US 221

TO: FILE
FROM: Jonathan Henderson, PE
DATE: January 24, 2008
SUBJECT: R-2233AA 4C Meeting
Project Name: R-2233AA
WBS 34400.1.1
Rutherford County, NC
~~
MEMORANDUM
Raleigh, North Carolina
On January 23, 2008, following the steps of the "Merger O1" process, the 4C concurrence
meeting was held in the Hydraulics Unit conference room for the above-referenced project. In
attendance at the meeting were:
Marshall Clawson NCDOT Hydraulics Unit
Dan Duffield NCDOT Hydraulics Unit
Brian Wrenn NCDWQ
Marla Chambers NCWRC
Dave Baker USACE
Marella Buncick USFWS
Troy Wilson USFWS
Kathy Matthews USEPA
Lonnie Brooks NCDOT Structure Design
Mark Staley NCDOT REU
Carla Dagnino NCDOT PDEA -NEU
Brett Feulner NCDOT PDEA -NEU
Jameelah El-Amin NCDOT PDEA
John Nigro NCDOT -Project Services
Mike Little NCDOT -Roadway Design
Jonathan Henderson HDR
James Rice HDR
Wyatt Yelverton HDR
Vickie Miller HDR
John Jamison HDR
Marshall Clawson began the meeting by starting introductions and reviewing a brief history of
the project and its prior concurrence points. Jonathan Henderson then began a detailed
discussion of the permit impact sheets described below sheet by sheet. Italics refer to the
response given or action needed to resolve the comment.
Sheet 4: Site 1
• No comments
Sheet 5: Site 2

Memo to File
January 24, 2008
Page 2
• Brian Wrenn asked about the construction sequence for draining the pond and breaching
the embankment. Marshall replied that Hydraulics typically does not provide that but
that he would check with the Construction Unit for any details.
• Brian Wrenn wanted to be sure that impacts had been accounted for through the end of
the outlet rip-rap. This impact area had been accounted for on the impact sheet and in
the summary table.
• Kathy Matthews inquired about the proposed head ditch at the culvert entrance. The
head ditch shown on the impact sheets is the breach through the embankment. Some
discussion followed about whether or not the property owner would rebuild the pond.
The pond was used for irrigation and may be rebuilt outside the right-of--way. It had to
be breached for this project because NCDOT does not want structural embankment in
their right-of--way due to the liability.
Sheet 6: Site 3
• Used 1.5:1 slopes to minimize wetland and endangered plant impacts at culvert inlet.
• Marella Buncick asked if the actual location of the Hexastylis naniflora population was
known relative to the impacts. There are also potential indirect effects (clearing, etc.) on
the plant population beyond the actual fill slope impacts. The boundary shown is an
approximate area. NCDOT NEU will be responsible for further clarification of impacts
during Section 7 consultation.
• Brian Wrenn asked if rip-rap was placed in the stream. The rip-rap will not be placed in
the bed of jurisdictional streams; there is a note on the plan sheets.
Sheet 10: Site 4
• The jurisdictional stream and spring box were pointed out on this sheet. No comments.
Sheet 11: Site 5
• This site is the Broad River crossing.
• Brian Wrenn asked where the 36 ft of permanent impact was located. The impacts are
for the first bent on the northbound side of the bridge; there is an enlargement of this
area on the impact sheet since it is difficult to see.
• The deckdrains will be collected in a system and discharged over the rip-rap at the south
abutment; no drainage will be directed towards the north abutment.
Sheet 12: Site 6
• The jurisdictional stream location has been added by NEU to this sheet and drainage
adjusted accordingly following direction given at 4B.
Sheet 15/16: Site 7
• Brian Wrenn questioned if the impacts had been accounted for through the rip-rap outlet
protection. These impacts have been accounted for.

Memo to File
January 24, 2008
Page 3
Sheet 22/23: Site 8
• Fill slope was changed to 1.5:1 to reduce impacts.
• Marla Chambers inquired about the length and slope of the culvert and extensions and
condition of the stream. There was a discussion about potentially baffling the extensions.
The stream is very degraded at the existing inlet end. Sediment at the inlet would have to
be removed before adding the extension. The area immediately upstream had been
logged. It was discussed that there would not be much benefit in providing baffles in the
extension due to the remaining long section of existing culvert that would not be baffled.
• Marla asked if Natural Channel design had been considered. It had been considered in
this area, however the existing topography would not allow it due to steep slopes.
• Marella Buncick asked about the stability of the realigned channel and its tie to the
culvert inlet. The channel was designed to be stable in the S year storm event; it requires
rip-rap lining. Channel improvements are required from the inlet of the culvert along the
main channel to tie to existing. Steep terrain surrounding this area does not allow for a
better entrance angle for the channel.
• Question was asked about the grade on the proposed channel. It is relatively flat for this
area, the grade is broken and ranges from about 1.5% to 2.S%.
• Question was asked about stepping the channel down. The grades are relatively flat, the
channel is designed to be stable and stepping the channel could provide the opportunity
for a head cut.
Sheet 25: Site 9
• Marella Buncick inquired about the amount of discharge and if there was any
pretreatment for the pipe outleting into this site. Some of the discharge is running though
the roadside ditches and collected into this system; however, there are areas of
expressway gutter discharging here also. This site was discussed at the 4B meeting and
due to the steepness of the surrounding topography there was no feasible alternative.
For outlet stability this outlet was moved to tie into the culvert outlet pad.
• There was a question about the jurisdiction of an existing channel running parallel to the
road on the west side. Brett Feulner responded that this feature was not jurisdictional.
Sheets 26: Site 10
• This is the last sheet on the AA portion of the project. The impacts were stopped at the
end of AA, station 274+00. We were directed to include all of the impacts for site 10,
including those that fall on the AB portion. All impacts for site 10, up to but not
including Floyd's Creek, will be incorporated into the AA impact sheets and summary
table.
• This was another crossing where a 1.5:1 slope was used on the west side of the road to
minimize impacts.
Meeting adjourned.

Memo to File
January 24, 2008
Page 4
The preceding minutes are the interpretation of the writers and are assumed to be true. Any
errors should be directed to the writers as soon as practical.
cc: Meeting attendees
File
jrh

~`~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~i,iT
f~~[ j~ w
.~ N,1~~ 1 #I ~ :1 ~1 r ~~C
oErs~z _ ~Ar=
12:00 Lunch ~~~u[~,1t~~~,;T~,~QU~~ q~cN
1:00 Henegar R-2237C, US 321 from SR-1500 (Blackberry
Road) to US 221 at Blowing Rock
Caldwell County, Division 11
Hydraulic Design Review
Team Members: Monte Matthews: USACE
Marella Buncick: USFWS
Marla Chambers: NC WRC
Amy Euliss: NCDWQ
Brian Wrenn:NCDWQ
Chris Militscher: EPA
Kathy Matthews: EPA
Donnie Brew: FHWA
Davis Harris: REU
Greg Brew: Roadway
John Frye: Structures
Derrick Weaver: PDEA
Carla Dagnino: NEU
Trent Beaver: Division 11
3:00 Clawson R-2233AA, US 221 From South Carolina State
Line to Just South of Floyd's Creek
Rutherford County, Division 13
Permit Drawings Review (4B Meeting held 7/26/06)
Team Members: David Baker: USACE
Marella Buncick: USFWS
Marla Chambers: NCWRC
Brian Wrenn: NCDWQ
Chris Militscher: EPA
Kathy Matthews: EPA
Donnie Brew: FHWA
Roger Thomas: Roadway
Quang Nguyen: Structures
Jay McInnis: PDEA
Carla Dagnino: NEU
Ricky Tipton: Division 13

~~®~~~~ 1l ®V'V' ~~~~
NAMES AND ADDRESSES
PARCEL NO. NAMES ADDRESSES SITE NO.
RTE. 2, BOA 251
O BETTY WEASE ALLEN
MOORESBORO, NC 28119 1
O RONALD L. GREENS 7162 US HWY 221S 2
3
MOORESBORO, NC 28ll4 ,
7061 US HWY 221S
O HOWARD L. PARRIS
MOORESBORO, NC 28119 2, 3
711 US HWY 221S
~ MIgEL L. PARRIS MOORESBORO, NC 2811 2
251 ROCg RD.
5 MARTHA B. SIMS RUTHERFORDTON, NC 28139 ~
O FLOYD L. BUCSNER 130 HIKES RD. ~
MOORESBORO, NC 28119
799 HARRIS-HOLLY
O JAMES L. GRANT SPRINGS RD. ~
RUTHERFORDTON, NC 28139
O GEORGE W. TURNER 159 WAGON TRAIL
MOORESBORO
NC 28
5
~
,
114 ~
O
9 LEID CORPORATION 300 DALLAS ST.
SPINDALE
NC 28160
5
6
, ,
10 STEPHEN D. LOWS 2507 BETHEL CHURCH RD. 7
JONESVILLE, NC 2862

DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
RUTHERFORD COUNTY
PROJECT:3~(~OO.L1 (R-2233AA)
US 221
SHEET 1 OF 2 Ol / 08 / 08

WETLAND PERMIT IMPACT SUMMARY
WETLAND IMPACTS SURFACE WATER IMPACTS

Site
No.

Station
(FromlTo)

Structure
Size /Type
Permanent
Fillln
Wetlands
(ac)
Temp.
Fillln
Wetlands
(ac)
Excavation
in
Wetlands
(ac)
Mechanized
Clearing
in Wetlands
(ac) Hand
Clearing
in
Wetlands
(ac)
Permanent
SW
impacts
(ac)
Temp.
SW
impacts
(ac) Existing
Channel
Impacts
Permanent
(ft) Existing
Channel
Impacts
Temp.
(ft)
Natural
Stream
Design
(ft)
1 16+67 -L- 18" RCP <0.01 90

2 31+32 5 x 4 RCBC 0.022 205

3 40+98 5 x 4 RCBC <0.01 <0.01 0.035 109

4 83+59 36" RCP 0.019 188

5 96+49 BRIDGE <0.01 0.130 36 127

6 118+00 ROADWAY FILL 0.011 156

7 146+61 - 149+03 3 x 3 RCBC 0.051 615

8 232+53 - 234+90 5 x 6 RCBC 0.103 832

9 261+33 7 x 7 RCBC 0.010 210

10 272+34 - 274+00 ROADWAY FILL 0.023 228

TOTALS: <0.01 0.000 0.000 <0.01 0.000 0.283 0.130 2669 127 0
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DMSION OF HIGHWAYS
ROUTHERFORD COUNTY
34400.1.1 (R-2233AA)
SHEET 1 1 9 2008