20190397 Ver 1_ R-2566B CP_4B Meeting Minutes_Final_20210310

Wanucha, Dave
From:Lawing, Jason <[e-mail]>
Sent:Wednesday, March 10, 2021 4:13 PM
To:Sanderson, Mike; Berry, Michelle G; 'Lori Beckwith
([e-mail])'; McCann, Nora A; Wanucha, Dave; Chambers,
Marla J; Patterson, Robert D; Hining, Kevin J; Beaver, G Trent; Staley, Mark K; Cartner,
Wesley; Turchy, Michael A; Adima, Nathan N; Hampton, Donald E; Jamison, John;
Spacek, Tony; Green, Spencer; Weeks, Andrew; Kretchman, Douglas W; Dilday, Jason L;
Headrick, Hannah S; [e-mail]; [e-mail];
fmr.ernest.j.hahn
Cc:Janet Mizzi; [e-mail]; Aldridge, Michelle -FS; Chapman,
Amy; Pettyjohn, Michael A; Paschal, Keith; Wilkerson, Matt T; Williams, Eric; Anderson,
Brook E; Woodard, Jordan A; Walston, Jeffrey D; Lipscomb, Brian S; Robinson, Beverly
G
Subject:\[External\] RE: R-2566B CP_4B Meeting Minutes_Final
Attachments:R-2566B 4B Merger Meeting Minutes (2021-03-10).pdf
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to
Report Spam.

Everyone,

th
The meeting minutes for the Concurrence Point 4B Merger Meeting held Wednesday, February 10 for the R-2566B
project in Watauga County, NC (Division 11) have been revised and finalized with everyone’s comments. Thank you to
everyone for their input. The minutes have been placed on Connect (see link below) and are also attached. Included on
the last page of the minutes are action items for the group. They are listed below in this email as well.

R-2566B 4B Meeting Minutes

Action Items
 Kimley-Horn – Develop meeting summary and distribute to attendees. - FINALIZED
 Kimley-Horn – Look into design related revisions per the discussion in the meeting minutes. – IN
PROGRESS
 Kimley-Horn and NCDOT - Kimley-Horn and NCDOT to discuss potential of adding regenerative
stormwater conveyance at steep outfalls to help reduce velocities per NCDEQ request. – IN PROGRESS
 Kimley-Horn and NCDOT - NCDEQ requested design team to consider using a modified plunge pool at
perched pipe outfalls at select locations along the Watauga River (sheets 6 through 9) to help
create/enhance aquatic pool habitat. Kimley-Horn and NCDOT to discuss. – IN PROGRESS
 NCWRC – To assess available fish data and provide feedback to the design team on which crossings
should account for fish passage. – RECEIVED 3/2/21
 NCDOV Division 11 – Check on the status and provide the pipe inventory request. – RECEIVED 2/10/21
 NCDOT - Further coordination is to occur to determine if the green sheet needs to be clarified for which
project each commitment applies. – RECEIVED 3/1/21

Thanks,

Jason Lawing, P.E.
Kimley-Horn | 200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202
Direct: 704 319 5683 | Mobile: [phone] | www.kimley-horn.com
1

From: Lawing, Jason
Sent: Monday, February 15, 2021 2:42 PM
To: Sanderson, Mike <[e-mail]>; Berry, Michelle G <[e-mail]>; [e-mail];
'Lori Beckwith ([e-mail])' <[e-mail]>; McCann, Nora A
<[e-mail]>; Wanucha, Dave <[e-mail]>; Chambers, Marla J
<[e-mail]>; Patterson, Robert D <[e-mail]>; Hining, Kevin J
<[e-mail]>; Beaver, G Trent <[e-mail]>; Staley, Mark K <[e-mail]>; Cartner, Wesley
<[e-mail]>; Turchy, Michael A <[e-mail]>; Adima, Nathan N <[e-mail]>; Hampton,
Donald E <[e-mail]>; Jamison, John <[e-mail]>; Spacek, Tony <Tony.Spacek@kimley-
horn.com>; Green, Spencer <[e-mail]>; Weeks, Andrew <[e-mail]>;
[e-mail]; Dilday, Jason L <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; [e-mail];
[e-mail]; [e-mail]
Cc: Janet Mizzi <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; Aldridge, Michelle -FS
<[e-mail]>; Gledhill-earley, Renee <[e-mail]>; Chapman, Amy
<[e-mail]>; Pettyjohn, Michael A <[e-mail]>; Paschal, Keith <[e-mail]>;
Wilkerson, Matt T <[e-mail]>; Williams, Eric <[e-mail]>; Anderson, Brook E
<[e-mail]>; Woodard, Jordan A <[e-mail]>; Walston, Jeffrey D <[e-mail]>;
Brian Lipscomb <[e-mail]>; Robinson, Beverly G <[e-mail]>
Subject: R-2566B Concurrence Point 4B Meeting Minutes

Everyone,

th
Thank you for attending the Concurrence Point 4B Merger Meeting last Wednesday, February 10 for the R-2566B
project in Watauga County, NC (Division 11). Attached are meeting minutes to document the discussion. Included on
the last page of the minutes are action items for the group. They are listed below in this email as well. Please review
the minutes and let me know if there are any discrepancies by the end of this week (2/19). At that time they will be
considered final and will be posted on Connect.

Action Items
 Kimley-Horn – Develop meeting summary and distribute to attendees.
 Kimley-Horn – Look into design related revisions per the discussion in the meeting minutes.
 Kimley-Horn and NCDOT - Kimley-Horn and NCDOT to discuss potential of adding regenerative
stormwater conveyance at steep outfalls to help reduce velocities per NCDEQ request.
 NCWRC – To assess available fish data and provide feedback to the design team on which crossings
should account for fish passage.
 NCDOV Division 11 – Check on the status and provide the pipe inventory request.
 NCDOT - Further coordination is to occur to determine if the green sheet needs to be clarified for which
project each commitment applies.

Thanks,

Jason Lawing, P.E.
Kimley-Horn | 200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202
Direct: 704 319 5683 | Mobile: [phone] | www.kimley-horn.com

2

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
ROY COOPER
GOVERNOR
MEMORANDUM TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
On Wednesday, February 10
subject project. The meeting
Attendees
Nathan Adima
Nora McCann
Trent Beaver
Kevin Hining
Michelle Berry
Ernest Hahn
Doug Kretchman
Michael Turchy
Jason Dilday
Wes Cartner
John Jamison
Hannah Headrick
Mike Sanderson
Donald Hampton
Mark Staley
Felix Davila
Robert Patterson
Dave Wanucha
Loretta Beckwith
Marla Chambers
Holland Youngman
Jason Lawing
Tony Spacek
Spencer Green
Andrew Weeks
ERIC BOYETTE
SECRETARY
February 10, 2021
Meeting Participants
Nathan Adima, P.E.
Project Management Unit — Division 11-14
Minutes of Merger Meeting — Concurrence Point 4B
R-2566B — Improvements to NC 105 from SR 1568 (Old Shulls Mill Rd)
to SR 1107 (NC 105 Bypass) near Boone; Watauga County, NC
, 2021 at 10:00 a.m., a virtual meeting was held via GoToMeetings for the
attendees were as follows:
NCDOT Project Management Unit
NCDOT Project Management Unit
NCDOT Division 11
NCDOT Division 11
NCDOT — Hydraulics Unit
NCDOT - Hydraulics Unit
NCDOT Roadway Design Unit
NCDOT EAU — Coordination and Permitting
NCDOT EAU — Coordination and Permitting
NCDOT EAU — Mitigation and Modeling
NCDOT Environmental Policy Unit
NCDOT Environmental Policy Unit
NCDOT Environmental Policy Unit
NCDOT Utilities Unit
NCDOT Erosion Control
FHWA
NCDEQ — DWR
NCDEQ — DWR
Army Corps of Engineers
NCWRC
USFWS
Kimley-Horn and Associates
Kimley-Horn and Associates
Kimley-Horn and Associates
Kimley-Horn and Associates
TIP Project R-2566B
NEPA/404 Merger Meeting - Concurrence Point 4B (February 2021) Page 1 of ' 21

Project Overview
Jason Lawing (Kimley-Horn) led the 4B meeting discussion. The meeting started with a general
overview of the project. The project vicinity map from the Environmental Assessment document was
shared to discuss project limits. Google Earth was used with a KMZ file overlaid on the aerial/terrain that
included the major linework from the project design files showing alignment, roadway, slope stakes,
jurisdictional features, existing pipes and proposed storm drain / cross pipes. The FEMA floodplain
limits of Watauga River and Laurel Fork Creek were also shown in Google Earth as part of the
conversation. Google Earth was used throughout meeting to give better context at each jurisdictional site,
showing existing conditions, proposed storm drain layout and the constraints dictated by the challenging
surrounding mountainous terrain and parallel rivers with regulated floodplains.
The R-2566BA project was mentioned as part of the discussion. This project handles the bridge
replacement on NC 105 over the Watauga River. It is within the project limits of the R-2566B project
and was split out due to a low sufficiency rating and a need to replace the bridge before the R-2566B
project would be ready. Coordination has occurred at the jurisdictional feature sites between the BA and
B teams, such that the BA permitted sites would account for the ultimate build -out of the B project. The
tentative LET date for the BA project is currently scheduled for 7/19/2022.
The Project Commitments (green sheet) was shared with the group. Jason Dilday mentioned that the R-
2566B project commitments were updated in late 2019 during the permitting process for the R-2566BA
project. The commitments were updated to include a moratorium from April 1 to November 1 for the
Watauga River and Laurel Fork for no in -water work to avoid adverse impacts to the Eastern Hellbender
in the project area. A link to the updated green sheet was provided. Further coordination is to occur to
determine if the green sheet needs to be clarified for which project each commitment applies.
A preliminary list of the avoidance and minimization efforts that were planning to be utilized on this
project was shared and discussed. The list can be seen below. Robert Patterson made note to add
reference to the NCDOT BMP Toolbox and any measures used from the toolbox when completing the
stormwater management plan. A study of potential stormwater treatment measures will need to be
performed and documented for the 401 application. Especially, since on this project all streams receiving
runoff are trout waters and the Watauga River is a High Quality Water (HQW). The NCDOT Post
Construction Stormwater Program (PSCP) Manual Appendix A requires that stormwater BMP's be
implemented to the maximum extent practicable (MEP) for HQW.
R-2566B Stormwater Management Plan — Avoidance and Minimization Efforts
General Project Narrative and Description of Minimization of Water Quality Impacts:
• Maintaining existing drainage patterns to best extent practical.
• Avoiding direct discharges where practicable.
• Grassed shoulder typical section utilized as much as possible throughout the project to encourage
sheet flow off the roadway. Approximately 4.1 of 4.4 miles are grassed shoulder typical section.
• Minimized directly connected impervious surfaces where possible. Runoff from road in shoulder
section will drain through grassed ditches (cut and lateral ditches) prior to outfall connection.
• Grassed conveyances used in lieu of closed system to the maximum extent practicable.
• A raised grassed median (19.5' wide typical) utilized as much as possible throughout the project
after the Watauga River bridge crossing. Helps reduce additional impervious area.
TIP Project R-2566B
NEPA/404 Merger Meeting - Concurrence Point 4B (February 2021) Page 2 of ' 21

• Use of steep (2:1) slopes to reduce structure length and fill slope offset to help reduce stream and
wetland impacts. Coordinated with Geotech to identify areas where slopes can be steeper that 2:1
to further reduce impacts.
• Use of steep cut slopes (based on Geotech recommendations) into mountain, which will help
reduce impacts to jurisdictional streams draining down mountain
• Use of retaining walls to avoid impacts due to fill to parallel jurisdictional streams and FEMA
floodplains.
o 25+80 to 28+00 -Y1- (RT) PSH 5
o 106+40 to 106+80 -L- (LT) PSH 6
o 108+10 to 108+40 -L- (LT) PSH 6
o 172+10 to 175+50 -L- (LT) PSH 12
o 178+10 to 181+00 -L- (LT) PSH 12
o 262+20 to 268+00 -L- (LT) PSH 19
o 270+10 to 279+50 -L- (LT) PSH 19-20
o 287+10 to 290+10.75 -L- (LT) PSH 21
• Use of headwalls on proposed pipes to minimize stream impacts by tying in earlier (examples Sta.
87+00 -L- (LT) and 89+00 -L- (LT))
• Use of Berm Ditch Outlet's (BDO's) at top of steel cut slopes into mountain to minimize stream
impacts
• Matched existing jurisdictional stream geometry when capturing in proposed conveyances and
analyzed with a 50-year discharge to verify capacity.
• Channel changes were utilized and matched existing stream typical section to the maximum
extent practicable (examples, Sta. 70+25 to 71+50 -L- and Sta. 295+10 to 297+00 -L-)
• Offsite areas evaluated to determine if future development should be accounted for in design
• At jurisdictional streams recommend countersunk (keyed in) rip rap in channel at all pipes (no
geotextiles in channel). Rip rap with geotextile to be used on the stream banks. Help minimize
erosion, head cuts and diffuse flow.
• Burying box culverts and circular cross pipes at jurisdictional streams, if possible. Pipe burial
allows for wildlife passage and helps minimize channel erosion at inlet and outlet of the pipes.
Based on discussion with NCDOT, the following pipe guidelines were used. Pipe have been
labeled in the plans with either "Bury" or "Not Buried":
o Not a JS, don't bury
o JS only on one end, don't bury
o JS on both ends and has pipe slope over 4%, don't bury over concern of head cut
o JS on both ends and has pipe slope less than 4%, bury
o Extensions of current pipes that don't involve replacement, don't bury
o JS to be captured in a piped system, don't bury
o Bedrock prevents burial, don't bury
o Wetlands, don't bury
• Construction phasing and traffic control considerations were considered when laying out new
culverts to reduce construction time.
• Non -symmetric, best fit alignment to minimize impacts to jurisdictional streams (Watauga River,
Laurel Fork Creek and Big Branch) and wetlands.
o Shifted alignment to west in beginning section of project up to Watauga River bridge to
reduce impacts on animal passageway parallel with the Watauga River and floodplains.
• Shifted bulb -outs to avoid additional stream and wetland impacts (example Sta. 273+00 -L-)
TIP Project R-2566B
NEPA/404 Merger Meeting - Concurrence Point 4B (February 2021) Page 3 of ' 21

• Pipe inventory requested to determine if existing pipes are in good condition and can be retained.
Will help avoid impacts. Possible slip lining of pipes to be considered to retain existing pipes
under large amounts of fill that are in poor condition. Bore and jack of pipes under consideration
at certain crossing locations.
• Existing 3 @ 7' x 6' Box Culverts at Sta. 287+96 retained and extended to improve
constructability, limit traffic control, and reduce cost.
4B Plan Review
Kimley-Horn used the 4B PDF set of plans (previously sent to the group for review) and went sheet by
sheet to discuss jurisdictional sites, showing existing conditions (pictures provided), proposed storm drain
layout and the site constraints. Below is a recap of the discussion areas on each sheet. In red is the any
discussion that occurred at each site. If no discussion is shown, then no comment or concerns with the
proposed design was mentioned.
General 4B Discussion Items:
o Concern about maintaining aquatic passage through pipes. NCWRC fisheries staff
and Division 11 conducted surveys during the week of February 22" d, 2021 along
the project area to check for history of aquatic passage to help identify which pipe
crossings should try to accommodate fish passage. The findings from the survey
are as follows:
1. Three streams held trout. All other streams were small and steep.
NCWRC seemed fine with no new requests/attempts to improve aquatic
passage for the streams not mentioned below.
2. The small tributary of the Watauga River by the confluence of HWY 105
and Old Shulls Mill Road at Station 72+00 -L- held a diversity of species
above and below the crossing (steel pipe), including Brown Trout. It is
low gradient, so fish probably can move upstream from the Watauga
River at certain times of the year. Passage is good at this location now.
Consultant to review the existing plans and make sure we maintain (or
improve if possible) existing passage at this stream.
3. The proposed replacement of two steel pipes with a single box culvert on
a UT of Laurel Fork at Station 197+00 -L- will need to be reviewed to see
if we can improve/provide passage. There are multiple ages of Brown
Trout in the stream by the pipe. Hopeful we can improve the situation,
as currently the flow is split between two pipes and slightly perched.
4. NCWRC agreed that the existing level offish passage in Laurel Fork near
the triple barrel box culvert at Station 288+00 -L- is questionable due to
the steep slope and natural stream morphology, but might not be out of
the question at high flows. Also, it is known wild trout are in this section
and on both sides of the culvert. Therefore, consultant to review options
to increase the probability of passage in the new culvert and see what
we might be able to do to retrofit/improve passage in the existing
culvert. Possibly limiting normal flows to two barrels with a sill, and/or
installing sills to create steps through the culvert to lessen velocity.
TIP Project R-2566B
NEPA/404 Merger Meeting - Concurrence Point 4B (February 2021) Page 4 of 21

o Discussion about adding baffles to eligible pipes and box culverts
1. Determine maximum slope on boxes for adding baffles and other
controlling factors. Identify eligible locations
o NCDEQ requested design team to consider using a modified plunge pool at
perched pipe outfalls at select locations along the Watauga River (sheets 6
through 9) to help create/enhance aquatic pool habitat.
o NCWRC requested that stormwater sediment and erosion control meet design
standards of sensitive watersheds during construction per project commitments.
o NCWRC requested the use of stormwater BMP's where possible as project design
moves forward.
o NCDEQ requested design team investigate adding regenerative stormwater
conveyance at steep outfalls to help reduce velocities. Kimley-Horn to discuss
with NCDOT as project moves forward into final drainage design.
o Division to look into previous pipe inventory request and provide after meeting.
• Sheet 4
o Sta. 68+75 to 72+00 -L-
1. JS stream on RT through wetlands; impacted by widening; replacing JS
stream with matching channel geometry
48 Discussion: Corps requested that total wetland impacts be included on the
permit drawings. It was discussed that at 48 impacts are not yet quantified, but
will have them at the future 4C meeting when permit drawings have been
developed.
2. JS on LT approaching road has steep slope ("'10%); JS on RT much flatter
(0.5% slope; contributing to wetland environment)
3. Existing 48" CMP on LT crosses under driveway; in poor condition; stream
banks eroding and meandering around the 48" d/w pipe entrance
4. Existing 48" CMP X-pipe, stream eroding around edge of pipe due to
sharp bends
5. Use of proposed HW to help limit impacts; base ditch with keyed -in CL I
rip rap in channel used due to steep stream slope; pipe not buried due to
stream slope; channel geometry set to match existing
6. 48" RCP cross pipe aligned with approaching stream from left side of
road; avoids the stream taking a sharp right-hand turn at the roadway
embankment (concern with erosion in roadway embankment). Prefer
bends to occur on downstream end as shown.
48 Discussion: Consider realigning base ditch to run more in -line with proposed
cross pipe and avoid sharp turns on downstream end.
7. Outfall JS, large base, flat slope, standing water. Appears more like
"farmers swale" with fields on either side. Proposed matches existing
geometry and carries it upstream to the proposed cross pipe outfall.
8. Proposed layout will help with constructability (can maintain existing
stream flow through 48" CMP's while proposed is being constructed).
9. Originally looked at similar layout to existing; however due to widening it
resulted in cut 100's of feet back into mountain
o Sta. 13+75 -Y1- (Old Shulls Mill Road)
1. 24" CMP cross pipe under NC 105; becomes JS on downstream side
TIP Project R-2566B
NEPA/404 Merger Meeting - Concurrence Point 4B (February 2021) Page 5 of 21

2. Re-establishing channel in area of existing Old Shulls Mill Road (to be
removed); matched channel geometry; keyed in rip rap due to slope and
cross pipe outfall protection
48 Discussion: Confirmed that we expect the existing roadbed will be re -seeded
once removed per comment
3. Proposed 36" cross pipe (buried 0.6') w/ HW to help limit stream impacts
4. Rip rap embankment protection on upstream banks due to roadside
ditches
5. Rip rap outlet protection downstream (CL I RR keyed -in channel; rip rap
and geotextile on banks)
o Sta. 18+00 to 19+50 -Y1-
1. Existing 18" CMP with wetlands along road (in existing roadside ditches)
on either side.
2. Shifted upstream cross pipe to align with downstream side due to new
road alignment
3. Existing 36" CMP on downstream side used by property owner to cross
fields on either side of the stream
4. Proposed pipe extended further downstream to provide similar field
access.
5. Structure 0402 is a drop structure that had to be used to get slopes to
work for field access pipe. Pipe from 0402 to 0403 very flat which should
reduce velocity and reduce possibility of erosion/scour. RR outlet pad.
48 Discussion: No Comment
• Sheet 5
o Sta. 84+75 to 87+25 -L-
1. JS on LT side of -L- approaching road with very steep slope ("14%); rock
in channel
2. Existing 30" CMP in good condition; pipe perched 6" downstream, but no
signs of scour up or downstream
3. Pipe under considerable fill (-35')
4. Pipe only very slightly undersized (HW/D of "2)
5. Pipe inventory requested; possible slip line of existing pipe
6. Currently proposing to retain and extend on the upstream end; DS
doesn't require extension; 30" pipe extension through use of JB due to
fill depth; pipe slope both existing and extension "'9% (no drop in box)
7. Possible bore and jack of helper pipe depending on inventory results
8. Use of HW upstream to limit impacts; base ditch with keyed -in CL I rip rap
in channel used due to steep stream slope; pipe not buried due to stream
slope; channel geometry set to match existing
9. RR outlet pad downstream
10. Storm drain outfall at 84+75 RT with rip rap embankment protection
down slope. RR ends just prior to spring and wetland
48 Discussion: Potential for fish passage was discussed at this crossing. Discussion
of steep pipe/stream slope, little to no water depth, debris in channel (vegetated,
wooded) and perched pipes would not accommodate fish passage. NCWRC to
look at fish data to determine if anything needs to be considered at this crossing,
but consensus of group is it would not apply at this crossing.
TIP Project R-2566B
NEPA/404 Merger Meeting - Concurrence Point 4B (February 2021) Page 6 of 21

o Sta. 23+00 -Y1-
1. Existing 24" CMP undersized to be replaced with 42" RCP not buried due
to pipe and stream slope (6.5% and 14%)
2. Use of HW upstream to limit impacts; base ditch with keyed -in CL I rip rap
in channel used due to steep stream slope; channel geometry set to
match existing
3. Rip rap outlet protection downstream (CL I RR keyed -in channel; rip rap
and geotextile on banks)
4. Improved pipe/stream crossing angle, should also allow for easier
construction
48 Discussion: No Comment
o Sta. 89+00 -L-
1. JS on LT side of -L- approaching road with very steep slope ("22%); rock
in channel
2. Existing 30" CMP in good condition; pipe perched 10" downstream, with
10" deep, 5' diameter scour hole downstream; outlet channel otherwise
good with boulders and large rocks protecting stream banks from erosion
3. Pipe under considerable fill ("35')
4. Pipe size correctly (HW/D —0.8)
5. Pipe inventory requested; possible slip line of existing pipe
6. Currently proposing to retain and extend on the upstream end; DS
doesn't require extension; 30" pipe extension through use of JB due to
fill depth and pipe slope change; pipe slope existing (-12%) and extension
(-8%) (no drop in box)
7. Possible bore and jack of helper pipe depending on inventory results
8. Use of HW upstream to limit impacts; base ditch with keyed -in CL I rip rap
in channel used due to steep stream slope; pipe not buried due to stream
slope; channel geometry set to match existing
9. RR outlet pad downstream
48 Discussion: Potential for fish passage was discussed at this crossing. Discussion
of steep pipe/stream slope, little to no water depth, debris in channel (vegetated,
wooded) and perched pipes would not accommodate fish passage. NCWRC to
look at fish data to determine if anything needs to be considered at this crossing,
but consensus of group is it would not apply at this crossing.
o Sta. 11+00 -Y2- (Old Shulls Mill Rd)
1. Existing 30" CMP, recommend replacing due to widening
2. Existing pipe outfall was found to be plugged 2' on site visit 03-17-2020
3. Proposed 30" RCP (not buried due to pipe/stream slope, —S%)
4. Proposed Pipe is raised 2' to improve outfall condition
48 Discussion: Kimley-Horn and NCDOT see no risk to downstream wetlands due
to improvement of outfall condition
5. Rip rap embankment protection on upstream banks due to roadside
ditches
6. RR outlet pad downstream prior to wetlands
o Retaining wall from 25+80 to 28+00 -Y1- (RT)
1. Protects from filling into meandering, parallel JS
TIP Project R-2566B
NEPA/404 Merger Meeting - Concurrence Point 4B (February 2021) Page 7 of 21

48 Discussion: No Comment
o Watauga River / Old Shulls Mill Road bridge crossing
1. FEMA stream
2. Roadway improvements along Old Shulls Mill Road raises grade slightly;
100 year overtops road
3. Insurable structures immediately upstream; will need to model to prove
no impact
48 Discussion: No Comment
• Sheet 6
o Big Branch stream crossings; stream confluence upstream of building near Sta.
107+50 -L- (LT)
o Sta. 106+69 -L-
1. Existing 36" CMP in good condition
2. Existing pipe undersized (overtops road in 50-year event); however,
residents never seen overtop
3. Pipe under considerable fill ("25'+)
4. Large boulders and vegetation (trees) in banks up and downstream
5. Pipe slope —16%
6. Use of retaining wall to limit stream impacts
7. Pipe inventory requested in case existing pipe is used as part of proposed
solution; possible slip line of existing pipe
8. Anticipate bore and jack of supplementary pipe to LT of existing;
supplementary pipe size will depend on pipe inventory results (if exist
pipe in good condition then can look at sizing helper pipe smaller to help
reduce cost of bore and jack; if not good condition then need to size to
convey entire drainage area assuming exist pipe will eventually fail; need
to account for 20' x 40' bore pit on downstream side)
9. Transmission pole at Sta. 106+51 -L- (71' RT); coordinated with Blue Ridge
Energy and bore and jack should be allowed under pole based on distance
of pipe away from pole, typically there is a no construction zone
48 Discussion: Potential for fish passage was discussed at this crossing. Discussion
of steep pipe/stream slope, little to no water depth, debris in channel (vegetated,
wooded) and perched pipes would not accommodate fish passage. NCWRC to
look at fish data to determine if anything needs to be considered at this crossing,
but consensus of group is it would not apply at this crossing.
o Sta. 108+86 -L-
1. Existing 30" CMP in good condition
2. Existing pipe undersized (overtops road in 50-year event); however,
residents never seen overtop
3. Pipe under considerable fill ("25'+)
4. Large boulders and vegetation (trees) in banks up and downstream
5. Pipe slope "'14%
6. Pipe on considerable skew
7. Use of retaining wall to limit stream impacts
TIP Project R-2566B
NEPA/404 Merger Meeting - Concurrence Point 4B (February 2021) Page 8 of 21

8. Pipe inventory requested in case existing pipe is used as part of proposed
solution; possible slip line of existing pipe
9. Anticipate bore and jack of supplementary pipe to LT of existing;
supplementary pipe size will depend on pipe inventory results (if exist
pipe in good condition then can look at sizing helper pipe smaller to help
reduce cost of bore and jack; if not good condition then need to size to
convey entire drainage area assuming exist pipe will eventually fail; need
to account for 20' x 40' bore pit on downstream side)
10. Minimal impacts anticipated to wetland along Old Shulls Mill roadside
(DS)
48 Discussion: Potential for fish passage was discussed at this crossing. Discussion
of steep pipe/stream slope, little to no water depth, debris in channel (vegetated,
wooded) and perched pipes would not accommodate fish passage. NCWRC to
look at fish data to determine if anything needs to be considered at this crossing,
but consensus of group is it would not apply at this crossing.
o Existing pipes downstream on Old Shulls Mill Road undersized (30" pipes)
1. Need to be replaced and/or helped with additional pipes. Waiting to
finalize until direction on NC 105 cross pipes is determined
2. Need survey of stream downstream of 30" under Old Shulls Mill on sheet
6; need to determine JS limits on downstream side
3. Existing 30" CMP on Sheet 7 perched by approximately 10' downstream;
but ties directly into the Watauga River and no signs of scour
48 Discussion: Existing plunge pool area downstream of existing 30" under Old
Shulls Mill Road on Sheet 7 discussed by group. Need to look into possibility of
adding similar plunge pools in other areas such as downstream of the existing 30"
under Old Shulls Mill Road on Sheet 6. NCDEQ requested design team to consider
using a modified plunge pool at perched pipe outfalls at select locations along the
Watauga River (sheets 6 through 9) to help create/enhance aquatic pool habitat.
Fish passage was discussed on these pipes as well, in context with trying to
eliminate perched condition. Eliminating perch in replacement pipe would result
in pipe with slope of approximately 35% or would require extensive excavation on
upstream side that would potentially impact NC 105 road embankment. NCWRC
to look at fish data to determine if anything needs to be considered at this
crossing, but consensus of group is it would not apply at this crossing.
• Sheet 7
o Sta. 112+75 RT of Old Shulls Mill Road
1. Perched pipe (3'); rock in channel; not JS stream; ties to River
immediately DS
2. Rip rap outlet protection
48 Discussion: No Comment
o Sta. 117+00 to 119+00 4-
1. Wetland on LT side of road (roadside ditch) impacted by widening
2. Capturing spring just above cut slope with a BDO
TIP Project R-2566B
NEPA/404 Merger Meeting - Concurrence Point 4B (February 2021) Page 9 of 21

3. Existing 24" CMP at Sta. 119+50 extends downstream under private
property and under a building; recommend plug, fill and abandon of
existing pipe and introducing new storm pipe crossing at Sta. 121+00 so
pipe can stay within NCDOT ROW for maintenance.
4. 30" cross pipe; 30" CSP w/elbows down right embankment (0717 to
0718) due to steep embankment. (system sized for 50-year event from
0715 to 0718)
5. Old Shulls Mill Road being removed at outlet. Recommend removing
existing 24" CMP and re-establish channel. Match existing channel
geometry.
6. Base ditch with keyed -in CL I rip rap in channel
48 Discussion: IS and wetland at outfall of existing 24" CMP discussed since water
would be diverted away in proposed design. Requested these stream impacts be
quantified and the wetland along left side of Old Shulls Mill be considered a total
take.
• Sheet 8
o Sta. 124+75 -L-
1. Existing 18" CMP to be plug, filled and abandoned
2. Capturing JS stream on LT with BDO at top of cut slope; extremely steep
stream slope; boulders in channel
3. Proposed 24" (sized for 50-year event)
4. CSP with elbows on RT side of road due to extremely steep slope (37.5%
with 7.5' deep structure at 0817).
5. RR embankment protection down steep slope until toe
48 Discussion: No Comment
o Sta. 125+00 to 127+00 -L-
1. Wetland on LT side of road (roadside ditch) impacted by widening
48 Discussion: No Comment
o Sta. 126+75 to 130+00 -L-
1. Capturing JS stream on LT with BDO at top of cut slope; extremely steep
stream slope; boulders in channel
2. Existing JS drains to road, captured in 18" CMP along LT side of road and
then crosses road in 18" CMP at Sta. 130+00
3. Proposed design similar to existing (sized for 50-year event from 0801 to
0814)
4. Rip rap outlet protection downstream (CL I RR keyed -in channel; rip rap
and geotextile on banks)
5. 130+00 LT tie in another JS captured with BDO (sized for 50-year event)
48 Discussion: No Comment
o Sta. 130+75 to 134+00 -L-
1. Capturing JS stream on LT with BDO at top of cut slope; extremely steep
stream slope; boulders in channel
2. ExistingJS drains to road with abrupt turns and pipe (possible old access),
wetlands identified impacted by widening of road and then crosses road
in 24" CMP at Sta. 134+00
TIP Project R-2566B
NEPA/404 Merger Meeting - Concurrence Point 4B (February 2021) Page 10 of 21

3. Proposed design similar to existing (sized for 50-year event from 0807 to
0813)
4. Rip rap outlet protection downstream (CL I RR keyed -in channel; rip rap
and geotextile on banks)
5. 134+00 LT tie in another JS captured with JB (drop box due to road
elevation differences), retaining existing 18" CMP under Southridge
Road; proposed sized for 50-year event
48 Discussion: No Comment
• Sheet 9
o Sta. 137+50 -L-
1. Storm drain outfall on right side of road (similar to existing) with rip rap
outlet protection at top of slope. Existing slope vegetated with no signs
of erosion.
48 Discussion: No Comment
o Sta. 144+00 to 145+00 -L-
1. Capturing JS stream on LT with BDO at top of cut slope; steep stream
slope
2. Proposed design with 30" cross pipe (sized for 50-year event from 0908
to 0912)
3. Rip rap embankment protection downstream down slope to top bank of
Watauga River
48 Discussion: No Comment
o Sta. 145+00 to 146+50 -L-
1. Wetland on LT side of road ("roadside ditch") impacted by widening
48 Discussion: No Comment
o Sta. 148+00 to 148+50 -L-
1. Existing 24" CMP cross pipe at 148+25 being replaced due to widening;
two JS streams drain to 24" pipe
2. JS along roadside impacted by widening; being replaced with base ditch
matching existing geometry; drains to HW 0917 and ties to proposed 30"
cross pipe
3. Capturing another JS stream on LT with BDO at top of cut slope; steep
stream slope
4. RR embankment protection on DS side down steep existing embankment;
stops where JS slope starts to flatten out
48 Discussion: No Comment
• Sheet 10
o Sta. 150+70 -L-
1. Storm drain outfall on right side of road (similar to existing) with rip rap
embankment protection down steep existing embankment. Existing
slope vegetated with no signs of erosion.
48 Discussion: No Comment
o Sta. 151+80 -L- to end of sheet
TIP Project R-2566B
NEPA/404 Merger Meeting - Concurrence Point 4B (February 2021) Page 11 of 21

1. R-2566BA project
2. Coordination at jurisdictional feature sites between BA and B team for BA
to account for ultimate build -out of B section at tie-in's. No additional
impacts on B project anticipated in BA project limits
48 Discussion: No Comment
• Sheet 11
o Watauga River bridge crossing
1. R-2566BA project; Split out due to low sufficiency rating and needing to
be replaced before full B section ready
48 Discussion: No Comment
• Sheet 12
o Sta. 171+40 and 172+35 -L-
1. Replacement of existing cross pipes on BA section of project with 60"
bore and jack pipes. Coordination at jurisdictional feature sites between
BA and B team for BA to account for ultimate build -out of B section at tie-
in's
48 Discussion: No Comment
o Sta. 172+10 to 175+50 -L- (LT)
1. Proposed retaining wall that eliminates fill from roadway into FEMA
floodplain and Laurel Fork Creek
2. Storm drain outfall on left side of road (Sta. 172+40) with rip rap
embankment protection down steep existing embankment. Existing
slope vegetated with no signs of erosion.
48 Discussion: No Comment
o Sta. 178+10 to 181+00 -L- (LT)
1. Proposed retaining wall that eliminates fill from roadway into FEMA
floodplain and Laurel Fork Creek
2. Storm drain outfall on left side of road (Sta. 179+10) with rip rap
embankment protection down steep existing embankment to Laurel Fork
Creek.
3. Existing pond (JS) on mountain top on RT side of road above DRW6
impacted by cut slope from proposed driveway. Capture in BDO to carry
down the mountain. Size for 50-year event (1201 to 1207)
48 Discussion: No Comment
• Sheet 13
o Sta. 183+00 -L-
1. Storm drain outfall on left side of road (Sta. 183+00) with rip rap
embankment protection down steep existing embankment to Laurel Fork
Creek.
48 Discussion: No Comment
o Old Danner Road -Y3- and Drake Road
1. FEMA modeling needed to update with proposed improvements and
determine potential impacts
TIP Project R-2566B
NEPA/404 Merger Meeting - Concurrence Point 4B (February 2021) Page 12 of 21

48 Discussion: No Comment
o Sta. 187+50 -L-
1. Storm drain outfall on left side of road (Sta. 187+50) with rip rap
embankment protection down steep existing embankment to Laurel Fork
Creek.
48 Discussion: No Comment
o Sta. 190+50 -L-
1. Existing 54" CMP cross pipe (shown in survey as 60" structural steel);
perched by 3' on DS end with scour hole; rock in stream down to Laurel
Fork Creek
2. Could not make use of existing pipe due to extreme stream slope changes
on widened portion of road to RT.
3. Replace with 60" RCP (not buried due to pipe (-8%) and stream slope
("36%))
4. Proposed pipe lowers outfall elevation to eliminate perch
5. HW's up and downstream to reduce stream impacts
6. Rip rap protection up and downstream (CL I RR keyed -in channel; rip rap
and geotextile on banks)
7. Upstream channel graded from beyond upstream confluence to
upstream headwall in order to get under roadway.
48 Discussion: No Comment
o Sta. 193+00 to 195+00 -L-
1. FEMA modeling for fill slope into floodplain needed to update with
proposed improvements and determine potential impacts
48 Discussion: No Comment
• Sheet 14
o Sta. 197+25 -L-
1. Existing 2 @ 54" steel pipes; measured in field as 54", survey labeled as
60"; pipes perched 6" DS with 1' deep scour hole; rocks and vegetated
banks
2. Could not make use of existing pipe due to extreme stream slope changes
on widened portion of road to RT.
3. Existing pipes undersized.
4. Replace with 1 @ 10' x 6' RCBC (not buried due to pipe (4.8%) and stream
slope)
5. Rip rap protection up and downstream (CL II RR keyed -in channel; rip rap
and geotextile on banks)
6. RCBC location set to try and make use of existing left 54" pipe during
construction to maintain normal flow
48 Discussion:
a. Kimley-Horn to assess potential to add baffles inside of RCBC
TIP Project R-2566B
NEPA/404 Merger Meeting - Concurrence Point 4B (February 2021) Page 13 of 21

b. NCWRC to assess whether fish passage is anticipated at proposed
box culvert.
o Sta. 201+05 to 202+50 -L-
1. Existing JS with 2' base, vegetated banks with rocky channel. No signs of
erosion.
2. Wetland on RT side of road ("roadside ditch") impacted by widening
3. Existing 18" CMP undersized and too deep to tie in with 2G1's.
4. Matched typical channel geometry and carried water through base
ditches to proposed cross -pipe; proposed 24" RCP (not buried 7.3% pipe
slope)
5. Matching existing pipe outfall location (1411 and 1421) and providing
embankment protection down embankment to toe at JS tie-in
48 Discussion: NCWRC requested that embankment protection be added on
opposite bank on the JS across from outfall pipes
• Sheet 15
o Sta. 10+32 -Y4- (LT)
1. Existing 15" CMP in good condition
2. Outfalls into stream bank protected by rip rap. No sign of erosion at
outfall
3. Bridge recently replaced; new bridge as-builts requested for invert
information
4. Plans will be revised to tie into existing 2G1 and utilize existing outfall pipe
48 Discussion: No Comment
o Baird's Creek Road -Y4-
1. Roadway improvements along Baird's Creek Road raises grade slightly;
100 year overtops road
2. FEMA modeling needed to update with proposed improvements and
determine potential impacts
48 Discussion: No Comment
o Sta. 219+00 -L- (RT)
1. JS captured in existing 18" CMP above access road. Retaining a portion
of existing 18" pipe to limit impacts upstream into mountain. Tie
proposed JB (1514) to existing pipe in cut slope. Had to introduce drop
in structure to retain, because existing pipe would be exposed by cut
slope.
2. Replacing with 24" cross pipe (sized for 50-year event, 1514 to 1517)
3. Outfall matches existing pipe location and elevation down at toe of left
embankment
4. Small section of open channel prior to existing 18" CMP under private
d/w
5. Plans to be revised to replace downstream 18" under private driveway to
match proposed 24" upstream pipe. Will match existing pipe outfall
location and elevation and provide embankment protection down
embankment to toe at JS tie-in
TIP Project R-2566B
NEPA/404 Merger Meeting - Concurrence Point 4B (February 2021) Page 14 of 21

48 Discussion: No Comment
• Sheet 16
o Sta. 222+50 -L-
1. Existing 24" pipe under existing building (under foundation). Call to
replace and capture with a BDO. Sized 1601 to 1606 with 50-year event.
2. Pipe end damaged on left side of road. Perched 5' with minor scour at
outfall, but downstream protected by rock with little signs of scour.
3. Currently calling to retain since RCP, sized correctly and will help traffic
control. Pipe inventory requested.
4. Adding rip rap outlet protection per NCDOT outlet pad standards
5. Plan to add structure on existing 30" (-8' back to avoid damaged end)
and drop structure to eliminate perch pipe condition
48 Discussion: No Comment
o Sta. 228+50 -L-
1. JS captured upstream (RT) by 12" HDPE to be retained.
2. Tie to existing 18" HDPE because it was going to daylight in proposed cut
slope.
3. 1611 to 1617 sized for 50-year event
4. Retaining exist 48" CMP on RT side of road; captures water offsite on
sheet 17 (not JS)
5. Existing 48" Steel pipe; good condition; slightly undersized (HW/D of —2);
under a large amount of fill ("28'); has large offsite pipes that tie so prefer
to retain; avoid traffic control if retain. Pipe inventory requested
6. Perched —1' on DS with minor scour at outfall; downstream protected by
rock with little signs of scour.
7. Adding rip rap outlet protection.
48 Discussion: If existing pipe is retained there is no need to fix perched condition
on downstream end since perch is minor and there are no signs of erosion.
o Sta. 228+50 to 231+25 -L-
1. Proposed retaining wall limits impacts to existing outfall and
Jurisdictional stream
48 Discussion: No Comment
• Sheet 17
o Sta. 235+37 -L- (LT)
1. Existing 18" CMP cross pipe.
2. Proposed system outfall at top of slope at same location and invert as
existing with added rip rap outlet protection. Outfall in good condition
with no signs of erosion
48 Discussion: No Comment
o Sta. 238+00 -L- (LT)
1. Existing 24" CMP system outfall.
2. Proposed system outfall at top of slope at same location and ties to
existing surface. With rip rap outlet protection. Outfall in good condition
with no signs of erosion.
TIP Project R-2566B
NEPA/404 Merger Meeting - Concurrence Point 4B (February 2021) Page 15 of 21

48 Discussion: No Comment
o Sta. 239+58 to 241+00 -L-
1. JS captured in BDO on RT side of road (1714). System sized as 50-year
event (1714 to 1722). Ties to existing 24" RCP cross pipe under road.
Sized correctly, helps avoid traffic control issues.
2. Retaining existing 24" CMP on LT side of road. Outlets into existing
wetland. Existing pipe in good condition. Perched 1' with minor scour at
outfall, but stream in good condition with little signs of scour. Pipe
inventory requested.
3. Sta. 240+32 to 241+29 wetland on RT side of road ("roadside ditch")
impacted by widening
4. Sta. 242+69 to 243+36 wetland on RT side of road ("roadside ditch")
impacted by widening
48 Discussion: No Comment
• Sheet 18
o Sta. 245+00 to 251+20 -L- [1810,1814)
1. Existing JS enters project area down mountain near 251+20 RT. Flows
through wetland that will be impacted by widening. Takes multiple 90
degree turns before tie to roadside ditch. Flows down roadside ditch to
a large hole that develops at 245+00 at an existing 66" CMP pipe.
2. Proposed road fills over JS. Cross pipe will be collared, extended and
water will be conveyed through closed storm system with BDO's at top
of cut slope to capture concentrated offsite drainage area flow. System
designed for 50-year event.
3. 66" CMP cross pipe in good condition up and downstream. Boulders in
channel. Plan to revise and eliminate downstream channel
improvements since protection already there and avoid JS impacts.
4. Pipe sized correctly. Pipe inventory requested.
48 Discussion: No Comment
o Sta. 253+35 to 254+20 -L-
1. Existing JS flows down to closed system at drop inlet
2. Proposed road is cutting into existing JS. Water will be conveyed through
closed storm system with a BDO at top of cut slope to capture
concentrated offsite drainage area flow. System sized for 50-year event
(1822 to 1828)
3. Outfall in good condition with boulders in channel
4. Proposed 24" CSP with elbows outfall pipe lowered to eliminate existing
outfall pipe perch ("'1') and keyed -in CL I Rip Rap outlet protection added
48 Discussion: No Comment
• Sheet 19
o Sta. 260+72 -L- (LT)
1. Existing 18" HDPE; JS begins at outfall
2. Large boulders at outfall in good condition with no signs of scour.
3. Proposed 36" CSP w/Elbows to be extended to stub out at fill slope
48 Discussion: No Comment
TIP Project R-2566B
NEPA/404 Merger Meeting - Concurrence Point 4B (February 2021) Page 16 of 21

o Sta. 263+91 -L- (LT)
1. Existing 36" RCP. Pipe inventory requested. Becomes JS at outfall.
2. Large boulders at outfall in good condition with no signs of scour
3. Don't anticipate adding rip rap to avoid JS impacts.
48 Discussion: No Comment
o Sta. 262+20 to 268+00 -L- (LT)
1. Proposed Retaining wall prevents impacts to FEMA stream and floodplain
48 Discussion: No Comment
o Sta. 270+20 -L- (LT)
1. Proposed storm outfall at structure 1924 at top of slope beyond proposed
retaining wall
2. Class I Rip rap embankment protection down embankment to toe of
Laurel Fork Creek
48 Discussion: No Comment
o Sta. 270+10 to 279+50 -L- (LT)
1. Proposed Retaining wall prevents impact to stream
2. There will be impacts to floodplain of Laurel Fork Creek
3. Modeling is planned to determine impacts to floodplain
48 Discussion: No Comment
• Sheet 20
o Sta. 274+17 to 274+92 -L- (LT)
1. Bulb -out previously shifted to avoid impacts to JS pond at concrete plant
(274+00 to 275+00)
2. Proposed Retaining wall located to prevent direct impacts to pond
48 Discussion: No Comment
• Sheet 21
o Sta. 287+10 to 290+10.75 -L- (LT)
1. Use of retaining wall to avoid impacts due to fill to parallel FEMA streams
and floodplains.
48 Discussion: No Comment
o Sta. 287+96 -L-
1. Existing 3 @ 7'x6' RCBC's in good condition. Pipe inventory requested.
On non-FEMA jurisdictional stream. Once downstream outfall joins with
Laurel Fork it becomes a FEMA detail study stream
2. Existing structures adequately sized
3. Large boulders in banks up and downstream in good condition
4. Extending existing boxes upstream and downstream with headwall to
limit stream impacts
5. Extensions not buried because extensions have 7% slope
6. Counter sunk Class II Rip Rap and geotextile on banks only
48 Discussion:
TIP Project R-2566B
NEPA/404 Merger Meeting - Concurrence Point 4B (February 2021) Page 17 of 21

a. Corps requested that base flow be restricted through the
appropriate number of barrels that closely matches the existing,
natural stream widths. Requested adding sill(s) to culverts to
restrict flow.
b. Kimley-Horn mentioned that providing less open area than the
existing condition is not typical, does not follow hydraulic
guidelines and could lead to worse upstream flooding.
c. Corps mentioned possibly providing a bypass pipe to account for
the lost open area by adding sill(s).
d. Kimley-Horn to also assess potential to add baffles inside of RCBC.
e. NCWRC to assess whether fish passage is anticipated at proposed
box culvert.
o Sta. 289+50 -L- (LT)
1. Proposed storm system outfall
2. Class I Rip rap embankment protection on steep roadway embankment
to existing to existing flattened area at toe of slope
48 Discussion: No Comment
o Sta. 290+25 to 295+12 -L- (LT)
1. Existing FEMA Limited Study stream in closed system 112" Steel pipe
underneath concrete plant. Retain existing 112" Steel pipe.
2. Proposed JB to tie into open end of 112" pipe with proposed outfall of
114" pipe at skew with HW to angle around bulb -out
3. Existing wall on concrete plant protecting pipe/stream failing
48 Discussion: No Comment
o Sta. 295+12 to 297+45 -L- (LT)
1. Existing FEMA Limited Study stream in open channel flow
2. Bulb -out widening impacts stream.
3. Existing 10' wide channel with large boulder lined banks in good condition
with 1' of normal water depth. Existing channel appears man-made. JS
becomes very steep in last 100' prior to 112" pipe.
4. Plan to pipe and re -align channel with matching stream geometry and
protect banks with counter sunk Class II Rip Rap and GFD on banks only.
Considered closed system under bulb -out, but open channel was
preferred for multiple reasons (constructability, maintenance, FEMA
compliance, etc.)
5. FEMA modeling required to achieve no impact since there are upstream
insurable structures in floodplain.
6. Bulb -out cannot shift while maintaining access to Concrete Plant.
Alternative location will involve purchasing existing businesses
48 Discussion:
a. NCWRC asked if a natural stream design could be utilized where
new channel is being established. Group agreed this was not a
good location for natural stream design due to existing
conditions.
TIP Project R-2566B
NEPA/404 Merger Meeting - Concurrence Point 4B (February 2021) Page 18 of 21

b. Asked if regenerative stormwater conveyance could be
implemented here. Kimley-Horn to discuss with NCDOT.
c. Corps asked how this stream impact would be classified? This
would be assessed as we progress to 4C.
• Sheet 22
o Sta. 297+45 to 302+32 -L- (LT)
1. Existing FEMA Limited Study stream in closed system 72" CMP
underneath lumberyard and businesses
2. Proposed JB to tie onto open end of 72" CMP with proposed outfall of
72" pipe at skew with HW to angle around proposed bulb -out
48 Discussion: No Comment
o Sta. 306+57 -L- (LT)
1. Wetland on LT side of road impacted by fill slope at intersection of NC
105 and NC 105 Bypass
48 Discussion: No Comment
General:
USFWS was not at the 48 meeting due to an invite issue. Therefore, as new representatives, extra
time was provided for USFWS to review the plans, review the meeting minutes, meet with NCDOT
and provide their comments. The following comments were provided by Lauren Wilson (FWS):
1. 1 reviewed some of the Service file (#10-244) for this project including the 3 and 4A Merger
Meeting Minutes and the Section 7 correspondence between DOT and USFWS.
2. 1 suggest avoidance and minimization measures for reducing impacts to water quality during
design or construction. While 1 reviewed all the material, it wasn't always clear to me what
measures are already planned or were considered so apologies for any duplication. Let me know
if construction related comments (vs design) are more appropriate for a different Merger
concurrence point. These are standard recommendations that the Asheville Field Office submits
on projects such as this. We agree with many of the comments submitted by other agencies
regarding the burial of culverts and measures to maintain wildlife passage and natural stream
function.
a. Forested riparian buffers (a minimum 50 feet wide along intermittent streams and 100
feet wide along perennial streams [or the full extent of the 100-year floodplain,
whichever is greater]) should be created, maintained, or restored adjacent to all aquatic
areas, where possible or impacted by the project.
b. Impervious surfaces, ditches, pipes, roads, utility lines, and other infrastructure that
requires maintenance, cleared rights -of -way and/or compromise the functions and
values of the forested stream buffers should not occur within riparian areas, where
practicable.
c. To effectively reduce erosion and sedimentation impacts, best management practices
specific to the extent and type of construction should be designed and installed prior to
land -disturbing activities and should be maintained throughout construction. Natural
fiber matting (coir) should be used for erosion control as synthetic netting can trap
animals and persists in the environment beyond its intended purpose. Land disturbance
TIP Project R-2566B
NEPA/404 Merger Meeting - Concurrence Point 4B (February 2021) Page 19 of 21

should be limited to what can be stabilized quickly, preferably by the end of the
workday.
d. Once construction is complete, disturbed areas should be revegetated with native
riparian grass and tree species as soon as possible. For maximum benefits to water
quality and bank stabilization, riparian areas should be forested; however, if the areas
are maintained in grass, they should not be mowed.
e. Only the absolute minimum amount of work should be done within stream channels to
accomplish necessary construction. The amount of disturbance to in -stream and riparian
areas should not exceed what can be stabilized by the end of the workday.
f. All work in or adjacent to streams should be conducted in a dry work area to the extent
possible.
g. Equipment should not be operated in the stream unless necessary. Machinery should be
operated from the banks in a fashion that minimizes disturbance to woody
vegetation. Equipment should be: (a) washed to remove any contaminant residue prior
to project construction, (b) in good working order, and (c) checked to ensure there are no
leaks of potential contaminants (such as oil or other lubricants) prior to and during
construction.
h. Measures to control sediment and erosion should be installed before any ground
disturbing activities occur. Grading and backfilling should be minimized, and existing
native vegetation should be retained (if possible) to maintain riparian cover for fish and
wildlife. Disturbed areas should be revegetated with native grass and tree species as
soon as the project is completed.
3. Tree removal recommendations:
a. Signed comments from the 4A Merger Meeting Minutes discuss tree preservation, to the
extent possible, between 105 and Watauga River to preserve wildlife passages.
Additionally, we recommend preserving trees suitable for tree -roosting bats: trees (live,
dying, dead, or snag) with a diameter at breast height (DBH) of three inches or greater
that exhibits any of the following characteristics: exfoliating bark, crevices, cavity, or
cracks.
b. Remove trees outside the active bat season (1 April —15 Oct) if possible. If not, we
encourage avoidance of the pupping season (1 June —31 July).
Action Items
• Kimley-Horn — Develop meeting summary and distribute to attendees.
• Kimley-Horn — Look into design related revisions per the discussion in the notes above.
• Kimley-Horn and NCDOT - Kimley-Horn and NCDOT to discuss potential of adding
regenerative stormwater conveyance at steep outfalls to help reduce velocities per
NCDEQ request.
• Kimley-Horn and NCDOT - NCDEQ requested design team to consider using a modified
plunge pool at perched pipe outfalls at select locations along the Watauga River (sheets
6 through 9) to help create/enhance aquatic pool habitat. Kimley-Horn and NCDOT to
discuss.
• NCWRC— To assess available fish data and provide feedback to the design team on
which crossings should account for fish passage.
• NCDOV Division 11 — Check on the status and provide the pipe inventory request.
TIP Project R-2566B
NEPA/404 Merger Meeting - Concurrence Point 4B (February 2021) Page 20 of 21

• NCDOT — Provide latest green sheet. Further coordination is to occur to determine if the
green sheet needs to be clarified for which project each commitment applies.
TIP Project R-2566B
NEPA/404 Merger Meeting - Concurrence Point 4B (February 2021) Page 21 of 21