20210452 Ver 1_R-2577A 4C Minutes Final_20210309

R-2577A 4C Interagency Concurrence Point Meeting Minutes RK
Date: November 20, 2019
Location: NCDOT Structures Conference Room
Time: 8:00 AM
Minutes Authored By: Brent Huskey
Attendees: Bill Barrett- NCDOT EAU Erik Seiler-NCDOT Hydraulics Unit
Robert Patterson - DWR Scott Blevins- RK&K
Nicholle Braspennichx-USACE Brent Huskey- RK&K
Marla Chambers- NCWRC Jonathan Whittington- RK&K
Via Telephone:
Amy Euliss- NCDOT Division 9 DEO Claire Ellwanger- USFWS
Connie James- NCDOT Division 9
Dave Wanucha- DWR(Division 9 & 11)
Kevin Mitchell-DWR (Division 13 & 14)
Introductions were made and then Brent Huskey started to go through the 4C plan set.
Permit Drawing Sheet 4 of 23: Site#1 UT to Lowery Mill Creek,SFC: Stream SFC runs west to east through the project and is currently
conveyed in a 42"RCP under-Y9-and through a 48"RCP under-L-at 100+92. This crossing is identified in USGS and soil survey mapping
and is being identified as jurisdictional in the JD. Since this crossing is in the Yadkin River Basin the proposed ditches entering the stream do
not have to meet the design criteria for buffer filtration. There will be stream impacts on the up and downstream sides of the site.
The design team is proposing to bore and jack a new 72"welded steel pipe, not buried, under-Y9-and-L-parallel to the existing pipes.
Bill Barrett stated at Site 1A,the impact in the summary sheet needs to be changed from"bank stabilization"to"armoring channel"when
there is rip rap placed in the channel bottom. Mr. Barrett also stated to remove"bank stabilization"from Site 1 D as well as change"bank
stabilization"to"armoring channel"at Site 1 E in the summary sheet.
Response:Site 1A has been changed from"bank stabilization"to"armoring channel", "bank stabilization"has been removed from Site 1 D and
"bank stabilization"has been changed to"armoring channel"for Site 1 E.
Amy Euliss stated at Site 1 D,to carry the lateral base ditch with rip rap to the outlet of the 72"pipe.
Response: The lateral base ditch with rip rap has been carried out to the outlet of the 72"pipe.
Marla Chambers asked if RK&K would try to hold a constant grade through the 72"pipe crossing to increase the chance of aquatic passage.
As of now,the pipe crossing changes slopes at every junction box structure resulting in a steep pipe slope that crosses under the-L-
alignment.
Response: RK&K redesigned the 72"pipe crossing to hold a constant grade of 2.5%through the hydraulic crossing. The revised pipe slopes
are shown in the pipe profile for the crossing, Permit Drawing Sheet 8 of 23.
Erik Seiler stated to show the existing pipes in the pipe profile for Site 1 on Permit Drawing Sheet 7 of 22.
Response: The existing pipe has been added to the pipe profile for the permit drawings.
Page 1 of 4

Permit Drawing Sheet 6 of 23: Site#2 UT to Lowery Mill Creek,SFB: Stream SFB runs northwest to southeast through the project and is
currently conveyed in a single barrel 6'x 6' RCBC under-L-at 107+43. This crossing is identified in USGS and soil survey mapping and is
being identified as jurisdictional in the JD. Since this crossing is in the Yadkin River Basin the proposed ditches entering the stream do not
have to meet the design criteria for buffer filtration. There will be stream impacts on the up and downstream sides of the site.
The design team is proposing to extend the single barrel 6'x6' RCBC on the upstream and downstream end of the crossing.
Bill Barrett stated to break out the upstream impacts to Site 2A—bank stabilization, Site 2B—armoring channel bed and bank and Site 2C—
stream impact from the culvert extension. Mr. Barrett also stated to break out the downstream impacts to Site 2D—stream impact from the
culvert extension and Site 2E—armoring channel bed and bank.
Response: For the final permit drawing plans,the rip rap in the proposed outlet channel tie-in will be extended so that it is armoring the
stream bed for Site 2E. The impacts have been broken out from Site 2A—Site 2E to address Mr. Barrett's comment.
Permit Drawing Sheet 10 of 23: Site#3 UT to Lowery Mill Creek,SFA: Stream SFA runs west to east through the project and is currently
conveyed in a 30"HDPE under-Y14-at 13+32. This crossing is identified in USGS and soil survey mapping and is being identified as
jurisdictional in the JD. Since this crossing is in the Yadkin River Basin the proposed ditches entering the stream do not have to meet the
design criteria for buffer filtration. There will be stream impacts on the up and downstream sides of the site.
The design team is proposing to install 2 @ 42"RCPs, not buried and both pipes sitting at the same invert,at this crossing in place of the
existing pipe
In the 4B meeting held on June 12,2019, RK&K was proposing a single 60"RCP at this crossing. During the final drainage design this
crossing was changed to 2©42"RCPs as stated above due to headwater control reasons.
Bill Barrett stated at Site 3A,the impact in the summary sheet needs to be changed from"banks stabilization"to"armoring".
Response: Site 3A has been changed from"bank stabilization"to"armoring channel."
Marla Chambers stated that it is not preferred to split the base flow to due to debris clogging the pipes and destabilizing the crossing.
Nicholle Braspennichx asked Amy Euliss what type of permit this project was going to be,which Ms. Euliss stated that this will be an
Individual Permit. Ms. Braspennichx stated that due to the regional conditions on these permits that you are not supposed to split the base
flow. Ms. Euliss stated that it hasn't been an issue in the past with splitting the base flow at crossings if the reason for doing so can justified in
the permit application. Jonathan Whittington made the statement that RK&K will go back try to design one pipe and this crossing. Erik Seiler
suggested at looking into putting a pipe arch for this crossing.
Erik Seiler stated to show the existing pipe on the pipe profile for Site 3 on Permit Drawing Sheet 11 of 22.
Response: The proposed 2 @ 42"RCPs has been changed back to a single 60"RCP pipe at this crossing to address the permitting
concerns. The existing pipe for this crossing has been added to the pipe profile for Site 3 on Permit Drawing Sheet 12 of 23.
Permit Drawing Sheet 10 of 23: Site#4 Lowery Mill Creek,SEW: Stream SEW runs north to southeast through the project and is
currently conveyed in a triple barrel 7'x 10' RCBC under-L-at 140+20. This crossing is identified in USGS and soil survey mapping and is
being identified as jurisdictional in the JD. Since this crossing is in the Yadkin River Basin the proposed ditches entering the stream do not
have to meet the design criteria for buffer filtration. There will be stream impacts on the up and downstream sides of the site.
The design team is proposing to remove the existing triple barrel 7'x 10' RCBC and replace with dual bridges. The bridges will be skewed
120 degrees and have identical span arrangements of 1 © 105', 1 @ 60',for an overall length of 165'. The spill through abutments will have
slopes of 1.5:1 normal to the abutment cap and will be lined with Class II riprap.
The left side of the stream will have a setback of approximately 20'from the top of bank to abutment toe to maintain the floodplain width found
up and downstream of the crossing. This setback area will not be lined with riprap to provide an area for animal crossing. The right side of
the stream will have a setback of approximately 5'from the top of bank to abutment toe for slope stability and to match the overbank width up
and downstream of the crossing.
Bill Barrett stated to move"bank stabilization"to the front of the description for Site 4A and Site 4B in the summary sheet of the permit
drawings. Mr. Barrett stated that it is hard to see the text for"SEE INSET B", Brent Huskey stated that this will be moved so the label is more
visible for the final permit set.
Page 2 of 4

Response:"Bank stabilization"has been added to the front of the description for Site 4A and Site 4B. The text for"SEE INSET B"has been
moved to be visible.
Permit Drawing Sheet 14 of 23&Permit Drawing Sheet 16 of 23: Site#5 UT to Martin Mill Creek,SET: Stream SET runs southwest to
northeast through the project and currently runs adjacent to the existing road.This area is identified in USGS and soil survey mapping and is
being identified as jurisdictional in the JD. Since this area is in the Yadkin River Basin is does not have to meet the design criteria for buffer
filtration. There will be stream impacts as well as total take of wetland WHQ and most of wetland WHP.
The design team is proposing a channel change that will tie to UT to Martin Mill Creek before intersecting the proposed fill slope of US-158,
running parallel with the roadway facility for approximately 386'and intersecting Martin Mill Creek before it crosses under US-158 in a RCBC.
Amy Euliss stated to remove the small amount of hand clearing and replace it with mechanized clearing.
Response: The hand clearing impact has been removed and replaced with mechanized clearing.
Permit Drawing Sheet 16 of 23: Site#6 Martin Mill Creek,SES: Stream SES runs northwest to southeast through the project and is
currently conveyed in a single barrel 5'x 5' RCBC under-L-at 229+10. This crossing is identified in USGS and soil survey mapping and is
being identified as jurisdictional in the JD. Since this crossing is in the Yadkin River Basin the proposed ditches entering the stream do not
have to meet the design criteria for buffer filtration. There will be stream impacts on the up and downstream sides of the site.
The design team is proposing to retain and extend the existing single barrel 5'x 5' RCBC. The existing RCBC is not buried and therefore the
proposed culvert extensions will also not be buried.The existing outlet is perched approximately 2'above the channel bottom. The proposed
extension will not be perched. The existing culvert is undersized based on future land use hydrology calculations so a 48"welded steel pipe
will be bored and jacked parallel to the existing culvert. This 48"pipe will act as a high flow pipe and will sit on a floodplain bench.
Bill Barrett stated to break out the upstream impacts to Site 6A—armoring channel, Site 6B—stream impact from the culvert extension. Mr.
Barrett also stated to break out the downstream impacts to Site 6C—stream impact from the culvert extension, Site 6D—armoring channel
and Site 6E—bank stabilization.
Response: Site 6A has been revised to"armoring channel, Site 6B has been revised to"upstream culvert extension", Site 6C has been
revised to"downstream culvert extension"and previous Site 6D and Site 6E has been combined into just Site 6D which has been revised to
"armoring channel". Due to the US 158 alignment shift that took place after the 4C meeting,the proposed lateral ditch now ties into the
channel improvement of the culvert extension on the downstream side of the crossing which eliminates the need for bank stabilization.
Amy Euliss stated to add the culvert floodplain bench detail to the plans. Brent Huskey stated that the detail will be added to the ditch detail
sheet, Permit Drawing Sheet 2 of 22.
Response: The culvert floodplain bench details has been added to the plans on Permit Drawing Sheet 3 of 23.
Permit Drawing Sheet 21 of 23: Site#7 Left Fork Belews Creek,SEL: Stream SEL runs south to north along the left side of the project
and currently runs adjacent to the existing road. This area is identified in USGS and soil survey mapping and is being identified as
jurisdictional in the JD. Since this area is in the Roanoke River Basin is does not have to meet the design criteria for buffer filtration. There
will be stream impacts due to the road widening in this location.
The design team is proposing a 48"RCP that will outlet into the stream with a drop structure to reduce the velocity of the water that will be
coming out of the pipe.
Robert Patterson asked RK&K if it would be possible to break up the drainage network and add an outlet on the left side of the-L-to allow
there to be more treatment before it ties into the jurisdictional stream. Brent Huskey stated that yes this could be revised to achieve more
treatment. Erik Seiler suggested to add an outlet at point where the pipe increases from an 18"pipe to a 24"pipe on the left side of-L-.
Response: The drainage has been revised in this area to outlet into the lateral ditch on the left of the-L-alignment to provide more treatment
before it reaches the jurisdictional stream.
Bill Barrett stated that in the 4B meeting,Amy Euliss asked for RK&K to add a label on the plans identifying where the jurisdictional stream
begins as well as a label of where the stream changes from intermittent to perennial. Mr. Barrett noted that the"begin jurisdictional stream"
label was added but was wondering if RK&K was able to determine the transition from intermittent to perennial. Brent Huskey stated that
there wasn't anything in the environmental documents that pointed out if that transition took place any where near this project. Mr. Barrett
stated that he would look further into this.
Page 3 of 4

Response: With direction from Mr. Barrett and Ms. Euliss, labels have been added to the permit drawings showing the approximate location
of where Stream SEL changes from an intermittent stream to a perennial stream.
It was discussed at the end of the meeting to wait for the revisions to be made at the Walkertown Community Park before submitting the 4C
meeting minutes and revised plans per the 4C meeting. When the minutes and the plans are sent out, please provide a summary of what
changed to the plans as well as a time frame to have final comments back to RK&K.
Response: Here is a summary of what has changed on the project to avoid the Walkertown Community Park:
• To avoid all right of way claims with Walkertown Community Park,that is a 6(f) property,a shift was put in place from-L-202+25 to
242+09 that shifted US-158 approximately 30 feet to the southeast. The shift affected the alignment of-Y16-(Old Belews Cr. Road)
and-Y17-(Darrow Road).
• For the purpose of R-2577A permit drawings,the alignment shift affected Permit Site 5 and Permit Site 6 as follows:
o Permit Site 5—Impacts were reduced for stream SET and Wetland WHP
o Permit Site 6—There are less impacts on the upstream side and more impacts on the downstream side Stream SES
compared to the plans that were provided at the 4C meeting. The overall stream impacts to Stream SES did not change
much but the culvert extensions and supplemental pipe had to be revised to line up with the stream again.
Response: A set of updated Permit Drawings have been provided with the final 4C meeting minutes to reflect the changes that have been
made to these two permit sites.
Robert Patterson stated to make sure the stormwater management plan is submitted with the final 4C plans and meeting minutes.
Response: The stormwater management plan has been provided as part of the final 4C plans and meeting minutes.
The meeting adjourned.
1\ad.rkk.com\fs\Cloud\Projects\2016\16162_NCCenLSA\H01_R2577A_US158\Design\Hydraulics\DOCUMENTS\Permits14C1R-2577A 4C Minutes
Final.docx
Page 4 of 4