The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20050785 All Versions_Meeting Minutes_20060615Washington Bypass - Design/Build Project 4B Compliance Meeting June 15, 2006 Attendees - See Attached Item Description Follow-up and response comments to 4B items are shown in bold italics 1.0 Introductions • Rodger Rochelle - NCDOT - introduced the meeting. • All attendees introduced themselves. • Paul Newman of Flatiron/United introduced the project and design innovations that resulted in getting Flatiron/United the highest technical score during the proposal phase of the project. o Profile of US 17 was lowered throughout the project o NC33 Interchange over US17 was "flip-flopped" o These changes resulted in the following benefits ¦ Decreases footprint of project in permitted areas ¦ Reduces the US 17 roadway fill height by up to 40' ¦ Reduces the borrow by 2 million CY minimizing the off-site borrow pits ¦ Replaces the continuous 600' culvert with two shorter culverts (120' and 200') • 320LF reduction in stream impacts • approximately 1.2acre reduction in wetland impact • splitting the longer culvert improves the passage of fish and wildlife. • Provides 150' "daylight" between culverts o Approximate overall impact reductions: ¦ 1.3 acre reduction in wetlands impacts ¦ 535LF less stream impacts ¦ 17,000 SF less zone 1 buffer impacts ¦ 11,000 SF less zone 2 buffer impacts ¦ 6 acres less wetland clearing required. 2.0 Review of Documents • Josh Dalton of Sungate Design Group, and Rhett Butler of Earthtech did a page by page examination of the project: General • Grass Swale treatment calculations will be included with the 4C package that will be reviewed in September. Grass swale calculations were included in the 4C package. Sheet 4 • No Comments Sheet 5 • The feature being piped is non jurisdictional. Sheet 6 Sheet 7 Sheet 8 • Existing pond is the one seen during site visit March 15, 2006. Pond and stream buffers were discussed but no conclusion was reached. • Culvert will have a concrete weir at the inlet to direct low flow into the southern most barrel. • Impacted Wetlands = total take • Reduced flow spreadsheet will be provided at 4C • 2 areas of riprap are provided for transition from cut section to fill section Wetlands within the right-of-way are shown as a total take Sheet 9 • No Comments Sheet 10 • Filled sinkhole will have a TDE during construction This has been done Sheet 11 • Parallel ditch has a 0.3% slope, extremely flat will not require end treatment Sheet 12 through 23 = See "Tar River Wetlands Bridge" Sheet 24 • No Comments Sheet 25 • Total take wetlands in quadrant D • 48" structure going under L line • Ramp D structure = 24" draining gore area Wetland D is shown as a total take. Sheet 26 • Preformed scour holes are not in the wetlands • There is a scour hole inside the buffer, it was placed there to provide better drainage. It will be relocated outside the buffer, or eliminated by connecting its drainage pipe to another scour hole. • Question from the panel on why there are multiple scour holes versus piping all of the drains together and providing 1 or 2 scour holes. • Panel did not have a preference on holes versus pipe, just an opinion that the piping may be a more economical option. • NCDOT clarified that as long as the panel did not have a preference the economic decision would be left to the design / build team. The panel agreed to this. • No preformed scour holes are allowed in wetlands. Preformed scour hole that was in buffer has been eliminated. Sheet 27 • The inlet of the two outer barrels of the culvert will be benched to direct low flow into the center barrel. 2 Sheet 28 • Wetlands right (minutes should have indicated "left" instead of "right) of station 525+00 will be a total take The hydrology for the wetlands was not compromised due to the pipe and ditch emptying into it. Therefore, only the wetlands under fill would be impacted. Sheet 29 through 33 • No Comments Sheet 34 Sheet 35 We widen the existing V-ditch to a 2' base ditch at station 11+00 Y9 EPA requested that we make sure the existing ditches in the area of Sta. 11+00 Y9 are stable since they will convey the roadway drainage into the adjacent wetlands. • No comments Sheet 36 through 41 :no jurisdictional areas Sheet 42 Stream is not shown on the initial permit application as a buffer stream. Buffers to this stream. Chris Underwood (NEU) is checking on this location to confirm. Due to changes in the roadway configuration the net amount of impervious surface has been decreased. • If the outlet velocities are erosive, riprap will be added to stabilize the outfall of the 30" pipe Sheets 12 - 23 (Tar River Wetlands Bridge) • Closed drainage system recommended within 150' of the stream bank • Review of closed drainage system outfall, comment to use gabion baskets rather than a rip- rap pad. This will reduce the construction impacts on the wetlands. Contractor agreed to investigate. • Balance of bridge will have 6" diameter scuppers at least 12' in elevation above the wetlands with direct discharge. • Bridge rail will be a combination rail over the open water, this will extend 250' into the wetlands on each side of the river. Closed gabion baskets are proposed for the drainage outfall. 3.0 Fish Moratorium Questions from Flatiron/United • North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission clarified that the fish moratorium in the inundated floodplain is from February 15 until May 31. The moratorium extends until June 15 only for the open water of the Tar River and Kennedy Creek. • The area from the South Abutment of the bridge to Sandhole Road is not hydraulically connected to the River and therefore not subject to the moratoria. • There is no means that is approved to "dam" or block fish from entering the construction area, no construction can occur if water has inundated the construction corridor and this water is contiguous to the river.If the wetlands area is not inundated or hydraulically connected to the river or any of its tributaries, it is not subject to the moratorium. This means that construction activities that are allowed one day may have to be stop the next day until the hydraulic connections dissipates. • North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission and Army Corp of Engineers are will be making onsite inspections and evaluations of moratorium conditions on the project. 4.0 Clearing and Grubbing operations Agencies would entertain proposal on leaving organic matter in the ROW, Flatiron/United and NCDOT to discuss the best plan and will present a proposed solution to the agencies. EPA warned against the use of any accelerants to burn brush piles. 5.0 Washington Electric Transmission line • Flatiron United would like to move this utility line prior to the final approval of the project permit. This will allow the utility company to shut down their power grid for the switch over during a low demand time of the year. • The agencies would require Washington Electric to get a separate permit for the clearing operations (approximately .5 acres) through the wetlands. A proposed mitigation/replanting plan would have to be included if these wetlands are not considered impacted. • NC DOT is not party to this permit. The Design Build Team will prepare the permit application package on behalf of Washington Electric and will be responsible for all costs associated with this permit and conditions thereof. Washington Electric has submitted and obtained permit approval for their relocation and clearing. Prepared by: Jamie Hampton, Flatiron/United