The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20140090 Ver 3_Box Culvert Site 8 Profile_20160524 Wanucha, Dave From:Euliss, Amy Sent:Tuesday, May 24, 2016 3:38 PM To:Wanucha, Dave Cc:Guy, Jeremy M Subject:FW: Winston Outer Loop Box Culvert Attachments:Site 8 profile.pdf From: Morgan, Stephen R Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2016 1:29 PM To: Euliss, Amy Cc: Guy, Jeremy M Subject: RE: Winston Outer Loop Box Culvert Amy, We used a high flow, or flood plain bench with matching sill inside the culvert. The low flow barrel has a lower sill at its entrance that is supposed to match the streambed. It looks like we called for baffles inside the low flow barrel at 30’ spacing. The baffles and sill are not notched as they matched the low flow width well. I would suggest we wait a little while until there are a few storms to settle out the new stream flow regime around the culvert, then take a look again, at which point the stream profile should be surveyed for a distance up and downstream from the culvert. Hopefully it will plot out similarly to the attachment. We can always modify the sill/baffle combination if needed. I agree with you, rock cross vanes are not needed unless the culvert floor is perched above the stream bed. If an on-site meeting is needed I will be glad to attend. Thanks, Stephen Stephen Morgan, PE Project Manager, Design Support Hydraulics Unit NCDOT 919 707 6739 office 919 961 0887 mobile smorgan@ncdot.gov US Mail: 1590 Mail Service Center Raleigh NC 27699-1590 Physical Address: 1020 Birch Ridge Dr Raleigh NC 27610 1 Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties. _____________________________________________________________ From: Euliss, Amy Sent: Monday, May 23, 2016 3:32 PM To: Morgan, Stephen R Cc: Guy, Jeremy M Subject: FW: Winston Outer Loop Box Culvert See email below from Water Resources. He’s concerned that our 1’ sill is perched. He’s also concerned that we installed a sill rather than a sill and baffle. Can you comment on the referenced culvert design, and why baffles were not included? I have the CSR but it doesn’t show the sill at the outlet. Call me if you would like to discuss further. I’ve attached my earlier email to Dave that he references in the email chain. The Division really doesn’t see that there’s anything to be concerned about at this site. From: Wanucha, Dave Sent: Monday, May 23, 2016 3:18 PM To: Chambers, Marla J; Euliss, Amy Cc: Guy, Jeremy M Subject: RE: Winston Outer Loop Box Culvert I agree that a site visit is warranted. Notes from Merger are scant, but I located 4B notes from Jan and Mar 2008. All references to box culverts include agencies request for baffles. Why DOT decided not to install baffles is unclear. Amy or Jeremy, I would like to review the construction plans for the culvert. When you get a chance, please you scan the relative plan sheet(s) and send? Thanks. Dave W. Dave Wanucha Division of Water Resources Transportation Permitting Unit NC Department of Environmental Quality 336-776-9703 office 336-403-5655 mobile Dave.Wanucha@ncdenr.gov NC DEQ Winston Salem Regional Office 450 West Hanes Mill Road, Suite 300 Winston Salem, NC 27105 Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties. 2 From: Chambers, Marla J Sent: Monday, May 23, 2016 1:16 PM To: Euliss, Amy <aeuliss@ncdot.gov>; Wanucha, Dave <dave.wanucha@ncdenr.gov> Cc: Guy, Jeremy M <jmguy@ncdot.gov> Subject: RE: Winston Outer Loop Box Culvert I think it would be good to see it in person, if for no other reason, to see what can be learned. I’m an advocate of taking a look at permitted crossings months or even years after construction to make sure we are recommending the right things in our comment letters and in the Merger meetings. One thing that would be nice to know is how difficult is it to access the site to do work on it, if it’s decided that corrective work is appropriate. Then, at what point in the current construction process would it become much more difficult to access? In other words, how long can we monitor before needing to make a decision to leave it alone or make improvements? As far as the second or third week of June to visit the site, I have a couple activities that are being scheduled and may occur during that time. I should know this week. Currently, I’m NOT available June 7, 8, 9 or 15. Marla Marla Chambers // NCDOT Coordinator Habitat Conservation Program NC Wildlife Resources Commission c/o NCDOT 206 Charter Street Albemarle, North Carolina 28001 office: 704-982-9181 mobile: 704-984-1070 Marla.chambers@ncwildlife.org ncwildlife.org From: Euliss, Amy Sent: Friday, May 20, 2016 5:45 PM To: Wanucha, Dave <dave.wanucha@ncdenr.gov>; Chambers, Marla J <marla.chambers@ncwildlife.org> Cc: Guy, Jeremy M <jmguy@ncdot.gov> Subject: Re: Winston Outer Loop Box Culvert Marla, If you have the same concerns after reviewing the additional information in my email which Dave attached, please let me know. It is definitely my recommendation to leave it alone. Installing grade control when the downstream area is at the same elevation matches the sill elevation seems rather ineffective. Water has been turned into the culvert for several months. I did have them stick some small rock on the downstream side of the sill shortly after we turned the water into it, and after that, there have been no substantial changes. We did have a head cut upstream which we voluntarily fixed with a rock vein. 3 As for the stream width vs. the culvert width, this isn't something we can field adjust. If it's a this was a concern, it should be discussed in permitting or more ideally 4b and 4c for merger projects. Regarding the concern of shallow water in the culvert, we backfilled the culvert to the sill elevation per our permitted plans. The design for this culvert did not call for baffles, just sills. The stream carries a lot of sediment, so I expect the water will remain shallow. Immediately downstream is also shallow until you get to the next pool. We'll be happy to meet you onsite if you would like to discuss further. Amy Sent from my iPhone On May 20, 2016, at 5:04 PM, Wanucha, Dave <dave.wanucha@ncdenr.gov> wrote: Hi Marla, Thanks for your input. You make several good points. I attached comments from Amy earlier today. I agree that monitoring is a good idea if there is time, but we need to take a closer look at other options you suggest. The low flow barrel does seem a bit too wide compared with the channel upstream and downstream, although I have not put a tape to it. Downstream the channel is incised and unstable with failing banks. It is likely the same upstream. Do you have time in second or third week in June to meet us and take a closer look? Does that work for you Amy? Dave W. Dave Wanucha Division of Water Resources Transportation Permitting Unit NC Department of Environmental Quality 336-776-9703 office 336-403-5655 mobile Dave.Wanucha@ncdenr.gov NC DEQ Winston Salem Regional Office 450 West Hanes Mill Road, Suite 300 Winston Salem, NC 27105 <image002.png> Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties. From: Chambers, Marla J Sent: Friday, May 20, 2016 12:42 PM To: Wanucha, Dave <dave.wanucha@ncdenr.gov> Subject: RE: Winston Outer Loop Box Culvert 4 This does concern me. If it’s become perched already, it may get worse. That seems to indicate a down- cutting of the downstream channel or the stream bed wasn’t constructed at the right elevation. There doesn’t appear to be much natural rock in the substrate, so the stream is probably susceptible to down- cutting, etc. One corrective option might be to construct a grade control or series of grade control cross veins downstream to bring the stream bed and water level back up. They would need to have small rises to avoid becoming obstructions themselves. It appears from the photo that it is very shallow water in the culvert, which may not allow fish passage. I’m wondering if the natural width of the stream is actually less than the width of the culvert barrel. If so, a narrowing of the channel through the culvert might help, by building up a small bank on each side inside the barrel or use notched baffles. If the stream elevation is lower, cutting notches in the existing sills may work, but I believe a grade control and/or tamping rock into (under) the stream bed at the outlet would still be needed to prevent further down-cutting. Just some thoughts. I’m not opposed to monitoring it, as long as the delay doesn’t mean that access to the area to make corrections (if that currently exists) doesn’t go away in the mean time. Marla Marla Chambers // NCDOT Coordinator Habitat Conservation Program NC Wildlife Resources Commission c/o NCDOT 206 Charter Street Albemarle, North Carolina 28001 office: 704-982-9181 mobile: 704-984-1070 Marla.chambers@ncwildlife.org ncwildlife.org <image008.jpg><image009.jpg><image010.jpg><image011.jpg> From: Wanucha, Dave Sent: Friday, May 20, 2016 10:16 AM To: Chambers, Marla J <marla.chambers@ncwildlife.org> Subject: Winston Outer Loop Box Culvert Hi Marla, See attached pic of a box culvert outlet taken yesterday during project review. It was installed last year. The project is still under construction. A slight perch has developed at the sill low flow side. Is this too much of a drop for aquatic passage? Amy E. seems to think is not a problem. We’re thinking this may need to be corrected, or keep an eye on it and see how looks later in the year. Any suggestions? Dave W. Dave Wanucha Division of Water Resources Transportation Permitting Unit NC Department of Environmental Quality 5 336-776-9703 office 336-403-5655 mobile Dave.Wanucha@ncdenr.gov NC DEQ Winston Salem Regional Office 450 West Hanes Mill Road, Suite 300 Winston Salem, NC 27105 <image012.png> Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties. Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties. <mime-attachment> 6