R-2527_Draft_4C_Meeting Minutes

00
��i
vhb.
R-2527 MONTGOMERY COUNTY
4C MEETING MINUTES
January 131", 2021 10:00 AM — 12:00 PM
Location: Online-GoToMeeting
Attendees:
NAME AGENCY PHONE E-MAIL
Felix Davila FHWA 919-747-7021 [e-mail]
Mike Sanderson NCDOT EPU 919-707-6154 [e-mail]
Jeremy Goodwin NCDOT REU 919-707-2942 [e-mail]
Robert Patterson NCDWR 919-707-3880 [e-mail]
James Lastinger USACE PM 919-554-4884, [e-mail]
ext. 32
Michelle Berry NCDOT Hydraulics 919-707-6719 [e-mail]
Michael Turchy NCDOT EAU-ECAP 919-707-6157 [e-mail]
Shane Petersen NCDOT 919-707-6083 [e-mail]
Archeologist
Reuben Blakley NCDOT Div 8 910-773-8027 [e-mail]
Rob Ridings NCDENR 919-707-8786 [e-mail]
Christina PM Geotech 919-707-6878 [e-mail]
Bruinsma
Jennifer NCDOT PMU 919-707-7135 [e-mail]
Hernandez
Kristy Alford NCDOT SMU 919-707-6531 [e-mail]
Allison White NCDOT PMU 919-707-6341 [e-mail]
Ali Koucheki NCDOT Utilities 919-707-6699 [e-mail]
David Webb NCDOT Hydraulics 919-707-6731 [e-mail]
Travis Wilson NCFW 919-707-0370 [e-mail]
Michelle Aldridge USFS 828-257-4259 [e-mail]
Jeff Hemphill NCDOT ECAP 919-707-6126 [e-mail]
Collin Mellor NCDOT EPU 919-707-6139 [e-mail]
Benjamin NCDOT PMU [e-mail]
Williamson
Tucker Martin NCDOT Utilities 919-707-6984 [e-mail]
Pam Williams NCDOT PMU 919-707-6608 [e-mail]
Reid Robol VHB 919-754-5005 [e-mail]
Eric Berger VHB 919-741-5780 [e-mail]
Frank Fleming VHB 919-741-5785 [e-mail]
1

00
��i
vhb.
4C Meeting Minutes
The Interagency Concurrence Point 4C Meeting was held on January 13, 2021 at 10:00 AM via
GoToMeeting's webinar. Reid Robol began the meeting by facilitating introductions and gave a
brief overview of the project and project limits. He then proceeded to lead in a site by site
review of the proposed permit impacts. The following items were addressed:
1. General questions that were asked throughout the project:
• Shane Peterson brought up the archeological sites labeled as Historical Site Boundary on
the 4C plans. Further discussion was held regarding how these areas should be labeled.
The consensus was for these areas to be labeled 'Environmental Sensitivity Area'. James
Lastinger will check on how these should be labeled. Michael Turchy stated to not to use
the initials ESA on permit drawings and to spell it out.
• Michelle Aldridge referenced previous USFS coordination with NCDOT concerning eight
specific sites where natural channel design was desired. Ms. Aldridge confirmed that
the letter received from Pam Williams regarding these specified sites was acceptable to
the USFS. Ms. Aldridge asked for USFS to be more involved early in the process for in
future projects with the Department.
• On Sheet 4 of 91— Mr. Lastinger asked about why the Hazardous Spill Basin (HSB) that
was near Rocky Creek was removed since the 4B meeting. Mr. Robol explained that it
was originally added because it is in a critical area due to the Lake Tillary watershed.
However, it was removed because it would not function correctly due to the Rocky
Creek overflow. There is another HSB on the northeast quadrant of the sheet that is to
be left as is.
• On Sheet Permit drawing Sheet 72 of 91— Mr. Lastinger asked if Andy Williams provided
the JD for this site. There is concern that the stream called out as "Not Jurisdictional"
in the northwest quad of the triple barrel culvert may be JS. Jeff Hemphill stated that
the feature was re-verified in 2012 and it remained non-jurisdictional. Mr. Hemphill will
investigate this and follow up. There was also discussion on the bar downstream of the
triple barrel. Mr. Robol stated this was considered during the outlet channel design.
2

00
��i
vhb,
• Mr. Lastinger asked if this project was in the merger process and if it will require an
individual permit. Pam Williams answered the it will be in the merger process and going
to be a permit modification. Mr. Turchy responded that R0623, R2527, and R2530B
were previously permitted together and that preliminary permits were submitted for
R2527. This project will be handled with a permit modification.
• Mr. Lastinger asked when the permit mod application is expected to be submitted. Pam
Williams responded that NCDOT will be aiming for a spring 2021 submittal. Division 8 is
requesting to have pemits in place before Utility relocation starts. Allison White stated
Let date is July 19, 2022
2. Review of Stormwater Management Plan (SMP) and Permit Drawings
• Mr. Robol asked if there were any questions regarding the SMP and the Pipe burial
sheet. There were no comments on the SMP or Pipe burial sheet.
• Permit Sheet 4 of 91
o Site 1 (Wetland WF)
■ Mr. Robol asked if the middle portion of Wetland WF should be
considered an impact. Mr. Lastinger stated no total take is needed.
Permit site is to be left as is.
o Site 2 (Stream SB-3) and Site 4 (Stream SB-1) — Replacing 2 @ 9' x 7' RCBC with 2
@ 10' x 10' RCBC (Buried 1.0'). At 4B, this culvert was to be retained and
extended but it has been revised due to existing culvert conditions at the request
of the division.
■ No Comment
o Site 3 (Wetland WE)
■ Mr. Robol stated a revision was needed to change the mechanized
clearing to fill in wetland to create a total take at this site.
o Site 5 (Stream SB-2) and Site 6 (Stream SB-4) — Replacing 2, 24" RCPs with a 54"
Trenchless Installation Pipe
■ No Comment
• Permit Sheet 9 of 91
3

�0 00
�0
hb®
o Site 7 (Stream SJ)— Replacing 2, 24" CMPs with 36" Trenchless Installation Pipe
■ No Comment
• Permit Sheet 11 of 91
o Site 8 (Wetland WH)
■ No Comment
o Site 9 (Wetland WF)
■ No Comment
o Site 10 (Stream SL-A)—42" RCP to be retained and extended
■ Mr. Robol asked about extending the TS line to the Easement lines and
there were no comments. To be left as is.
• Permit Sheet 14 of 91
o Site 11 (Wetland WR)
■ No Comment
o Site 12 (Stream SM-1) and Site 15 (Stream SM-2)— Replacing 30" RCP with 48"
Trenchless Installation Pipe
■ No Comment
o Site 13 (Wetland WP)
■ Shane Peterson pointed out there was an archeological site of concern
(environmentally sensitive area) on plansheet 13 but it is outside of the
controlled access. There were no comments on permit Site 13.
o Site 14 (Wetland WM)
■ No Comment
o Site 16 (Wetland WN)
■ No Comment
• Permit Sheet 19 of 91
o Site 17 (Stream SN)— Replacing 30" RCP with 42" Trenchless Installation Pipe
■ No Comment
o Site 18 (Wetland WV)
■ No Comment
4

�0 00
0
�I�b®
• Permit Sheet 22 of 91
o Site 19 (Wetland WS)
■ No Comment
o Site 20 (Stream SO-1) and Site 22 (Stream SO)— Replacing 30" RCP with 42"
Trenchless Installation Pipe
■ No Comment
o Site 21 (Wetland WU)
■ No Comment
• Permit Sheet 26 of 91
o Site 23 (Stream SC) and Site 24 (Stream SC-1)— Replacing 60" RCP with 1 @ 7' x
8' RCBC with Beveled HW (Buried 1.0')
■ No comment
• Permit Sheet 29 of 91
o Site 25 (Stream SC-3)— Replacing 24" RCP with 36" Trenchless Installation Pipe
■ No Comment
o Site 26 (Wetland WT)
■ No Comment
o Site 27 (Pond)
■ No Comment
o Site 28 (Stream SC-2)—Stream is impacted due to the proposed roadway
embankment and will be replaced with a lateral base ditch
■ Mr. Robol stated the 4C package previously distributed depicted this as
site 60 but has been corrected site 28. No other comments.
• Permit Sheet 33 of 91
o Site 29 (Stream SD) and Site 30 (Stream SD-1)— Replacing 2 @ 10' x 7' RCBC with
2 @ 14' x 9' RCBC (Buried 1.0' in West Barrel and Buried 2.0' in East Barrel). At
4B, this culvert was to be retained and extended but it has been revised due to
existing culvert conditions at the request of the division.
5

�0 00
�0
hb®
■ Rob Ridings noted that the lateral ditch on the northwest side of the
culvert needs to be connected to the stream. There were no comments
on the permit impacts shown.
• Permit Sheet 36 of 91
o Site 31 (Wetland WU-2)
■ Mr. Lastinger commented to revise the inlet channel (Left of L) to Fill in
Wetlands and Mechanized Clearing outside of the proposed channel.
o Site 32 (Stream SP)— Replacing 60" RCP with 66" Trenchless Installation Pipe. At
4B, this pipe was to be retained and extended but it has been revised due to
existing pipe conditions at the request of the division.
■ No Comment
o Site 33 (Wetland WX)
■ No Comment
• Permit Sheet 39 of 91
o Site 34 (Stream SQ)— Replacing 18" RCP System with 24" RCP-III System
■ No Comment
• Permit Sheet 42 of 91
o Site 35 (Stream SR)— Replacing 24" RCP with 36" RCP-III System
■ No Comment
o Site 36 (Wetland WZ-1)
■ No Comment
o Site 37 (Stream SS-1) — Replacing 30" RCP with 30" RCP System
■ No Comment
• Permit Sheet 44 of 91
o Site 38 (Stream SU)— Rerouted though a 60" Trenchless Installation Pipe
■ No Comment
o Site 39 (Stream SE) — Replacing 2 @ 7' x 7' RCBC with 2 @ 7' x 9' RCBC (Buried
1.0'). At 4B, this culvert was to be retained and extended but it has been revised
due to existing culvert conditions at the request of the division.
6

00
��i
vhb,
■ No Comment
• Permit Sheet 47 of 91
o Site 40 (Wetland WKK)
■ Mr. Robol asked if considering this wetland fully impacted was
appropriate. Mr. Lastinger responded that he agreed the impacts as
shown. There were no further comments.
o Site 41 (Wetland WMM)
■ No Comment
o Site 42 (Wetland WLL)
■ No Comment
• Permit Sheet 52 of 91
o Site 43
■ Mr. Robol explained that this site has been removed from the plans. It
will also be noted on the Impact Summary Sheet.
o Site 44 (Stream SF-A) and Site 45 (Stream SF-Al)— Replacing 60" RCP with 1 @ 8'
x 10' RCBC (Buried 1.0')
■ No Comment
o Site 46 (Wetland WNN)
■ No Comment
• Permit Sheet 56 of 91
o Site 47 (Stream SW-B) — Replacing 24" RCP with 42" Trenchless Installation Pipe
■ No Comment
o Site 48 (Wetland WHH)
■ No Comment
• Permit Sheet 59 of 91
o Site 49 (Wetland WFF)
■ No Comment
• Permit Sheet 63 of 91
7

00
��i
vhb,
o Site 50 (Stream SX) — Replacing a 24" RCP with a 36" RCP-III. This then flows into
an existing 36" RCP this is being replaced with a 60" Trenchless Installation Pipe
■ No Comment
o Site 51 (Wetland WGG)
■ No Comment
o Site 52 (Wetland WPP)
■ No Comment
• Permit Sheet 69 of 91
o Site 53 (Stream SY-A) — Replacing 1 @ 7' x 5' RCBC with 1 @ 8' x 10' RCBC (Buried
1.0')
■ No Comment
• Permit Sheet 72 of 91
o Site 53 (Stream SY-A) — Replacing 1 @ 7' x 5' RCBC with 1 @ 8' x 10' RCBC (Buried
1.0') that flows into a proposed standard base ditch
■ No Comment
o Site 54 (Stream SF-B) — Replacing 3 @ 9' x 11' RCBC with 3 @ 14' x 12' RCBC
(Buried 1.0' in East and Middle Barrel and Buried 2.0' in West Barrel). At 4B, this
culvert was to be retained and extended but it has been revised due to existing
culvert conditions at the request of the division.
■ Mr. Ridings asked about the bar downstream Mr. Robol explained that
VHB has investigated that already and no further action is needed.
• Permit Sheet 76 of 91
o Site 55 (Wetland WEE)
■ No Comment
• Permit Sheet 79 of 91
o Site 56 (Wetland NEW1)
■ This site has been removed as it is anticipated there will be no impact to
the wetland created by the overhead utility. This will be noted on the
Impact Summary Sheet.
8

�0 00
0
�I�b®
o Site 57 (Wetland WXX)
■ No Comment
• Permit Sheet 82 of 91
o Site 58 (Wetland WCC)
■ Mr. Robol stated site 58 will be revised from mechanized clearing to
permanent fill in wetlands.
o Site 59 (Stream SY-B)— Replacing 1 @ 8' x 8' RCBC with 1 @ 9' x 11' (Buried 1.0')
■ No comment
• Permit Sheet XX of 91 (PSH 38)—This sheet was not included in the original 4C set. This
will be added to the set as 84A.
o Site 60 (Wetland WBB)
■ This site was previously permitted under the project R-0623 and these
impacts are shown in green. The previously constructed drainage for R-
0623 is shown in dashed lines and additional impacts were shown for the
placement of the Junction Box with Manhole and 18" RCP extension at
+/-Sta. 450+00 -L- LT. It was agreed that the impacts shown on the R-
2527 4C set were acceptable and no additional impacts were necessary
for the proposed R-2527 work to tie in with the previously permitted R-
0623 project. Ali Koucheki asked if any proposed drainage work would
impact the water line shown on the left side of the project and Mr. Robol
explained that at this time there are no proposed impacts to the
waterline.
3. Action Items
• Please see previous sections for action items.
Meeting adjourned at 12:00 PM
9