U5169_Interagencyminutes4B_Draft

Subject: Draft Minutes from CP-4B Hydraulic Design Review Meeting on October 22, 2015 for U-
5169 in Guilford County
Team Members:
David Bailey - USACE
Mitch Batuzich - FHWA
David Wanucha - NCDWR
Travis Wilson - NCWRC
Cynthia Van Der Wiele — USEPA
Gary Jordan - USFWS
(present)
(absent)
(phone)
(phone)
(phone)
(present)
Participants:
Patty Eason, NCDOT Division 7(phone)
Ed Lewis, NCDOT Division 7(phone)
Tatia White, NCDOT Roadway Design
Piotr Stojda, NCDOT Roadway Design
Matt Lauffer, NCDOT Hydraulics
Bill Elam, NCDOT Hydraulics
Craig Lee, NCDOT Hydraulics
Mack Bailey, NCDOT SMU
Mark Staley, NCDOT REU
Carla Dagnino, NCDOT NES
Jeff Hemphill, NCDOT NES
Hemal Shah, NCDOT TPB
Kyle Pleasant, NCDOT Utilities
Kiersten Bass, HNTB
James Byrd, HNTB
Ben Carroll_ HNTB
The Project is the I-74/ US3ll and NC 68 (Eastchester Dr.) Interchange Ramp Replacement.
The meeting began at 12:30pm.
General Notes / Comments
• HNTB advised that drainage designs were submitted to NCDOT Hydraulics on 10/19/15 and that
they may be slightly different from the provided 4B Plans.
o HNTB added and that those designs could be reviewed as part of the 4B meeting if needed.
• Hydraulics noted that designs for this project will be in accordance with NCDOT's Post
Construction Stormwater Permit.
Sheet 4
• HNTB advised that structural BMPs will be evaluated and added in Quadrants B& C where
practical.
o HNTB added that the measures will likely be "media filters" and that there designs will be
coordinated with Hydraulics.
• NCDWR advised that Randleman Buffer Rules apply to this project.
• USACE questioned whether the wetland in quadrant C would be a total take.
o HNTB advised that the impact would be a total take of approximately 0.01 acres.
• USACE questioned the lack of jurisdictional streams on the 4B plans.
o NCDOT Roadway advised that the FS file would be revised to reflect the jurisdictional
streams in the current WET file.
Page 1 of 2

Sheet 5
• HNTB advised that the preformed scour hole shown left of -LNB- Sta. 43+25 on the provided 4B
Plans is no longer required since the existing drainage is being retained.
o NCDWR/ USACE questioned whether improvements were required at either the pipe
outlet or downstream.
o Photos at the outlet of the 15" CSP and downstream area were reviewed and showed no
issues.
Sheet 6
• USACE questioned the amount of expected stream impacts for the outfall (Stream B) left of -Y-
Sta. 17+40.
o HNTB advised that stream impacts at this outfall would be less than 20 LF and classified
as bank stabilization with no rip-rap proposed in the stream bed.
• USACE advised that mitigation for these impacts would be at a ratio of 2:1.
Sheet 7
• USACE questioned the amount of anticipated stream impacts for the outfall (Stream A) left of -
Y1- Sta. 18+00.
o HNTB advised that stream impacts for this outfall would be approximately 200 LF.
o HNTB added that the project will eliminate a severe headcut at the existing pipe outlet
right of -Y- Sta. 39+20.
o Several photos of the existing conditions were viewed.
• USACE advised that mitigation for these impacts would be at a ratio of 2:1.
Sheet 8
• No Comments.
Closin� Statements
• Permitting for this project will be by "Nationwide Permit".
• USACE questioned whether this project would be impacted by a future 6-Lane project on NC 68.
o NCDOT advised that it would not.
• HNTB advised that noise walls have been proposed for this project but that no additional
jurisdictional impacts are expected.
• USACE questioned the need for a 4C meeting.
o All parties agreed that a 4C meeting was not required.
• Upon receipt from HNTB, NCDOT Hydraulics will distribute permit drawings for final review and
comment.
The meeting adjourned at 2:30pm.
Page 2 of 2