20160172 Ver 1_More Info Received_20160304

Johnson, Alan
From:Turner, Erin <[e-mail]>
Sent:Monday, March 14, 2016 7:44 AM
To:Johnson, Alan; Amschler, Crystal C SAW ([e-mail])
Cc:David Homans; Lowe, Michael; Darrin Peine ([e-mail])
Subject:RE: Riley Avenue Project
Attachments:2016-01-29_revised plans_riley ave.pdf
Alan,

Please see City responses to your specific comments below in red. I have also attached a plan set with markings to help
clarify impacts. Channels on the upstream side are labeled 1 and 2.
Green box is current extent of outlet. The blue boxes outline the locations of the existing upstream

o
headwalls. Four 18” RCPs with FES called out with yellow circles. No pipe extension beyond existing
conditions.
Red lines represent the existing alignment of channel 1. It is approximately 30LF on the upstream side; the

o
new channel length is the same. This means there is a permanent loss of 30LF as a result of fill to realign the
channel. On the downstream side we are losing ~48LF of channel 1 as a result of fill to tie into the new
baseflow channel.
Channel 2 alignment does not change; temporary impacts only.

o
Existing rip rap of 25 LF; new rip rap length 55LF= 30LF loss of new downstream baseflow channel.

o

In summary, we are permanently impacting 78LF of channel 1 as a result of the realignment of the channel and 30LF of
the baseflow channel on the downstream side as a result of rip rap. Total permanent impacts = 108LF. Temporary
impacts will have to be recalculated on the revised plan set.

Let me know if you have any more questions.
Thanks!

Erin Turner
Wetlands Specialist
City of Charlotte | Engineering & Property Management | Storm Water Services
office: 704-336-3927 | [e-mail]

From: Johnson, Alan [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2016 9:16 AM
To: Darrin Peine; Amschler, Crystal C SAW ([e-mail]); Turner, Erin
Cc: David Homans; [e-mail]
Subject: RE: Riley Avenue Project

Concerns/comments at site:

1

What is the length of the new channel (at least 26 ft?)
The new length of channel 1 is approximately 30 LF (if grading is cut off below the headcut).

A 6 ft wide new channel should be reduced to no more than 2 ft wide channel (the cut over (between the two streams)
at the site is a good indicator)
Each channel feeding into the new culvert crossing will be graded no wider than 2 feet and the confluence of the 2
channels at the baseflow pipe will create a channel no wider than the width of the pipe itself (72”) which is necessary to
convey storm flows and alleviate road flooding.

The new channel should start at the bottom of the existing head cut. Otherwise, there may be stream stability issues.
The City now plans to cut off grading below the headcut to avoid creating instability. Expect to receive a revised plan set
soon.

The stream is a very low flow channel thus plenty of soil medium, quarry screening, etc. should be utilize to ensure the
stream flows OVER the riprap apron and not through the apron.
The riprap apron will be appropriately keyed into the stream channel. A note will be added to the revised plan set
describing this.

The channel should be back up to elevation immediately above and below the new culvert.
Floodplain benches will be graded as shown on plans and overflow/floodplain pipes are set above the invert of the
baseflow culvert to avoid over-widening of the channel.

Thanks
Alan

From: Darrin Peine [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2016 9:09 AM
To: Amschler, Crystal C SAW ([e-mail]) <[e-mail]>; Turner, Erin
<[e-mail]>
Cc: Johnson, Alan <[e-mail]>; David Homans <[e-mail]>;
[e-mail]
Subject: RE: Riley Avenue Project

Hi Crystal

Erin Turner and I meet with Alan at the Riley Avenue site yesterday afternoon and discussed the culvert project. Alan
would like to see some tweaks to the design in order to address 401 water quality concerns. The City will evaluate and
possibly amend the current design. Once received from the City, S&ME will provide you and Alan revised impacts and
PCN.

Erin – appended are the photos from the site visit.

Darrin Peine

S&ME, Inc.

704-523-4726 - office

704-589-3894 - mobile

[e-mail]

www.smeinc.com

From: Johnson, Alan [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, February 26, 2016 10:30 AM
2

To: Darrin Peine <[e-mail]>
Cc: Amschler, Crystal C SAW ([e-mail]) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Riley Avenue Project

th
Like to go take a look…week of the 7?

But question:

Stream 1 total impacts: 6 + 26 + 22 = 54
Stream 2 total impacts 32 + 59 + 27 + 32 = 150 (you left the upper 32 off)

Loss of stream is 81 lf due to riprap and loss of channel 1 on the down stream end.

The remaining impacts would be consider temporary 127 lf (matting, channel relocated (channel 1), and pump around)

How long is the rip rap pad….59 ft?

Is there any culvert extension?

Thanks
Alan

Alan D Johnson – Senior Environmental Specialist
NC Dept. of Environment & Natural Resources (NCDENR)
Division of Water Resources - Water Quality Regional Operations
610 East Center Ave., Suite 301, Mooresville, NC 28115
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]

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 unless the content is exempt by statute or other regulation.

3

,
ji
ik
rll, � i, i ••}SY�,T� ,�. }• ', I � �_ — - __II s �.,r.. +: I. i,�l�'�I
'1�'
,
AL
01, "
�•�I��� '�_. �. .. � �5'., ,1311 —_ — _ ,� � � ,�. L�� �II L M� J ^� •
J
I
.. i
d �'
r a .gypp I� � -ry
• 11 � � �r o � - - I7r.
.
` I
vj
�1 ' „ � ---• — �•- � yap ��+ _ I�_s
I�
jjm
f �!
s {"
I
3+
al J Lly

A
flh
TiT-7r.RF, 71'11711�'��
W-7
%F
A,
NIT"
'Trial
VTIIR�I�l•
J.
IA
I
tp;
igirm
q tj � 6-1,
A -In