20130472_Meeting Minutes_20110616

DRAFT MINUTES OF THE INTERAGENCY "46" MEETING ON 6/16/11 FOR
R-3601, BRUNSWICK CO.
Team Members: Brad Shaver - USACE (PRESENT)
Gary Jordan - USFWS (PRESENT)
Travis Wilson-NCWRC (PRESENT)
Steve Sollod -NCDCM (PRESENT)
Stephen Lane -NCDCM (PRESENT)
David Wainwright-NCDWQ (PRESENT)
Chris Militscher -EPA (ABSENT)
Ron Lucas-FHWA (PRESENT)
David Harris -REU (ABSENT)
Ron McCollum -Roadway (PRESENT)
Omar Azizi -Structures (PRESENT)
Charles R. Cox -PDEA (PRESENT)
Chris Rivenbark -NEU (PRESENT)
Jackson Provost -Division (PRESENT)
Participants: Jay Twisdale, NCDOT Hydraulics (PRESENT)
Brook Anderson, NCDOT Hydraulics (PRESENT)
Dustin Creech, NCDOT Hydraulics (PRESENT)
Kristine O'Connor, NCDOT PDEA (PRESENT)
Emily Murray, NCDOT Structures (PRESENT)
Jeffrey L. Teague, NCDOT Roadway (PRESENT)
Mark Staley, NCDOT REU (PRESENT)
Benjetta Johnson, NCDOT TMU (PRESENT)
Steve Kite, NCDOT WZTC (PRESENT)
Elizabeth Lusk, NCDOT NEU (PRESENT)
Amy James, NCDOT NEU (PRESENT)
Mason Herndon, NCDWQ (PRESENT)
KJ Kim, NCDOT Geotech (PRESENT)
Gordon Cashin, NCDOT NEU (PRESENT)
H. Allen Pope, NCDOT Division (PRESENT)
Tom Stoddard, NCDOT STIP (PRESENT)
Jay Twisdale began the meeting with a brief overview of the project. He stated this
project consists of constructing a diverging diamond interchange at the intersection of
NC133 (SR 1472) and US 17-74-76 and widening US17-74-76 from that interchange to
the US421 interchange at the battleship. Jay noted the-L- line was widened to the inside
or median of the existing roadway. The project also includes replacing or widening four
bridges. Jay went through the plans sheet by sheet, discussing the drainage layout with
emphasis on the jurisdictional sites. Specific comments are listed below by plan sheet
number:
Page 1 of 4

Sheet 4 & 13: Jay Twisdale stated the project proposes to build a diverging diamond
interchange. A portion of the R-3601 design overlays the original design for R-4002. 8-
4002 is currently under construction and has been revised to end at the northern end of
the proposed R-3601 on NC 133 (SR1472). The approved permit for that project included
the construction of a water quality island and water quality ditch which will no longer be
built under that project due to the new project limits. However, those features will be
incorporated into the proposed design of R-3601.
Jay stated that the existing drainage on NC133 in front of the line of businesses along the
southern end of the proposed project, allowed runoff from the roadway to go into a storm
drain system that runs through the parking lots of those businesses and discharges into a
jurisdictional stream. Our proposed design will try to pick up the roadway drainage and
carry it under NC133 to outlet into a grassed Swale near the intersection of NC133 and
the realigned Blackwell Rd. The grassed Swale will provide treatment of the runoff prior
to it entering any jurisdictional areas. This would be an improvement to the system that
exits to a jurisdictional stream at-Y- Sta. 35+00 (LT).
It was asked if there will be impacts to the jurisdictional stream at the beginning of -Y2-
(Approx. Sta. -Y2- 13+00). Jay stated the jurisdictional stream begins at the outlet of the
existing pipe. There will be some minor impacts to the stream from the construction of
this project.
Steve Sollod questioned why the fill slope juts out at the wetlands on -Y2-. Jay
explained the change in topography causes the toe of fill to jut out. As the ground
elevation falls, the fill slope goes out further before catching. It was verified that the
slopes will be 3:1 in the wetlands. Brad Shaver asked if the realignment of Blackwell Rd.
could tie into the -Y- line closer to the interchange to minimize the wetland impacts.
Ron McCollum explained that the road had to be realigned because it was too close to the
diverging diamond interchange. Also, the Town of Belville has a redevelopment coming
in and their master plan ties in right across from it. This intersection will become a 4-
way intersection after their development is complete. Ron stated that ideally we would
like to bring Blackwell Rd. into NC133 at a 90 degree angle but they had angled the tie in
as much as possible to minimize the impacts to the wetlands. He said a 15 degree
deviation is about the maximum to prevent sight distance problems at the intersection.
Ron explained the turnaround bulb on the -Y- line, directly across from the Blackwell
Rd. tie-in, is necessary to allow U-turns until the road on that side is constructed.
Jay stated the existing pipe in the parking lots outlets to the jurisdictional stream at the
location of the proposed tumaround bulb. There will be some impacts to the
jurisdictional stream due to construction of the turnaround and extension of the storm.
drain system.
Sheet 5 & 6: Jay Twisdale stated the widening along the -L- line will be on the inside to
minimize impacts to the adjacent wetlands. The department is now pursuing the
replacement of Bridges 103 & .105 over the Brunswick River due to scour issues that
Page 2 of 4

were discovered during the design process. We are currently proposing to use 100' spans
with the roadway crest near the middle of the bridge to minimize spread. We plan to
maintain the spread within the proposed bridge shoulders, collect it in 2G[s at each end of
the proposed bridges, and discharge it at the toe of fill. Steve Sollod stated they have a
serious issue with the amount of impacts to the CAMA wetlands by the fill required to
construct the temporary detour. He suggested lengthening the temporary bridge. Jeffrey
Teague said the detour bridge was placed as close to the existing roadway as possible and
is as long as it can be to avoid the existing roadway embankment. Lengthening the
detour bridge would require the detour alignment to be moved further away from the
existing roadway which would result in more impacts. Steve asked if 3:1 slopes were
used. Ron McCollum stated that they were used. Steve asked about the possibility of
using rip rap to steepen up the slopes. Ron stated rip rap or geogrid might allow the use
of 2:1 slopes. Using sheet piles was mentioned as another alternative. David Wainwright
suggested preparing a cost comparison of the different options.
Jay mentioned that deck drains would not be required on the proposed bridges. There
will be impacts to the wetlands at the pipe outlets where the runoff is collected and
discharged at the ends of the bridge. Jay stated we would try to outlet to 404 wetlands
instead of the CAMA wetlands. Jay stated we will not use preformed scour holes
because we don't construct them in wetlands. We will use standard rip rap outlet
protection. Steve asked about the proposed and existing span lengths. Jay replied that
the existing spans are approximately 60' and we are looking at 100' spans for the
proposed.
Jay stated we would maintain the existing low chord elevation for navigational cleazance.
He stated that the existing low chord of Bridge 103, which is the lowest of the bridges,
would be maintained. Kristine O'Connor stated the Coast Guard could not tell her for
sure if we will need a permit. She stated at mean high water there was only about 2-3' of
clearance. Someone stated the water depth was approximately 40'.
Brad Shaver asked if the bridge drainage could outlet outside of the wetlands. Jay
responded that the wetlands come to the existing toe of fill and we have to take our
drainage outlet to the toe of fill It was asked where the existing bridge deck drainage
goes and Jay Twisdale stated it is currently discharged directly into the Brunswick River
through deck drains.
Sheet 7: Jay stated we will be maintaining or replacing and upgrading the existing
drainage. The project will widen to the inside with some sliver fills on the outside of the
existing embankment There were no other comments.
Sheet 8: Jay Twisdale's comments were the same as Sheet 7. Since the existing facility
does not have any shoulder berm gutter within the limits of the project, and no problems
are present, the use of shoulder berm gutter will be limited on this project. Proposed
shoulder berm gutter will be primarily off the ends of the bridges. Steve Sollod asked
about utilities on the bridges. He mentioned there are currently conduits suspended under
the bridge and asked if that would be continued or if a directional bore would be used.
Page 3 of 4

No one was in attendance representing the Utilities Unit so that question could not be
answered definitively. Jay Twisdale said his speculation would be directional bore.
Sheet 9: Jay Twisdale stated we will maintain dual bridges over Alligator Creek and we
plan to retain and widen the west bound bridge (#108). We will be widening to the inside
(South) and will cut off the portion of the existing bridge deck that breaks to the south.
The proposed widening will break to the south. This approach will result in no surface
water being added to the existing deck drains on the north side of the bridge that will be
retained. There will not be any deck drains on the new portion of the bridge. The
drainage on the new portion of the bridge will be maintained on the shoulder until it is
collected at the end of the bridge and discharged to a grassed Swale in the median.
Jay stated that the east bound bridge (#107) is functionally obsolete and will be replaced.
The shoulders of the proposed bridge are sufficient so that no deck drains will be required
on the new bridge. We will capture the water on the bridge deck and bring it to the west
end where it will discharge into a Swale that will provide treatment of the water prior to it
entering the creek.
[t was mentioned that a temporary detour structure would not be required for the
construction of these bridges because construction could be staged.
Sheet ]0: Jay Twisdale stated there is a low-lying area in the median where ponding
currently occurs. The proposed project may slightly decrease the storage volume in that
area. To make sure the water can get out prior to impacting the roadway embankment,
we will either add across-line to the outside of the roadway or add a ditch through the old
roadway embankment that blocks flow in the median from reaching Alligator Creek. He
suggested the most likely option would be to add a ditch through the old roadway
embankment..
Sheet 11: Jay Twisdale stated this is the end of construction along the -L- line on this
sheet that ties back in to the existing roadway. There were no other comments.
Sheet 12: Jay Twisdale stated we have some minor roadway improvements to add a turn
lane in the median for U-turns at the crossover that is directly across from the entry road
to the Battleship. There were no other comments.
Page 4 of 4

MINUTES OF THE INTERAGENCY "4B" MEETING ON 6/16/11 FOR R-3601,
BRUNSWICK CO.
Team Members: Brad Shaver -USAGE (PRESENT)
Gary Jordan - USFWS (PRESENT)
Travis Wilson - NCWRC (PRESENT)
Steve Sollod -NCDCM (PRESENT)
Stephen Lane -NCDCM (PRESENT)
David Wainwright-NCDWQ (PRESENT)
Chris Militscher -EPA (ABSENT)
Ron Lucas -SHWA (PRESENT)
David Harris -REU (ABSENT)
Ron McCollum -Roadway (PRESENT)
Omar Azizi -Structures (PRESENT)
Charles R. Cox -PDEA (PRESENT)
Chris Rivenbark -NEU (PRESENT)
Jackson Provost -Division (PRESENT)
Participants: Jay Twisdale, NCDOT Hydraulics (PRESENT)
Brook Anderson, NCDOT Hydraulics (PRESENT)
Dustin Creech, NCDOT Hydraulics (PRESENT)
Kristine O'Connor, NCDOT PDEA (PRESENT)
Emily Murray, NCDOT Structures (PRESENT)
Jeffrey L. Teague, NCDOT Roadway (PRESENT)
Mark Staley, NCDOT REU (PRESENT)
Benjetta Johnson, NCDOT TMU (PRESENT)
Steve Kite, NCDOT WZTC (PRESENT)
Elizabeth Lusk, NCDOT NEU (PRESENT)
.4my James, NCDOT NEU (PRESENT)
Mason Herndon, NCDWQ (PRESENT)
KJ Kim, NCDOT Geotech (PRESENT)
Gordon Cashin, NCllOT NEU (PRESENT)
H. Allen Pope, NCDOT Division (PRESENT)
Tom Stoddard, NCDOT STIP (PRESENT)
Jay Twisdale began the meeting with a brief overview of the project He stated this
project consists of constructing a diverging diamond interchange at the intersection of
NC133 (SR 1472) and US 17-74-76 and widening US17-74-76 from that interchange to
the US421 interchange at the battleship. Jay noted the -L- line was widened to the inside
or median of the existing roadway. The project also includes replacing or widening four
bridges. Jay went through the plans sheet by sheet, discussing the drainage layout with
emphasis on the jurisdictional sites. Specific comments are listed below by plan sheet
number:
Page 1 of 4

Sheet 4 & 13: Jay Twisdale stated the project proposes to build a diverging diamond
interchange. A portion of the R-3601 project limits slightly overlap the project limits for
R-4002. R-4002 is currently under construction and has been revised to end at the
northern end of the proposed R-3601 on NC133 /SR1472 (Village Road). The approved
permit for that project included the construction of a water quality island and a water
quality ditch which will no longer be built under that project due to the new project
limits. However, those features will be incorporated into the proposed design of R-3601.
Jay stated that the existing drainage on NC 133 in front of the line of businesses along the
southern end of the proposed project, allowed runoff from the roadway to go into a storm
drain system that runs through the parking lots of those businesses and discharges into a
jurisdictional stream. Our proposed design will try to pick up the roadway drainage and
carry it under NC133 to outlet into a grassed Swale near the intersection of NC133 and
the realigned Blackwell Rd. The grassed Swale will provide treatment of the runoff prior
to it entering any jurisdictional areas. This would be an improvement to the system that
exits to a jurisdictional stream at -Y- Sta. 35+00 (LT).
It was asked if there will be impacts to the jurisdictional stream at the beginning of -Y2-
(Approx. Sta. -Y2- 13+00). Jay stated the jurisdictional stream begins at the outlet of the
existing pipe. There will be some minor impacts to the stream from the construction of
this project.
Steve Sollod questioned why the fill slope juts out at the wetlands on -Y2-. Jay
explained that the change in topography causes the toe of fill to jut out. As the ground
elevation falls, the till slope goes out further before catching. It was verified that the
slopes will be 3:1 in the wetlands. Brad Shaver asked if the realignment of Blackwell Rd.
could tie into the -Y- line closer to the interchange to minimize the wetland impacts.
Ron McCollum explained that the road had to be realigned because it was too close to the
diverging diamond interchange. Also, the Town of Belville has plans to redevelop their
downtown area and their proposed entrance to this azea ties in directly across from
relocated Blackwell Road. This intersection will become a 4-way intersection after their
development is complete. Ron stated that ideally we would like to bring Blackwell Rd.
into NC133 at a 90 degree angle but they had angled the tie-in as much as possible to
minimize the impacts to the wetlands. He said a 15 degree deviation is about the
maximum to prevent sight distance problems at the intersection. Ron explained the
turnaround bulb on the -Y-line directly across from the Blackwell Rd. tie-in is necessary
to allow U-turns until the road on that side is constructed.
Jay stated the existing pipe in the parking lots outlets to the jurisdictional stream at the
location of the proposed turnaround bulb. There will be some impacts to the
jurisdictional stream due to construction of the turnazound and extension of the storm
drain system.
Sheet 5 & 6: Jay Twisdale stated the widening along the -L- line will be on the inside to
minimize impacts to the adjacent wetlands. The department is now pursuing the
Page 2 of 4

replacement of Bridges 103 & 105 over the Brunswick River due to scour issues that
were discovered during the design process. We are currently proposing to use 100' spans
with the roadway crest near the middle of the bridge to minimize spread. We plan to
maintain the spread within the proposed bridge shoulders, collect it in 2GIs at each end of
the proposed bridges, and discharge it at the toe of fill. Steve Sollod stated that the DCM
has a serious issue with the amount of impacts to the LAMA wetlands caused by the fill
required to construct the temporary detour. He suggested lengthening the temporary
bridge. Jeffrey Teague said the detour bridge was placed as close to the existing roadway
as possible and is as long as it can be to avoid the existing roadway embankment.
Lengthening the detour bridge would require the detour alignment to be moved further
away from the existing roadway, which would result in more impacts. Steve asked if 3:1
slopes were used. Ron McCollum stated that they were used. Steve suggested NCDOT
investigate the use of sheet piles to significantly reduce impacts to the CAMA Coastal
Wetlands associated with the fill required to construct the detour bridge. Ron stated rip
rap or geogrid might allow the use of 2:1 slopes. Using sheet piles was mentioned as
another alternative. David Wainwright suggested preparing a cost comparison of the
different options. NCDOT agreed to investigate the use of sheet piles to minimize
impacts.
Jay mentioned that deck drains would not be required on the proposed bridges. There
will be impacts to the wetlands at the pipe outlets where the runoff is collected and
discharged at the ends of the bridge. Jay stated that we would try- to outlet to 404
wetlands instead of the CAMA wetlands. Jay also stated that we will not use preformed
scour holes because we don't construct them in wetlands. We will use standard rip rap
outlet protection. Steve asked about the proposed and existing span lengths. Jay replied
that the existing spans are approximately 60' and we are looking at 100' spans for the
proposed.
Jay stated we would maintain the existing low chord elevation for navigational clearance.
He stated that the existing low chord of Bridge 103, which is the lowest of the bridges,
would be maintained. Kristine O'Connor stated the Coast C;uard could not tell her for
sure if we will need a permit. She stated at mean high water there was only about 2-3' of
clearance. Someone stated the water depth was approximately 40'.
Brad Shaver asked if the bridge drainage could outlet outside of the wetlands. Jay
responded that the wetlands come to the existing toe of fill and we have to take our
drainage outlet to the toe of fill It was asked where the existing bridge deck drainage
goes and Jay Twisdale stated it is currently discharged directly into the Brunswick River
through deck drains.
Sheet 7: Jay stated that we will be maintaining or replacing and upgrading the existing
drainage. The project will widen to the inside with some sliver fills on the outside of the
existing embankment. There were no other comments.
Page 3 of 4

Sheet 8: Jay Twisdale's comments were the same as Sheet 7. Since the existing facility
does not have any shoulder berm gutter within the limits of the project, and no problems
aze present, the use of shoulder berm gutter will be limited on this project. Proposed
shoulder berm gutter will be primarily off the ends of the bridges. Steve Sollod asked
about utilities on the bridges. He mentioned there are currently conduits suspended under
the bridge and asked if that would be continued or if a directional bore would be used.
No one was in attendance representing the Utilities Unit so that question could not be
answered definitively. Jay Twisdale said his speculation would be directional bore.
Sheet 9: Jay Twisdale stated we will maintain dual bridges over Alligator Creek and we
plan to retain and widen the west bound bridge (#108). We will be widening to the inside
(South) and will cut off the portion of the existing bridge deck that breaks to the south.
The proposed widening will break to the south. This approach will result in no surface
water being added to the existing deck drains on the north side of the bridge that will be
retained. There will not be any deck drains on the new portion of the bridge. The
drainage on the new portion of the bridge will be maintained on the shoulder until it is
collected at the end of the bridge and discharged to a grassed Swale in the median.
Jay stated that the east bound bridge (#107) is functionally obsolete and will be replaced.
The shoulders of the proposed bridge are sufficient so that no deck drains will be required
on the new bridge. We will capture the water on the bridge deck and bring it to the west
end where it will discharge into a Swale that will provide treatment of the water prior to it
entering the creek.
It was mentioned that a temporary detour structure would not be required for the
construction of these bridges because construction could be staged.
Sheet ]0: Jay Twisdale stated there is a low-lying area in the median where ponding
currently occurs. The proposed project may slightly decrease the storage volume in that
azea. To make sure the water can get out prior to impacting the roadway embankment,
we will either add across-line to the outside of the roadway or add a ditch through the old
roadway embankment that blocks flow in the median from reaching Alligator Creek. He
suggested the most likely option would be to add a ditch through the old roadway
embankment.
Sheet 11: Jay Twisdale stated this is the end of construction along the -L- line on this
sheet that ties back in to the existing roadway. There were no other comments.
Sheet 12: Jay Twisdale stated we have some minor roadway improvements to add a turn
lane in the median for U-turns at the crossover that is directly across from the entry road
to the Battleship. There were no other comments.
Page 4 of 4