/or corrections please inform Kim Gillespie at- 733-7844 ext. 247 or [e-mail]
within seven days.
Paul R. Koch, PE
Project Manager
paul. [e-mail]
PRKlacs
cc: File

StanW