20120285 Ver 1_Meeting Minutes_20110912

BEVERLY EAVES PERDUE
GOVERNOR
� M
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
TURNPIKE AUTHORITY
AGENDA
Western Concurrence Meeting
September 12 2011
3rd Floor Hearing Room NCDENR Mooresville Regional Office
Mooresville North Carolina
TIME 10 00am 12 00am
STIP No U 3321— Gaston East West Connector
Gaston /Mecklenburg Counties Divisions 12/10
PURPOSE CP4C Permit Drawing Review (Part 2)
TEAM MEMBERS
Jennifer Harris NCTA
Shannon Sweitzer NCTA
Liz Hair USACE
George Hoops FHWA
Chris Militscher USEPA
Marla Chambers WRC
Polly Lespinasse DWQ
Renee Gledhill Earley SHPO
Marella Buncick USFWS
NCDOT TECHNICAL SUPPORT STAFF AND OTHER AGENCY STAFF
EUGENE A CONTI JR
SECRETARY
Scott McLendon USACE
Doug Taylor RDU
Monte Matthews USACE
Tony Houser RDU
Brian Wrenn DWQ
David Bass Atkins (Design Lead)
Mike Holder Division 12
Ron Ferrell Atkins (Permitting)
Barry Moose Division 10
Jill Gurak Atkins (NEPA)
David Chang Hydraulics
Jamie Byrd HNTB (Hydraulics Lead)
Marshall Clawson Hydraulics
Kiersten Bass HNTB (NCTA GEC)
Rodger Rochelle TPMU
Phillip Rogers HNTB (Hydraulics)
• Introduction and Opening Comments
• Review of CP4C (Part 1) Meeting
• Permit Drawing Review by Site
• Jurisdictional Delineation Status
• Project Schedule (see handout)
• Conclusion
NORTH CAROLINA TURNPIKE AUTHORITY
1578 MAIL SERVICE CENTER RALEIGH N C 27699 1578
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
http Hwww ncturnplke org
r

10,00 " NORTH CAROLINA
Turnpike Authority
Turnpike Environmental Agency
Coordination (TEAC) Meeting
Gaston East -West Connector
Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties, STIP No U -3321
Merger Process Concurrence Point 4C — Permit Drawing Review (Part 2)
Protect Description
The Gaston East West Connector also known as the Garden Parkway would be a controlled access toll road
extending from 1 85 west of Gastonia in Gaston County to 1 485 near the Charlotte Douglas International Airport in
Mecklenburg County
A Draft Environmental Impact Statement (Draft EIS) was published in April 24 2009 The Draft EIS evaluated twelve
Detailed Study Alternatives (DSAs) with DSA 9 identified as the Recommended Alternative Public Hearings were held
in June 2009 Based on the Draft EIS and comments received during the public review period the Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) North Carolina Turnpike Authority (NCTA) and North Carolina Department of Transportation
(NCDCT) identified DSA 9 as the Preferred Alternative and documented this alternative in the Final EIS published in
December 2010
Final roadway design and schematic hydraulic design have been completed for the portion of the project from NC 279 (S
New Hope Road) to the project terminus east of 1 485 an approximately 6 mile section including mainline bridge
crossings of the South Fork Catawba and Catawba Rivers This section is highlighted in Figure 1
Permit Drawing Review by Site ( *Including 7/15/11 Site Visit)
Site 50 — Sheet Nos 3 10 South Fork Catawba River
Site 51— Sheet Nos 11 14 Stream 5296*
(4B Action Item — Consider alternating baffles in the low flow boxes)
Site 52 — Sheet Nos 15 18 Stream 5297
(4B Action Item — Consider alternating baffles in the low flow boxes)
Site 53 — Sheet Nos 19 22 Stream 5300*
Site 54 — Sheet Nos 23 29 Stream 5300 Wetland W288
(4B Action Item — Consider alternating baffles in the low flow boxes)
Site 55 — Sheet Nos 23 24 30 35 Stream 5304 Wetland W289
Site 56 — Sheet Nos 36 39 Pond P52
Site 57 — Sheet Nos 40 46 Catawba River
(4B Action Item — Increase size of energy dissipater at end of bridge)
Site 58 — Sheet Nos 47 53 Stream S312A & S318A Wetland W317*
Site 59 — Sheet Nos 54 56 Stream 5318 & S318B

September 12 2011
Gaston East West Connector (STIP U 3321)
Concurrence Point 4C — Permit Drawing Review (Part 2)
September 12 2011
Site 60 —Sheet Nos 57 61 Stream S312A Wetland W321
(48 Action Item — Consider alternating baffles in the low flow boxes investigate shifting the inlet of
box culvert crossing slightly west investigate shifting the alignment of the service road slightly south)
Site 61— Sheet Nos 63 65 Stream 5323
Site 62 — Sheet Nos 66 71 Stream 5326
Site 63 — Sheet Nos 72 76 Stream S304A Wetland W324 Pond P57
Site 64 — Sheet Nos 66 67 77 79 Stream 5339
Site 65 — Sheet Nos 8084 Stream 5321 & S338A Wetland W332 & W333
Site 66 — Sheet Nos 85 90 Stream 5321 & 5335 Wetland W325
Site 67 — Sheet Nos 91 94 Stream 5332
Site 68 — Sheet Nos 95 97 Stream 5330
Project Schedule
Concurrence Point 1 Purpose and Need
Concurrence Point 2 Detailed Study Alternatives
Concurrence Point 2A Bridging
Draft EIS
Concurrence Point 3 LEDPA
Concurrence Point 4A Avoidance & Minimization
Final EIS
Concurrence Point 4B Hydraulic Review
Concurrence Point 4C Permit Drawing Review
Record of Decision
Submit Permit Application
Award Construction Contracts
Open to Traffic
Complete Oct 2008
Complete Oct 2008
Complete Oct 2008
Complete Apr 2009
Complete Oct 2009
Complete Feb 2010
Complete Dec 2010
June 9 2011
August 11 & September 12 2011
September 2011
September 2011
March 2012
December 2015
2

® NORTH CAROLINA
Turnpike Authority
Turnpike Environmental Agency Coordination
(TEAC) Meeting
MEETING MINUTES — CONCURRENCE POINT 4c
Final
Date August 11 2011
1000 am to 1200 pm
Structure Design Conference Room
NCDOT Century Center
Raleigh NC
Project STIP U 3321 Gaston E W Connector — STP 1213(6)
Attendees
David Bass Atkins
Kiersten Bass HNTB /NCTA
Jamie Byrd HNTB
Marla Chambers NCWRC
Ron Ferrell Atkins
Jill Gurak Atkins
Liz Hair USACE
Jennifer Harris NCTA
Meeting Materials
• Information Package emailed prior to meeting
Polly Lespinasse NCDWQ
Monte Matthews USACE
Chris Mllitscher EPA
Clint Morgan Atkins
Phillip Rogers HNTB
Elizabeth Scherrer Atkins
Shannon Sweitzer NCTA
Brian Wrenn NCDWQ
o Agenda
o Handout with project description project schedule and a listing of sites to be discussed
o Meeting minutes from June 9 2011 Concurrence Point 4b (CP 4b) meeting
o Meeting minutes from July 14 2011 CP 4b site visit
o Map of Preferred Alternative
o Figure 7 — Figure showing approximate slope stakes for the project and the sites to be
discussed (Sites 50 68)
o Table — Buffer Impact Summary
o Table — Wetland Impact Summary
o Set of permit drawings
Turnpike Environmental Agency Coordination Concurrence Point 4c Meeting 8/11/11

Page 2of5
• Handout — Tables showing impacts to ponds wetlands and streams for the three design phases
(preliminary design in Draft EIS refined preliminary design in Final EIS and Final Design) for the
project segment from NC 279 (South New Hope Rd) to 1 485 Tables show overall reductions in
impacts to wetlands and streams for each subsequent design phase Pond impacts stayed the same
(0 26 acres)
• Set of roadway design plans
Purpose
Discuss hydraulic designs for the projects final design section from NC 279 to 1 485 as part of the
concurrence process for NEPA/404 Merger Concurrence Point 4c (CP 4c) — Permit Drawings
Discussion
Ms Harris opened the meeting with introductions and a review of the agenda and the project schedule It was
noted that Marella Bunack representing the USFWS sent an email to Ms Harris in which she stated Given
that we have discussed and visited in the field the mayor sites of concern 1 will defer to what the group decides
tomorrow My only comment is that the first site we visited other than the golf course should be redesigned
to protect both the structure and the creek
Mr Matthews stated the USACE wanted to include in the meeting minutes that they are coordinating with the
NCTA regarding the proposed median width for the project Ms Harris noted that NCTA submitted a memo to
the USACE dated August 5 2011 related to this topic This information will also be submitted with the permit
application NCTA will coordinate with USACE and the FHWA to determine if any additional information needs
to be added to the Record of Decision (ROD)
Mr Byrd asked if anyone had any final comments to the meeting minutes from the CP 4b meeting held on
June 9 2011 No one offered any comments so the meeting minutes for that meeting as included in the
CP 4c information package are considered final
Mr Wrenn asked if a design build team has been selected A design build team has not been selected yet
but the plans being shown are final design plans that can be constructed NCDWQ and NCTA agreed that
further discussion regarding the timing of the Section 401 application will be pursued outside of this CP 4c
meeting
Mr Wrenn also noted that NCDWQ would like to review the water quality modeling report before the permit
application is submitted The draft report has been prepared and is being reviewed by NCDOT and FHWA It
will be provided to NCDWQ when finalized
The impact sites along the final design segment of the project are ordered from Site 50 to Site 68 Mr Byrd
reviewed the sites beginning at Site 50 and worked eastward The meeting ended with discussions of Site 57
due to time constraints See action item below regarding follow up meetings
FINAL DESIGN IMPACT SITES
SITE 50 — South Fork Catawba River
There is no direct discharge from the bridges into the surface water or buffer areas Drainage will be collected
in a closed drainage system and discharge on the western end of the bridges just outside of the buffer near
the first bridge bent Stormwater will outlet into two preformed scour holes in order to diffuse flow before
flowing into the buffer
NCDWQ asked if the scour holes could be moved to the edge of the buffer NCTA and HNTB agreed this
could be done The velocity out of the scour hole is estimated to be 2 cubic feet per second (cfs) which is
equivalent to the 10 year storm flow from an 18 inch pipe
Turnpike Environmental Agency Coordination Concurrence Point 4c Meeting 8/11/11

Page 3 of 5
USACE asked if utilities would be attached to the bridge If so this would require a Section 10 permit NCTA
is not planning on allowing utilities to be attached to the bridge If this changes NCTA will inform the USACE
NCWRC stated they had reviewed the comment letter to NCTA from Mark Cantrell of the US Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS) responding to requests for comment on the FERC (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission)
application and NCTA s response back to Mr Cantrell NCWRC believes that when USFWS mentioned a
concern about woody debris this is more related to woody debris along the shoreline functioning as fish
habitat rather than a concern about woody debris piling up at the bridge piers
On the eastern end of the bridge stormwater will be collected and discharged into a lateral ditch which will tie
to an existing 18 pipe under Gaither Road There were no comments on the proposed design on the western
end of the bridge
SITE 51 — Stream S296
This location was discussed at the CP 4b meeting on June 9 2011 and at the subsequent site visit held on
July 14 2011 As a result of the discussion at these meetings the proposed culvert was realigned to the east
to provide a better alignment with the existing stream In addition baffles have been included at all locations
where baffles were requested by NCWRC at the CP 4b meeting
Mr Byrd mentioned that in an email prior to this CP 4c meeting Marella Buncick of USFWS expressed
concerns about the lateral ditch However due to existing topography and natural drainage patterns HNTB
was unable to reduce or eliminate the ditches draining down to the culvert inlet
The slope of the flatter portion of the lateral ditch is 0 4% Class I rip rap is proposed on the slope opposite the
ditch and Class II rip rap is proposed for the face of the bench NCDWQ requested rip rap on the right bank
(looking downstream) to protect the stream NCTA and HNTB agreed
There was a discussion about potential channel reconstruction There is a meander just upstream of the
culvert outlet Rip rap for bank protection could be extended through this downstream meander The culvert
slope is 0 65% The group agreed this measure was not needed
USEPA asked about the height of the fill slope in this location It is approximately 60 feet NCDWQ was
concerned about sediment sloughing off the fill slope with the only place for it to go being a drainage feature
that drains to S296 HNTB suggested skimmer basins may be required during construction The fill slopes will
be matted for stabilization
SITE 52 — Stream S297
The lateral ditch on the north side of the mainline has an 11 % slope until it makes a sharp turn into the stream
Class B rip rap is proposed as well as bank stabilization NCDWQ requested that for all areas where there is
bank stabilization proposed this impact should be accounted for separately in the permit
USEPA asked if the lateral ditch could be tied to the culvert instead of emptying at the stream meander or
piped directly to the culvert It is likely the area is too steep for either of these options to be feasible Another
option suggested was to remove the stream meander which would create more impacts but would result in a
more stable design that would be less prone to erode in the long term HNTB will investigate the design at this
area The resource agencies requested a site visit to inspect the stream meander approximately 130 feet
upstream of the proposed culvert NCTA will organize a site visit
SITE 53 — Stream S300 — Tucker Road Relocation
This site is the relocation of Tucker Road a two lane roadway The slope of the lateral ditch in this area is
5 6% It could be piped directly to the culvert (culvert slope is 1 1 %) The ditch would be lined with PSRM
The fill slope is approximately 15 feet in height and the lateral ditch is close to the base of the slope NCDWQ
requested that the bank face opposite where the lateral ditch empties and should have Class 1 rip rap not
matting as currently proposed
Turnpike Environmental Agency Coordination Concurrence Point 4c Meeting 8/11/11

Page 4 of 5
SITE 54 — Stream S300 — West Side of NC 279 (Southpoint Road) Interchange
This stream which crosses Site 53 downstream runs through the interchange area 4 1 slopes in the
interchange area will provide some treatment of stormwater before it reaches the culvert The culvert slope is
2% There were no comments on this site
SITE 55 — Stream S304 — East Side of NC 279 (Southpoint Rd) Interchange
Where the lateral ditch near the mainline north of the eastbound on ramp ties into S304 USEPA and USACE
requested rip rap to prevent erosion NCTA and HNTB agreed
Per NCDWQ the entire length of 5304 in the interchange area should be counted as impacted since the flow
that contributes to the stream in this area may become entirely stormwater runoff unless there is a spring If
there is a spring this will need to be accounted for in the design
SITE 56 — Pond 52
Pond 52 approximately 0 2 acres is proposed to be filled There were no comments on this site
SITE 57 — Catawba River
There is no direct discharge from the bridges into the surface water or buffer areas Bridge stormwater will
drain to the east toward a proposed roadway sag The size of the energy dissipater at the southeast bridge
corner was increased per a CP 4b action item The 10 year storm flow out of the dissipater is approximately
31 cfs The stormwater flows off the bridges (untreated) discharges into a lateral base ditch to the east and
flows into a proposed energy dissipater in order to diffuse flow before entering the buffer The majority of the
water draining from east to west will be treated with grass swales before being discharged into the buffer The
group was concerned about the discharge velocity The topography on the north side of the bridge is much
steeper making a dissipater on that side not feasible
NCDWQ stated the design was appropriate but the velocities are of concern if they are erosive However
NCDWQ s investigations after the June 9 2011 meeting did not result in any additional suggestions Mr
Morgan suggested investigating installing two dissipaters one for the bridge stormwater and one for the swale
stormwater HNTB will investigate
SITES 58 65
Due to time constraints these sites were not discussed at this meeting The group agreed to continue
discussion at another CP 4c meeting
Action Items
• NCTA will account for bank stabilization impacts separately in the permit application
• NCTA will organize a site visit to the crossing of Stream S297
• On the same day as the site visit to S297 the group will continue the CP 4c discussion for Sites 58 68
which were not discussed at the August 11 2011 meeting due to time constraints
• NCTA will provide NCDWQ a copy of the water quality modeling report prior to the permit application
once it is finalized
• Site 50 — South Fork Catawba River — Per NCDWQ scour holes will be moved to the edge of the
buffer area
Turnpike Environmental Agency Coordination Concurrence Point 4c Meeting 8/11/11

Page 5 of 5
• Site 51 Stream S296
o Per NCDWQ rip rap will be placed on the right bank (looking downstream) to protect the
stream
o Skimmer basins were discussed as an item of concern during for erosion control during
construction No further action required by NCTA at this time
• Site 53 Stream S300 — Per NCDWQ install rip rap instead of matting on the bank face opposite the
lateral ditch on the north side
• Site 55 — Stream S304 — Per USEPA and USACE install rip rap to prevent blow out where the lateral
ditch near the mainline north of the eastbound on ramp ties into S304
• Site 57 — Catawba River — southeast bridge corner investigate the feasibility of constructing two
energy dissipaters one for the bridge stormwater runoff and the other for the swale runoff
Turnpike Environmental Agency Coordination Concurrence Point 4c Meeting 8/11/11

Ij
G st E st W I C nn I
STIP Protect U 3321
C nc nc P M g
A g M 11 2011
STREAM IMPACTS FOR PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE COMPARISON OF DESIGN PHASES
SEGMENT FROM NC 279 (SOUTH NEW HOPE ROAD) TO F485
STIPP ) tU321 G t E IW tC
P d A11 mat F-ID g ire m mp 1 b sed tm 1 Imd
P f mad AIt R f d D g ml S w Rd st m mp cal I ad b sed gh of w y I and p1 bull 125t If m h sl p t k I
S m I S m A but nd DEIS DSA Imp N R re Tech R p H f h G E W C ec E h Tec F nary 2008
d th T mp k E nm I Ag my Coord m M i ng h Id Ap 18 2008
S m ID
C Id
S gIn M
St m N m
H d I I
y
U It
hd mitt t/
P I I
B k
H IgM
(tt)
A g
Width (tt)
D pth
(I)
S b t t
Quality
CI NI tI
USACE
S
NCDWO
S
D ft EIS DSA
P Ivnmary
D
�Ak f� d/
R f d
.,D
ed
r'a "°
Sery d
F—ID
P m nem
Im
286
K3
UTt S F C t b R
3050102
1 1 nn It
1 2
1
Stt sand g I
WSV
54
21 275
V
.,
286
K3a
UT t S F C t b R
50102
P nn 1
1 4
2 7
4-6
S It sand gm I bbl
WSV
62
31
286A
K3a
Uf i S F C t wb R
3050 02
1 1 nn tt 1
1
12
1
Sit sa d
WS V
NA
NA
287
K3
UT t S F C t wb R
3050 02
1 1 -H 1
1
23
4
S It sa d
WSV
1 36
23
287
K3a
UT i S F C t wb R
3050102
P — I
>6
4-6
4
S d g I
WSV
36
NA
293A
K3a
UTt S F C f b R
3050102
1 t -at 1
1
1 2
1
S h sand
WSV
54
2275
293A
K3a
UT I S F C t wb RN
3050102
P nn I
1
23
34
S It S d gm I
Ws V
54
NA
295
K3
UT S F C b R
5 102
P re 1
24
3 5
4
S It sa d g I bbl
WS V
68
32 3225
296
K
UTt S F C I b R
3050102
P re 1
6
24
S I S d g. l
WS V
655
34
578
557
634
297
1 K3a
UTt S F C t b R
3050102
P 1
1 4
3-6
1 4
S h t bbl b u1d
WSV
83
3 5
9171
652
668
298
K3
UTt S F C b R
3050102
1 1 nn tt t
1 12
3
S h saml g I
WSV
45
19
298
K3
UT t S F C I wb R
3050102
P nn I
1 2
3
S It sand gm I
WSV
45
19
299
K3a
UT -t- S F C t b R
3050102
1 1 rm tt l
12
3
1 2
Stt S ntl gm I
WS V
67
265
299
K
UTt S F C t b R
3050 2
P 1
23
34
1 4
S It S tl g I
WS V
67
265
300
K3
UTt S F C wb R
3050102
1 I nn It 1
3
1 3
S sa d g I bbl
WSV
79
235
1399
1405
12 5
300
K3
UT S F C 1 wb R
3050102
P — 1
3
35
3
SIt sand gm I bbl
WSV
79
33
193
230
232
300A
K3a
UT I S F C 1 b R
3050 02
1 1 1 "It 1
6
1 3
1 1 3
Sfl S ml gm I
WSV
1 42
21
301
K3
UT t S F C I b R
3050102
1 1 ml It [
4
36
1 2
S It S d g. l
WSV
79
23
301
K3a
UTt S F C t b R
3050 02
P M 1
34
4 7
1-6
S II sad g. l bbl
WS V
79
285
301A
K3a
UT t S F C t b R
3050102
It nn tt t
5
3
13
S rcl gm I
Ws V
51
195
30 B
K3
UTt S F C t b R
3050 2
Montt 1
5
3
1 3
SR S nd g I
WSV
51
195
302
K3b
UTt C t b R
3050101
1 l rot It
2
3
1 2
S It sand
WSV B
65
195
303
K3b
UT C I wb R
3050101
1 1 -at t
2
S ml gm I
WSV B
42
23
303
K3b
UT i C t wb R
3050101
1 Pre 1
23
1 24
1 3
S It sa cl g. l bbl
WSV B
1 42
31
304
K3b
UT t C t b R
050101
1 I nn tt t
1
3
1 2
Sit sa d
WS V B
1 85
22
260
26
123
304
K3b
UTt C t b R
3050101
P nru I
3
35
1 4
S It sa d g I bbl
WS V B
85
31
484
568
511
305
K3b
UTt C t b R
3050 0
P M 1
3-0
46
310
SIt sand gm I bbl
WSV 8
82
31 5
135
310
K3c
UTt C t b R
3050101
1 1 rot
2
1 3
1 2
S It sand gm I
WSV B
NA
NA
311
K3c
UTt C 1 b R
305 101
1 1 rm tt t
1
12
1
S It sand 9. 1
WSV B
46
19
3
K3
UT 1 C 1 b R
305010
P M_ 1
1 4
3 10
2 12
9m T. Ubl
bould
WS V B
57 77
35 39
3 A
K3C
UT t C t wb R
3050101
1 t nn ❑ 1
1
1 2
1 2
S It sand
WSV B
1 49
235
3 2
K3
UTt C t b R
3050101
I nn It 1
1
23
1
S I sa d
WS V B
5
235
52
26
3 2A
K3c
8 rd m C k
3050 0
P — 1
35
8 10
2 12
S It t bbl bould
C
66
50
973
742
770
3 2B
K3c
UT i C t wb R
3050 0
1 1 nn It l
1
2
2
S It sand
WSV B
7
19
S313
K3
UTt C t wb R
3050101
It rm It l
4
28
2
SR S d gm I
WSV B
63
22
313A
K3
UT 8 rd m C k
3050101
1 I -H t
1 3
3 5
2
SK S tl gm I
C
42
19
314A
K3c
UT t 8 rd m Creek
3050101
1 I nn tt 1
1 3
45
1 3
S 8 sand g. l bbl
C
50
21 75
226
314A
K3c
UTt B rd m C k
3050101
P 1
12
24
12
S h sand gm I bbl
C
63
33
969
5315
K3
UTt C t wb R
3050101
11 "It t
1
12
1 3
SIt sand g I
WSV B
50
27
315A
K3c
UT B rd m Creek
50 0
1 1 nn
S sand 9. 1 bb
C
NA
7
A
B rd m Creek
305
I
2
2
S It sand gm
C
53
235
3 7
K
UT B rd m C k
3050 0
1 t nn It
2
S It sad g. l
C
50
22S
K3
UT t B rd m C k
3050 01
1 t rot It 1
1 3
2 5
1 3
S It t bbl b Id
C
47
25
464
466
455
3 8
K3
UT t B rd m C k
3050101
P — I
NA
NA
NA
NA
C 1
47
25
318A
K3c
UT t B rd m Cm k
3050101 1
P nn 1
24
35
26
Stl S nd gm I
C
68
2575
318A
K3
UTt 8 rd m Creek
3050101
1 1 ml tt t
13
12 1
1
Stt S tl g. l
C
6
2 5
131
131
1
3188
K3
UT B rd m Creek
3050101
1 1 rot It
3
5
S nd gm I
C
5
90
7
BC
K3c
UT i B rd m Creek
3050 0
1 nn 1
2
2
_SR
3
S II sand
C
54
25
318D
K3
UT B rd m C k
0101
P 1
2
2
2
S R sa d g I
C
56
19
319
K3
UT i B rd m C k
3050 01
It rot It 1
1
3
2 5
S It sa d
C
53 1
19
321
K3c
Log L k Stye m
3050101
11 nett 1
13
3-6
1-6
SO S nd gm I
C
83
24
321
K3
L g L k St m
3050101 1
P 1
24
58
1 12
S tt t bbl bo Id
C
83
33
1610
830
485
323
K3
UT t B rd m Cre k
3050101 1
P re I
1 1
1 2 1
1
S It sa d
C
66
195
99
25
15
323A
K3
UT i B rd m Creek
3050101
1 1 rot It t
1 2
5
2
S It sand gm I bbl
C
42
255
324
K3
UTt 8 rd m C k
3050101
1 l nn tt 1
1
1 2
1 3
S sand
C
48
23
325
K3
UTt 8 rd rn C k
3050101
1 t nn tt 1
1 2
1 4
1 5
S It sad g I bbl
48
21 25
326
K3
UT t B rd m C k
3050101
1 t nn It 1
1 2
1 2
1 4
S It sa tl I
4
21 25
239
3361
200
326
K3c
UTt B rd m C eek
3050101
P 1
4
3
24
S It sand gm I bbl
52
305
132
328
K3c
UTt L L k Sire m
3050101
11 rot tt 1
34
4
1 4
Stt sad m l bbl
69
235
328
K3
UT L L k St m
3050 01
P I
NA
NA
NA
NA
PC
69
NA
329
K3c
UTt L L k Sire m
3050101
1 1 nn tt t
34
3 5
1 3
S 111 bbl bawd
67
2
330
K3
UT t L L k St m
305010
1 t__ It 1
3-4
3 5
S It t bbl b Id
77
26
330
K3
UT t L L k St m
3050101
P 1
34
3 5
Ell
S It sad
77
26
74
9
35
330A
K3
UT t L L k St m
3050101
1 1 nn tt 1
3-4
2
1 2
S It sa d g I I
C
60
205

G st E MW I net
STIP P 1 U 332
C nc nc P t 4c M t ng
Aug 2 11
STREAM IMPACTS FOR PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE COMPARISON OF DESIGN PHASES
EGMENT FROM NC 7 (SOUTH NEW HOPE ROAD) TO F
STIP P( t U 3321 G t E t W t C ne t
P f dAlt m t F 10 g t m mp t b sed tru t Imt
P i d Alt R f red D g nd S m Rd t m mp t I U t d b sed ght I y l m t p1 butt 125 leet from h d p k I
S m f SI am Alt but nd DEIS DSA Imp t N I R m Tech "I R p rt f th G t E I W I C ecf E rth Tech Inc F binary 2008
nd the T mp k E m m t I Ag my Cocrd mt M t ng held Ap 18 2008
5 m ID
C id
S gm t
St m N m
Hyd I gl
U it
Int mttt nt
P I I
B k
H (fg)ht
A g
W dth (ft)
D pth
(i )
S h t t
W t
O-Itty,
CI Ifi t
USACE
S
NCDWO
S
P umm�ry
ad
ed
rrn ve
FinaID
P mm m
33
K3c
UT I L g L k S m
3050 0
1 t mt ll t
13
23
1 2
S R sa d gm I
C
765
27
331
1(3c
UT t Lg L k Sire m
3050101
P m 1
3-6
2-6
S It sand gm I bbl
C
765
34
332
K3
UT I: L g L k St m
3050101
P 1
2
23
1 3
S h sand g I
C
82
41
3 7
58
89
3 3
K3
UT t L g L k St m
3050101
1 1 t rmitt t
1 2
1 1 2
1 1 2
S It sa d gm I
C
7
245
334
K3c
UT t L g L k St m
3050101
1 1 mt t
2
5
2 5
S nd gm I bould
bd. k
C
68
2
335
K3
UT t L g L k St m
3050 0
P m 1
23
23
24
S It sand m l
C
63
34
180
19
73
336
K3
UT t L L k St m
3050101
1 1 mt tt t
1 2
1 3
1 3
S It sad re I
C
43
205
337
K3
UT L L k St m
3050101
Im mt tt t
14
24
1 4
Stt sand I
C
56
26
337
K3
UT L L k Sire m
3050101
P nru 1
23
3
1 2
S I sand gre I
C
57
235
337A
K3
UT i L L k S m
3050
1 1 mt tt t
2
4
S It sad m l
C
74
235
338
K3
UT t L L k Sire m
3050101
1 t nn it I
1
2
1 2
S! sa d
C
44
2 5
338A
K3c
UT i L L k Sire m
3050101
1 1 mt tt I
1
2
2
S II sand
C
44
19
34
34
338B
K3c
UT I L L k St m
3050101
1 t -M 1
1 2
23
4
S It sa d gm I
C
575
205
68
339
K3
UT i L L k Sire m
3050101
1 1 mt it t
1
2
2
S It an d
C
50
235
735
238
90
339A
K3
UT I L L k St m
3050101
1 1 -at t
24
35
26
Stt sand gra I bbl
C
53
19
63
340
K3
UT i L L k St m
3050101
1 t nn tt 1
2-4
6
2-6
S 1 sand m l bbl
C
82
285
1082
13
340
K3
UT I L L k St m
3050101
P 1
1 2
3
1 3
S It S d m I
C
2
3
1244
340A
K3
UT t L L k St m
3050101
1 I mt tt t
1 2
2
2
S It sa d gre I bbl
C
70
25
359
82
226
341
K3c
UT i L ro L k Sire m
3050101
I t mt It 1
2
2
S h sand gm I
C
59
21
282
342
K3c
UT L L k S re m
3050101
1 t nn It I
1 2
2
1 2
S h sand gm I
C
53
195
343
K3
UT t C If yC k
3 50 03
1 rrn tt I
S. m N d d dd d f m USGS m pp g
C
73
205
346
J2
UT t Crowd m Creek
3050 0
1 mt It t
23
2
Sit sand
C
39
205
347
K3c
UT t B rd m Creek
3050101
P .— 1
34
1 5
23
S It sand
C
48
264
St m =be t recut b se ly those st m th th P f d All mat C and I st d
S W d I d n I(d b ogy) NCDWO

G t E t W t C I
STIP P f t U 3321
C P t4cM t g
A g 1 11 2011
WETLAND IMPACTS FOR PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE COMPARISON OF DESIGN PHASES
SEGMENT FROM NC 279 (SOUTH NEW HOPE ROAD) TO 1 -085
STIPP I tU3321 G t E tW IC t
F ID g w tI it mp t I I I db d t t Imt
P f it All R f dP Im yD g dS , R it w II d mp t I I t db it ght fw ylmt pl b ff 125f It in h I p t k I
S I Att b t d D It EIS DSA 9 Imp t N t I R T h I R p rt t th G t E t W t C t E th T h I Flo ry 2008
it th T p k E in t I Age y Coo it t M I g h Id Ap 18 2008
S f P f it Alt t Imp t PBS &J
W tl d N mb
C d S gm t
WSIt d
( )
C w d
CI f t
DWO R t g
W It d O I ty
R t g
D it EIS DSA 9
P Im ry D 9
Alt f t d
R f dD g
Alt P t1 Sdry
R d
P f tl
Alt t F I
D g P m t,
Imp t
278
K3b
0 18
P I t
23
L w
283A
K3
001
P I t
70
H gh
284
K3
047
P I 1
70
H h
285
K3
005
P I t
44
M it in
004
286
K3
033
P I t
68
H gh
287
K3
002
P I t
42
M d in
288
K3
0 004
P I 1
46
M d in
001
001
001
289
K3b
023
P 1 t
43
M it m
023
023
023
290
K3b
005
P I t
64
M it m
291
K3b
007
P I t
9
L w
292
K3b
001
P I 1
32
L w
293
K3b
002
P I 1
23
L w
293A
K3b
000
P I t
23
L w
294
K3b
018
P I t
38
M it in
295
K3b
001
P I t
22
L w
296
K3
001
P I I
NA
NA
297
K3
030
P I t
58
M it m
317
K3
1 478
P I t
62
M d m
037
037
027
317A
K3
003
P I t
31
L w
318
K3
009
P I 1
24
L w
319
K3
030
P I 1
23
L w
320
K3c
001
P I t e
23
L w
001
321
K3
002
P I t
14
L w
002
002
002
323
K3
0021
P I t
17
L w
002
0 02
324
K3
002
P 1 1
22
L w
002
0 02
002
325
K3
003
P I t
15
L w
003
002
001
326
K3
008
P I t
41
M d m
327
K3
012
P I t
60
M it in
328
K3
003
P I 1
53
M d m
329
K3
056
P I t
43
M d in
042
329A
K3
000
P I t
27
L w
330
K3
005
P I t
19
L w
331
K3
005
P I 1
17
L w
331 A
K3
001
P 1 t
38
M it in
332
K3
010
P I t
38
M it in
010
011
333
K3
005
P I t
17
L w
002
002
333A
K3
001
P I t
16
L w
001
334
K3
014
P I 1
42
M it in
002
003
335
K3
043
P I t
33
M d in
336
K3
007
P I 1
11
L w
337
K3
023
PI t
68
H gh
337A
K3
003
P I t
27
L w
3378 I
K3
0 02
P I t
35
M d m
338
H3
035
PEM1
16
L w
340
H3
0021
PFO1B
36
Hgh
TOTAL
1 871
1 49
000
067
11 11 a a1D 1 I D ly to W to to Y t a All 1 l: a I t a

1
G t E t W t C t
STIP P olect U 3321
C P t4 M t g
A g t11 2011
POND IMPACTS FOR PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE COMPARISON OF DESIGN PHASES
SEGMENT FROM NC 279 (SOUTH NEW HOPE ROAD) TO 1 485
STIP P olect U 3321 Gasto East W I C t
F I d g mp t b sed c t t I m t
R f d D g d S ry Rd p d mp is calc lated based o ght f w y I m t pl b If 125 f t f m h slope stak I
So f P d Att to t d DSA 9 Impacts Nat a/ Reso ces T h rc / R p rt f th G to E t West Co ecto Earth T h I F bru ry 2008
S ce f Ref ad Des g Impacts PBS &J
I n I m cl des ma I e d Y I
P d mbe s of t b ly th se w th the P of d Alt t St dy C d e I sted
P f d
Earth T h
C d
G ml Loc t Alo g
Total Ac es
C wad
D ft EIS DSA 9
P f ed
P f d
Alt t F al
P d ID
Segme t
C d
W th C d
Cl f to
Pr I m ry
Alt t o Ref ad
Alta at e
D g
Des g
Des g
S ry R d
Pe m e t
Imp t
E t IS thN wH p
45
K3B
Rd SR 279
1 00
PUBHh
E t f S th N w Hope
46
K38
Rd SR 279
1 04
PUBHh
52
K3B
East of B t Cl b Rd
020
PUBHh
020
020
020
56
K3C
West of 1 485
106
PUBHh
57
K3C
West of 1 485
006
PUBHh
006
006
006
58
K3C
E t f 1 485
1 063
PUBHh
Total
026
026
000
026
I n I m cl des ma I e d Y I
P d mbe s of t b ly th se w th the P of d Alt t St dy C d e I sted

UOrT'-i [ -kr tit 9il,-%
Merger Process Concurrence Point 4C — Permit Drawing Review
Project Description
The Gaston East West Connector also known as the Garden Parkway would be a controlled
access toll road extending from 1 85 west of Gastonia in Gaston County to 1 485 near the
Charlotte Douglas International Airport in Mecklenburg County
A Draft Environmental Impact Statement (Draft EIS) was published in April 24 2009 The Draft
EIS evaluated twelve Detailed Study Alternatives (DSAs) with DSA 9 identified as the
Recommended Alternative Public Hearings were held in June 2009 Based on the Draft EIS and
comments received during the public review period the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
North Carolina Turnpike Authority (NCTA) and North Carolina Department of Transportation
(NCDOT) identified DSA 9 as the Preferred Alternative and documented this alternative in the
Final EIS published in December 2010
Final roadway design and schematic hydraulic design have been completed for the portion of the
project from NC 279 (S New Hope Road) to the project terminus east of 1 485 an
approximately 6 mile section including mainline bridge crossings of the South Fork Catawba and
Catawba Rivers This section is highlighted in Figure 1
Permit Drawing Review by Site ( *Including 7/15/11 Site Visit)
Site 50 — Sheet Nos 3 10 South Fork Catawba River
Site 51 — Sheet Nos 11 14 Stream S296*
(4B Action Item — Consider alternating baffles In the low flow boxes)
Site 52 — Sheet Nos 15 18 Stream S297
(4B Action Item — Consider alternating baffles m the low flow boxes)
Site 53 — Sheet Nos 19 22 Stream S300
Site 54 — Sheet Nos 23 29 Stream S300 Wetland W288
(4B Action Item — Consider alternating baffles m the low flow boxes)
Site 55 — Sheet Nos 23 24 30 35 Stream S304 Wetland W289
Site 56 — Sheet Nos 36 39 Pond P52
Site 57 — Sheet Nos 40 46 Catawba River
(4B Action Item — Increase size of energy dissipater at end of bridge)
Site 58 — Sheet Nos 47 53 Stream S312A & S318A Wetland W317*
Site 59 — Sheet Nos 54 56 Stream S318 & S318B
August 11 2011 1

Gaston East West Connector (STIP U 3321)
Concurrence Point 4C— Permit Drawing Review
August 11 2011
Site 60 — Sheet Nos 57 61 Stream S312A Wetland W321
(4B Action Item — Consider alternating baffles In the low flow boxes Investigate
shifting the Inlet of box culvert crossing slightly west Investigate shifting the
alignment of the service road slightly south)
Site 61 — Sheet Nos 63 65 Stream S323
Site 62 — Sheet Nos 6671 Stream S326
Site 63 — Sheet Nos 7276 Stream S304A Wetland W324 Pond P57
Site 64 — Sheet Nos 66 67 77 79 Stream S339
Site 65 — Sheet Nos 8084 Stream S321 & S338A Wetland W332 & W333
Site 66 — Sheet Nos 8590 Stream S321 & S335 Wetland W325
Site 67 — Sheet Nos 91 94 Stream S332
Site 68 — Sheet Nos 9597 Stream S330
Project Schedule
Concurrence Point 1 Purpose and Need
Complete Oct 2008
Concurrence Point 2 Detailed Study Alternatives
Complete Oct 2008
Concurrence Point 2A Bridging
Complete Oct 2008
Draft EIS
Complete Apr 2009
Concurrence Point 3 LEDPA
Complete Oct 2009
Concurrence Point 4A Avoidance & Minimization
Complete Feb 2010
Final EIS
Complete Dec 2010
Concurrence Point 4B Hydraulic Review
June 9 2011
Concurrence Point 4C Permit Drawing Review
August 10/11 2011
Record of Decision
Late August
Submit Permit Application
Late August
Award Construction Contracts
March 2012
Open to Traffic
Dec 2015
2

BEVERLY EAVES PERDUE
GOVERNOR
� STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
TURNPIKE AUTHORITY
AGENDA
Western Concurrence Meeting
August 11 2011
Structure Design Conference Room Century Center Complex
Raleigh North Carolina
TIME 10 00am 12 00am —Jennifer Harris NCTA
STIP No U 3321— Gaston East West Connector
Gaston /Mecklenburg Counties Divisions 12/10
PURPOSE CP4C Permit Drawing Review
TEAM MEMBERS
Jennifer Harris NCTA
Shannon Sweitzer NCTA
Liz Hair USACE
George Hoops FHWA
Chris Militscher USEPA
Marla Chambers WRC
Polly Lespinasse DWQ
Renee Gledhill Earley SHPO
Marella Buncick USFWS
NCDOT TECHNICAL SUPPORT STAFF AND OTHER AGENCY STAFF
EUGENE A CONTI 7R
SECRETARY
Scott McLendon USACE
Doug Taylor RDU
Monte Matthews USACE
Tony Houser RDU
Brian Wrenn DWQ
David Bass Atkins (Design Lead)
Mike Holder Division 12
Ron Ferrell Atkins (Permitting)
Barry Moose Division 10
Jill Gurak Atkins (NEPA)
David Chang Hydraulics
Jamie Byrd HNTB (Hydraulics Lead)
Marshall Clawson Hydraulics
Kiersten Bass HNTB (NCTA GEC)
Rodger Rochelle TPMU
Phillip Rogers HNTB (Hydraulics)
• Introduction and Opening Comments
• Review of CP46 Meeting
• Permit Drawing Review by Site Including CP48 Action Items and 7/1S/11 Site Visit
(see handout)
• Jurisdictional Delineation Status
• Project Schedule (see handout)
• Conclusion
NORTH CAROLINA TURNPIKE AUTHORITY
1578 MAIL SERVICE CENTER RALEIGH N C 27699 1578
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
http / /www ncturnplke org

Wit/H - 'A LuW 4&/zTic && 4L
--v a,6 401
&V ",vLot
U.�tkt *.pa q-0
IJLPK� Jy�
U'w bp- �4uta�RA