20130223_RE U-2524D - Greensboro Outerloop Culvert - Back Fill_20151027

Wanucha, Dave
From: Lauffer, Matthew S
Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2015 4:46 PM
To: Wilson, Travis W.; Bailey, David E SAW; Wanucha, Dave; Gary Jordan
Cr. Elam, William H; Lee, Craig J; James Byrd; Cheely, Erin K; Dagnino, Carla S
Subject: RE: U-2524D - Greensboro Outerloop Culvert - Back Fil) (UNCLASSIFIED)
Importance: High
I appreciate the follow-up and discussion regarding the culverts on U-2524D. I have spoken with Dave and David and
based upon Travis' and Gary's input regarding animal passage, culvert burial for culverts 1, 2 and 3 will not be
performed. Grade control counter measures to prevent head-cutting at the inlet will be offered and reviewed at the 4C
meeting. Outlet measures will also be reviewed. We understand that this is a unique situation and that careful
consideration is required and has been given to animal passage, animal entrapment, water quality, and stream stability
in the determination of no burial.
Culvert 4 will be buried 1 foot with sills and baffles at 20 foot centers and backfilled with alluvial sediments.
The 4C meeting for this project is currently being proposed for December 17tn
Please let me know if there are additional concerns.
Regards,
Matt
Matthew (Matt) Lauffer, PE, CPM
Assistant State Hydraulics Engineer
Hydraulics Unit
Department of Transportation
919.707.6703 office
919.621.0443 mobile
mslauffer(c�ncdot.qov
Mail:
1590 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1590
Del ivery:
1020 Birch Ridge Dr.
Raleigh, NC 27610
a������ ���°�°�,��s���������� �� ����� ��°��� ��`��,� ������°�,�,� �,� ,��.������ �� ��`��
1

�'J����`� �°��°������ ��.����� �����°�:�,� ��W�r ����� ���.� �� �:��,����,���� �� �����°�� �:s�����,�.
II d��a�^Ikn����µc ..Il..�udd�^ir "���u.u.11..u.ulkn�^
-----Original Message-----
From: Wilson, Travis W.
Sent: Monday, October 26, 2015 2:42 PM
To: Bailey, David E SAW; Lauffer, Matthew S; Wanucha, Dave; Gary Jordan
Cc: Elam, William H; Lee, Craig J; James Byrd
Subject: RE: U-2524D - Greensboro Outerloop Culvert - Back Fill (UNCLASSIFIED)
Aquatic passage in culverts of this length is for the most part a non-issue, you're just not going to get upstream
movement. Therefore backfilling a long culvert for the entire length is not necessary in order to provide substrate and
bed form in the structure. However, when culverts are buried it is necessary to place an upstream sill in order to assure
the installation of that culvert does not form a head cut. When that sill is installed if the structure is not backfilled
behind the sill you may create a perch on the inlet side of the culvert. Being perched would depend on water depth and
the invert of culvert, but for long culverts I would assume it will would be perched . A perch is not preferred simply
because anything that goes over that lip, fish or wildlife, can't get back out and may or may not make it through to the
other side. With that being the case we should consider placing some backfill behind the sill inside the culvert for "X"
distance. Maybe 50-100 feet to step it down. You would likely have to place a couple of notched sills or lower sills to
hold that material in place.
Considering a long culvert scenario there may not be a lot of difference in burying the culvert versus not. Upstream
movement is not reasonable, however you don't want to create a downstream sink where once something goes over it
can't come back out. Is non-burial just as stable as burial, from what I've seen that depends more on hitting the correct
elevations during installation. But I certainly don't want to devalue culvert burial, in almost all culvert designs it is
absolutely beneficial.
Travis.
-----Original Message-----
From: Bailey, David E SAW [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, October 26, 2015 8:45 AM
To: Lauffer, Matthew S; Wanucha, Dave; Wilson, Travis W.; Gary Jordan
Cc: Elam, William H; Lee, Craig J; James Byrd
Subject: RE: U-2524D - Greensboro Outerloop Culvert - Back Fill (UNCLASSIFIED)
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE
Matt,
Thanks for your email. For the Corps' purposes, the 1' burial of culverts >48" in diameter is intended to 1) prevent
destabilization of the stream up and downstream of the structure and 2) allow for aquatic life passage. As for # 1, we
would expect that the culvert would be buried 1' unless there is reason to suspect that burial would result in stream
destabilization (and if so, that it could not be prevented by cross veins or other natural channel design-type structures
around the culvert inlet and/or outlet). Regarding # 2, and specifically backfilling, the Corps will defer to the experience
of the NCWRC and USFWS. Please let me know if you have any questions.
-Dave Bailey

David E. Bailey, PWS
Regulatory Project Manager
US Army Corps of Engineers
CE-SAW-RG-R
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
Phone: [phone], Ext. 30.
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we
continue to do so, please complete the Customer Satisfaction Survey located at
http://corpsmapu.usace.army.mil/cm_apex/f?p=136:4:0.
-----Original Message-----
From: Lauffer, Matthew S [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, October 23, 2015 1:21 PM
To: Wanucha, Dave; Bailey, David E SAW; Wilson, Travis W.; Gary Jordan
Cc: Elam, William H; Lee, Craig J; James Byrd
Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: U-2524D - Greensboro Outerloop Culvert - Back Fill
Gentleman
After some on-going discussions with some of you, I would like to gather input on the need to backfill culverts for the U-
2524D project.
There are some long culverts on this project as identified below and shown on the attachment. None of the culverts
have high flow barrels. Would you all be willing to comment on the benefit of burying these culverts a foot and
backfilling with stream-bed material?
We are mostly wanting to know the following:
Do you see a value in burying the culverts if they are over 1,000 feet in length?
If we do bury them would you want them backfilled?

The location of the culverts is near in Greensboro at the intersection of Lawndale and the proposed Greensboro
outerloop.
Blocked https://www.google.com/ma ps/@36.1406946,-79.8331553,18z?h 1=en
Thanks forward for your input. If you believe it would be beneficial to setup a meeting to discuss, we can do that as
well. Let me know if additional documentation would be helpful for consideration purposes.
Regards,
Matt
Culvert ID
Length (Feet)
Size
Slope
Burial
Sills
Baffles
Approximate Width of Stream
Drainage Area (Square Miles)
Drainage Area
Acres
% Impervious
Watershed Type

Notes
Culvert 1
1430
8' X 8'
1.04%
1'
Yes
No
5-6 '
0.15
98
31%
Urban
Connects with 2A
Culvert 2A
363
11'X9'
1.86%
1'
Yes
Yes (25 foot Centers)
Confluence of two streams - 4-5' and 5-6'
0.38
243
5

32%
Urban
Connects with 1 and 2B
Culvert 2B
712
11'X9'
0.50%
1'
Yes
No
Confluence of two streams - 4-5' and 5-6'
0.38
243
32%
Urban
Connects with 2A
Culvert 3
1214
11'X9'
0.59 %
1'
Yes
No
10'
6

1.12
716
13.10 %
Urban
Culvert 4
335
7'X8'
2.07 %
1'
Yes
Yes (20 foot Centers)
6-7'
0.22
140
27.30%
Urban
Backfill
Matthew (Matt) Lauffer, PE, CPM
Asst. State Hydraulics Engineer
Central Region, Divisions 5,7,8,9
Highway Stormwater Program
Hydraulics Unit
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Phone: [phone]
7

Cel I: 919-621-0443
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
Mail:
1590 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1590
Del ivery:
1020 Birch Ridge Dr.
Raleigh, NC 27610
From: Lauffer, Matthew S
Sent: Tuesday, September 08, 2015 10:31 AM
To: '[e-mail]'
Cc: Elam, William H; Lee, Craig J; [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> ; James
Byrd
Subject: RE: U-2524D - Greensboro Outerloop Culvert Summary (UNCLASSIFIED)
Dave,
Hope you enjoyed your weekend. These culverts will be single barreled culverts and will not have high and low flow
barrels. Stabilization of the culvert entrance and exit will be part of the design. I have attached a plan view layout of the
culvert configuration for the Lawndale interchange. The plan is to backfill the culverts with alluvial sediments that are
obtained during the excavation of the proposed culverts.
I am checking on the permit modification submittal date and will send that as soon as I know.
Please let me know if you have additional questions.
Regards,
Matt
s

Matthew (Matt) Lauffer, PE, CPM
Asst. State Hydraulics Engineer
Central Region, Divisions 5,7,8,9
Highway Stormwater Program
Hydraulics Unit
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Phone: [phone]
Cel I: 919-621-0443
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
Mail:
1590 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1590
Del ivery:
1020 Birch Ridge Dr.
Raleigh, NC 27610
From: Bailey, David E SAW [mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> ]
Sent: Tuesday, September 08, 2015 8:56 AM
To: Wanucha, Dave; Lauffer, Matthew S
Cc: Elam, William H; Lee, Craig J
Subject: RE: U-2524D - Greensboro Outerloop Culvert Summary (UNCLASSIFIED)
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE
Hi all. No additional comments at this time. Thanks for the coordination.
-Dave Bailey
David E. Bailey, PWS
Regulatory Project Manager
US Army Corps of Engineers
CE-SAW-RG-R
0

3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
Phone: [phone], Ext. 30.
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we
continue to do so, please complete the Customer Satisfaction Survey located at
Blockedhttp://corpsmapu.usace.army.mil/cm_apex/f?p=136:4:0.
From: Wanucha, Dave [mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> ]
Sent: Thursday, September 03, 2015 8:38 AM
To: Lauffer, Matthew S
Cc: Elam, William H; Lee, Craig J; Bailey, David E SAW
Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: U-2524D - Greensboro Outerloop Culvert Summary
Hi Matt,
Thanks for sending the data. The proposed sills and baffles appear to be consistent with DOT's guidance on the
subject. Will these culverts possess high flow barrels and flood plain benches, and if so, what type of material will be
used for backfill (if they are planned to be backfilled)?
Do you have a time estimate for when a permit modification will be submitted for the D section?
I have copied Dave Bailey with the Corps for his review and comments.
Dave B.,
These are the culvert data of which we spoke yesterday.
Dave W
10

Dave Wanucha
NC DENR Winston Salem Region Office
NC Division of Water Resources
Transportation Permitting Unit
450 W. Hanes Mill Rd, Suite 300
Winston-Salem, NC 27105
Cell [phone]
Office [phone]
[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject
to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties
From: Lauffer, Matthew S
Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2015 4:10 PM
To: Wanucha, Dave
Cc: Elam, William H; Lee, Craig J; Lauffer, Matthew S
Subject: U-2524D - Greensboro Outerloop Culvert Summary
Importance: High
H i Dave,
Per our phone conversation a couple weeks ago, I wanted to let you know what we were going to recommend for the
culverts on U-2524D near Lawndale with respect to sills and baffles.
The following is a summary of the structures and proposed configurations:
Culvert ID
11

Length (Feet)
Size
Slope
Burial
Sills
Baffles
Approximate Width of Stream
Drainage Area (Square Miles)
% Impervious
Watershed Type
Notes
Approximate Location of Inlet
Approximate Location of Outlet
Culvert 1
1430
8' X 8'
1.04%
1'
Yes
No
5-6 '
0.15
31%
Urban
Connects with 2A
12

Click Here.
<https://www.google.com/maps/di r/Lawndale+Baptist+Church,+3505+Lawndale+Dr,+Greensboro,+NC+27408,+U nited+
States/36.1404144,-79.8387639/ @ 36.1395152,-
79.8384438,261m/data=!3m1! 1e3!4m8!4m7! 1m5! 1m1! 1sOx88531e993d24b8a1:Ox69bfa1fe523c09f9! 2m2! 1d-
79.8237227!2d36>
Click Here <BlockedBlockedhttps://www.google.com/maps/dir/36.1415784,-79.8343776/36.1415459,-
79.8343776/@36.1414452,-79.8346833,261m/data=!3m1! 1e3?hl=en>
Culvert 2A
363
11'X9'
1.86%
1'
Yes
Yes (25 foot Centers)
Confluence of two streams - 4-5' and 5-6'
0.38
32%
Urban
Connects with 1 and 2B
Click Here <BlockedBlockedhttps://www.google.com/maps/dir/36.1415784,-79.8343776/36.1415459,-
79.8343776/@36.1414452,-79.8346833,261m/data=!3m1! 1e3?hl=en>
Click Here <BlockedBlockedhttps://www.google.com/maps/dir/36.1414578,-79.8330201/36.1414582,-
79.8330209/@36.1415499,-79.8327706,358m/data=!3m1! 1e3?hl=en>
Culvert 2B
712
11'X9'
0.50%
1'
Yes
No
13

Confluence of two streams - 4-5' and 5-6'
0.38
32%
Urban
Connects with 2A
Click Here <BlockedBlockedhttps://www.google.com/maps/dir/36.1414578,-79.8330201/36.1414582,-
79.8330209/@36.1415499,-79.8327706,358m/data=!3m1! 1e3?hl=en>
Click Here <BlockedBlockedhttps://www.google.com/maps/dir/36.1415784,-79.8343776/36.1415459,-
79.8343776/36.1421459,-79.8305943/@36.1422504,-79.8313856,131m/data=!3m1! 1e3!4m2!4m1!3e2?hl=en>
Culvert 3
1214
11'X9'
0.59 %
1'
Yes
No
10'
1.12
13.10 %
Urban
Click Here <BlockedBlockedhttps://www.google.com/maps/dir/36.1404562,-79.8341627/36.1404216,-
79.8341519/@36.140206,-79.8343969,179m/data=!3m1! 1e3?hl=en>
Click Here <BlockedBlockedhttps://www.google.com/maps/dir/36.1415784,-79.8343776/36.1415459,-
79.8343776/36.1421459,-79.8305943/@36.1422504,-79.8313856,131m/data=!3m1! 1e3!4m2!4m1!3e2?hl=en>
Culvert 4
335
7'X8'
14

z.o�i
1�
Yes
Yes (20 foot Centers)
6-7'
0.22
27.30%
Urban
Click Here <BlockedBlockedhttps://www.google.com/maps/dir/36.1426615,-79.8301804/36.141229,-
79.8301446/@36.1413951,-79.8293221,716m/data=!3m1! 1e3?hl=en>
Click Here <BlockedBlockedhttps://www.google.com/maps/dir/36.1426405,-79.8302394/36.1422073,-
79.8303359/@36.1413951,-79.8293221,523m/data=!3m1! 1e3?hl=en>
You will notice that the lengths of the culverts are long and that sills are used on all culverts and all culverts will be
buried a foot. Baffles will be placed on Culvert 2A and Culvert 4 where slopes are near 2%. Baffles will be placed across
the entire box with no additional reduction in stream width. Stream pictures are below for reference.
Please let me know if you concur with the proposal or would like to discuss further. My phone number is below.
Regards,
Matt
Stream on Culvert 1
15

cid:image001.png@01DOEA14.1DF73490
Stream u/s stream of Culvert 2A
cid: i mage002. png@01DOEA14.1DF73490
Stream U/S of Culvert 3
cid: i mage003. png@01DOEA14.1DF73490
Stream Up stream of Culvert 4
cid:image004.png@01DOEA14.1DF73490
Matthew (Matt) Lauffer, PE, CPM
Asst. State Hydraulics Engineer
Central Region, Divisions 5,7,8,9
Highway Stormwater Program
Hydraulics Unit
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Phone: [phone]
Cel I: 919-621-0443
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
Mail:
1590 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1590
Del ivery:
1020 Birch Ridge Dr.
Raleigh, NC 27610
16

Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third
parties.
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE
Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third
parties.
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE
17