20050785 All Versions_Meeting Minutes_20060921

Washington Bypass - Design/Build Project
4C Compliance Meeting
September 21, 2006
Attendees - See Attached
Item Description
Follow-up and response comments to 4C items are shown in bold italics
1.0 Introductions
• Rodger Rochelle - NCDOT - introduced the meeting.
• All attendees introduced themselves.
2.0 Review of Documents - Permit Drawings
• Josh Dalton of Sungate Design Group did a site by site examination of the project:
Site #1 Plan sheet #4
• The additional buffer impacts are due to the fill slope and are construction related only
Site #2 is eliminated
• The site is on Y9 which has been shortened and avoids any impacts
Site #3 Plan Sheet #6
• Culvert #1
o Surface water impact is less.
o Original permit application does not show buffer impacts, we have an increase in the
overall buffer impacts because they are now included.
o Question from Agencies on grass swales calculations and indication on the drawings,
spreadsheet that was supplied with the package clarified this question and the agencies
are fine with the method of presentation
Site #4 Plan Sheet 7.5
Inside the interchange the open stream is not counted as a permanent impact. From R/W to
R/W Wetlands are considered a total take since they will be isolated.
Structure 32 currently indicated as "no" for treated discharge, Qz velocity is 2.01 fps
therefore it can be considered treated.
Site #5 Plan Sheet 11
• Not a buffered stream, wetlands impact outside of fill slope, 10' outside of fill slope will be
mechanically cleared.
• Question from agencies, "are the wetland pipes buried?" Answer: Yes by 20% of pipe
diameter up to 1'. DCM had concern that since they require burying pipes by at least I' for
CAMA counties. However after clarification that the stream is not a blue line stream, 20%
is sufficient.
Site #6 Plan sheet 12 through sheet 24
• The main bridge (bridge 2)
• There is a small amount of wetlands excavation required near the south abutment to allow
for future maintenance and access - 0.05 acres of wetlands.
• The design-build team has indicated grubbing at the piers for pile installation to be
mechanized clearing and all other areas to be hand cleared. Hand cleared being defined as
machine clearing without grubbing and the root mat will remain in place.
• A discussion was had about whether the grubbed area at the piers was normally counted as
being mitigated area. NCDOT -NEU confirmed that they do count that area in the
mitigation quantity.
• Design build team indicated that the area that is indicated as mechanized clearing will be
minimized however they felt that giving the agencies a conservative estimate in the permit
application would be appropriate. Agencies agreed
• A question came up about leaving as much organic material in place after clearing as
practical. There is a concern about burning or damage to the environment from the
extraction of the brush and trees. NCDOT and design build team committed to minimize
the amount of organic material that was removed or burned without creating a navigational
hazard to the main channel.
• If the environment will be damaged more by the removal/buming of organics than by
leaving the cut organics the agencies would prefer to leave them in situ. However, this may
not be possible in the area between Sandhole Road and the Tar River Channel because
debris could easily make its way to the main channel during an inundation event.
• The agencies stressed that removal of branches and materials that would require grubbing or
disturbance to the root mat should be avoided.
Sheet 13
Shoulders of existing 17 is to be widened to allow for installation of guardrail
Sheet 14
• Separate permit has been obtained for The town of Washington's electric utility
relocation.
Sheet 19 - Start of Tar River main channel crossing
Question from agencies about the water line indicated on the drawings. This line needs to
be clearly defined for what it is, E.G. Mean Water Level or High Water Level. It is only
indicated as a water level on the current drawings. Label normal high water on both plan,
profile and cross sections.
Closed deck drainage system will bring water from the crown of the bridge to 150' from the
edge of the water, this discharge point will be out of the buffer zone.
Normal High water is shown on the Plan Section - on the cross sections Mean High Water and elevation
and Mean Low Water and elevation are shown.
Sheet 20
• Question from the agencies about the status of the Coast Guard permit. NCDOT has been in
contact with the coast guard and invited the CG to this meeting. The Coast Guard
permitting process will begin in earnest when the other agency permits are submitted.
Sheet 22
• Question from the design build team. Are the buffer impacts for Kennedy's Creek
allowable or mitigable? Answer from the agencies is that buffer impacts under a bridge area
are allowable, even for bents in the buffer. Only fill impact from abutment fills are
mitigable.
Sheet 23
• There will be a temporary construction easement for the clearing contractor to cross the
open water of Kennedy's Creek on the north side of the R/W. This area will be recovered
after the clearing operation is complete. The clearing contractor will be building all of his
roads/bridges out of existing timber and wood mats. No fill will be used for the clearing
operation for the entire site 6.
• Clarification to the agencies, the distance between the two split structures in the middle of
Kennedy's Creek is approximately 30'
• Sheet 52 will indicate the water profile in this area, the water is approximately 2' deep.
• Question from the agencies over the amount of buffer impacts in the table of buffer impacts.
Temporary Rock Silt Check Type A:
Temporary Rock Silt Checks Type A shall be placed as shown on the plans or as directed
by the Engineer. The Type A Checks will be rock dams constructed of Class B stone,
with sediment control stone placed on the flow side, and filter fabric underneath.
Temporary Rock Silt Checks Type A shall serve as drainage outlets for Silt Fence and
shall be constructed according to Standard Drawing No. 1633.01.
Materials:
(A) Class B Stone:
Class B stone shall meet the requirements of Section 1005 of the 2002 Standard
Specifications for Roads and Structures. Install stone according to Standard Drawing No.
1633.01.
(B) Sediment Control Stone:
Sediment control stone shall meet the requirements of Section 1005 of the 2002 Standard
Specifications for Roads and Structures. Install stone according to Standard Drawing No.
1633.01.
(C) Filter Fabric:
The filter fabric shall meet the requirements of Type 2 in Section 1056 of the 2002
Standard Specifications for Roads and Structures. The filter fabric shall be placed on the
ground beneath the Temporary Rock Silt Check Type A.
Maintenance and Removal:
The Contractor shall maintain the Temporary Rock Silt Checks Type A until the project
is accepted or until the dam is removed. The Contractor shall remove and dispose of silt
accumulations at the Type A Check when so directed by the Engineer in accordance with
Section 1630 of the 2002 Standard Specifications for Roads and Structures. The
Temporary Rock Silt Checks Type A shall be removed at the completion of the project,
and any earth disturbance inside the Mechanized Clearing area shall be seeded with
native grasses.
Design build group indicated that that number was only the permanent impacts and not the
total buffers.
Sheet 52 shows the Mean High Water elevation and Mean Low Water elevation on the cross section.
Sheet 24
• There are 2 dashed circles indicated for rock pads for Dominion power to place transmission
towers to replace and raise the existing transmission line in this area. These pads will be
permitted by Dominion under a separate permit application. This line will be removed
during construction and re-located after the construction is complete.
Site # 7 Sheet 25
• Buffered impacts and stream impacts on this site. Two pockets of wetlands are also
damaged.
• One small pocket of wetland could have been left, it was `totally taken' because it would
have been a small remnant.
Site # 7 Sheet 26
Site # 8
Linear footage of the channel and acreage are included in the surface water impacts.
• Storm water management pond on the State Employees Credit Union is not a mitigable site.
Therefore this site is eliminated.
Site #9 Sheet 27
• Small pocket of wetlands and permanent stream impacts
• TDE's include clearing of some wetlands and buffers. They are being considered
permanent impacts.
• The height of the culvert is under review however any changes to the culvert will not
modify the wetlands or stream impacts adversely.
Site # 10 Sheet 28
• Small pocket of wetlands, no other comments
Site #11 Sheet 42
• Buffer site only
• Fill in the buffer to widen the shoulder of the road, small retaining wall to keep the fill out
of the stream.
• The stormwater is going through the existing system. This system is being upgraded/added
to. 3 existing boxes that will not be treated (221, 224, 225). All new boxes will be treated
with grass swales.
• Site 11 needs to be identified as such on the drawings.
Site 11 is now identified on the drawings.
Dating of drawings
• For the CAMA permit each sheet of all the drawings needs to be dated for the permit
application to be reviewed. Earthtech will include dates on all drawings for all permit
applications.
The date (October 2, 2006) has been included on all permit drawings.
3.0 Mitigation Plan
Ron Johnson of Earthtech gave a brief overview of the proposed onsite mitigation sites.
• Osprey seafood - remove the material to the elevation of the existing wetland and replant
• Sandhole road - remove fill to existing wetland and fill borrow pit to elevation consistent
with wetland creation.
• 15`h street, buffer creation.
• Lilley property - dropped from consideration.