20150955 Ver 1_B-4929 CP4C Meeting Summary 20151124_20151124

Meeting Notes / Memorandum
Meeting Date: October 21, 2015 1:15 pm — 3:00 pm
Subject:
Location:
aF qoRlN C
}� �°.
�
3
t
'94�� OF iRp���
Meeting Notes for NEPA/404 Merger Team Concurrence Point 4C
TIP Project B-4929 (Topsail Island Bridge Replacement)
NCDOT Structure Design Conference Room, Century Center
Attendees: Mer�er Team (MT)
Present:
Brad Shaver, USACE
Ron Lucas, FHWA
Gary Jordan USFWS
Cathy Brittingham, NCDCM-Raleigh
Mason Herndon, NCDWR
Via Conference Call:
Cynthia Van Der Wiele, USEPA
Stephen Lane, NCDCM
Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Gregg Bodnar, NCDCM
Present from RS&H Consultant Team:
Richard Bollinger, RS&H
Jennifer Farino, RS&H
Sean Kortovich, RS&H
Will Weathersbee, RS&H
Prolect Team (PT)
Present from NCDOT:
Tyler Stanton, NES
Mark Staley, Roadside Environmental
Craig Deal, Hydraulics
Andy McDaniel, Hydraulics
Brian Lipscomb, Hydraulics
Craig Freeman, Hydraulics
Abby Vogt, Roadway Design
Via Conference Call:
Stoney Mathis, Division 3
A NEPA/404 Merger Team meeting for the subject project was held on October 215t, 2015 in NCDOT's
Structure Design Conference Room. The purpose of this meeting was to reach agreement on Concurrence
Point (CP) 4C (Permit Drawings Review).
Introductions: Mr. Richard Bollinger opened the meeting and welcomed everyone. Attendees introduced
themselves.
Presentation: Mr. Bollinger presented a PDF of the permit plans, and discussion included the following:
General Project Description and Overview of Permit Plans
• Each wetland impact site was discussed one by one from Site 1 to Site 7.
• It was noted that there was only 0.06 acres of CAMA wetland impacts, less than Green Sheets
commitment.
• Not all the water off the bridge is going to be able to be treated, so deck drains were added to the
bridge. Brief summaries will be added to the SMP narrative concerning the dispersed direct
discharges from the deck drains.
• Sites 2, 5, 6 and 7 have CAMA wetland impacts.
• Site 6 will have minimal impacts to the existing seawall.
November 24, 2015 Page 1 of 3

• Bents 4, 5 and 19-25 have been raised to 4.45' which is approximately 5' above the existing
wetlands and therefore would not be considered an impact.
• The Bridge Survey Report (BSR) has been updated to include an additional bent in order to
maintain access to the boat access navigational channel.
• Water ponding issue at Mr. Hendy's property was discussed and was determined that a yard inlet
could be put in place to help treat water in this area before it outlets into the wetland area beyond
the seawall. This would add only approximately 0.1 cfs to outfall from the current basin overflow
pipe. It was requested to have a grass swale treat the water before it enters the drainage system.
Merger Team (MT) questions and comments were discussed as follows:
MT Comment: Total impacts should be listed in the impact chart and have the breakdown of CAMA
wetlands below.
PT Response: Noted. Summary of impacts will be updated.
MT Comment: The cross sections typically show the fill slope, please show fill slopes where applicable.
PT Response: Noted, fill slope labels will be added to the plans.
MT Comment: Add to notes that the proposed structure will miss the Sub-Aquatic Vegetation (SAV)
habitat.
PT Response: Noted, a note will be added to the plans.
MT Comment: Add note to the total impacts chart about any pile impacts.
PT Response: Noted.
MT Comment: The work bridge will be considered a temporary impact and will have to be monitored
throughout the life of the project and check green sheet commitments. Please modify the work bridge to
miss the SAV habitat.
PT Response: Noted. The work bridge will be updated to avoid the SAV area.
MT Question: Are the footings going to have an impact? These are typically considered a permanent
impact, but do not require mitigation.
PT Response: No mechanized clearing will occur at the footings and piles and therefore will not
be considered as an impact. However, pile impacts will be counted in the total impacts and noted
at the bottom of the summary sheet.
MT Comment: Please label all CAMA wetlands in the permit drawings.
PT Response: Noted, a label will be added to the CAMA wetlands.
MT Question: Can updated permit drawings be included with the meeting minutes?
PT Response: Updated permit drawings will be posted on the 4B-4C package website.
MT Question: On sheet 11 of 21, since the work bridge is only 2' above the Mean High Water (MHWJ does
this block access to the many piers south of this channel? If so, is there another way around to obtain
access?
PT Response: A field review will take place during the field visit for the Navigation Evaluation
Report (NER). Upon post meeting field review and further investigation, we find the 12' Minimum
Vertical Clearance to the Temporary Work Bridge shown on the USCG Permit to be adequate to
serve existing boat traffic in this area. The permit drawings have been modified to show the 12'
November 24, 2015 Page 2 of 3

minimum vertical clearance at the boat access channel. There is also an alternate route to access
this area.
MT Question: When is this project being let?
PT Response: August 2016 (previously February 2017).
PT Question: Is there any way that work can be done during the Primary Nursery Area (PNAJ moratorium
from April 15` to September 30t`'? Using turbidity curtains or casings?
MT Response: Will need more information on the timeframes for construction. A list of items that
would like to be done during the moratorium would be helpful. R-3601 has an example of this,
but that project had a sturgeon habitat and this project does not. Stephen Lane will coordinate
with the Fisheries Commission and get this process started.
PT Response: NCDOT will provide these items and a response to the agencies.
If any recipient of the meeting notes would like to add comments or feels a comment is erroneous or
needs to be expanded, please feel free to contact Paul Atkinson at [phone] or by email at
patkinson@ncdot.�ov.
Copies to:
Meeting Attendees
Attachments:
November 24, 2015 Page 3 of 3