Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20140764 Ver 1_Maps Revised_20170223Wanucha, Dave From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Good afternoon! Thomson, Nicole J Thursday, February 23, 2017 12:44 PM Wanucha, Dave; David.E.Bailey2@usace.army.mil Fine, Lowell C Bridge 229, Shatterly Rd (SR 3118) Guilford County redline revision 02_23_17.pdf I've attached a redline drawing for you both (it's in blue, but there was already too much red on the drawing). This is a bridge to bridge replacement with no stream impacts, only buffer. The contractors have noted a few issues during construction related to offsite stormwater, onsite stormwater and elevation. On the first page, you'll note that there is an existing pipe that the property owner installed and then covered; DOT replaced the pipe and extended it. However, due to site elevations that are working against them, they did not carry the pipe to the proposed junction box (which I've "x-ed" out). That junction box isn't being installed because there is no way to tie the HDPE into it (again, elevation issues). The rip rap dissipator shown (outleting from the other two 2G1 boxes) will still go in as planned. However, as with the HDPE pipe, none of that water will drain out into the field as originally planned. The elevations in the field are higher; the fact that Duke power relocated their utility line out here is working against us now too (about a 3 foot elevation increase). Since they are so far along in the construction, I have devised (with the resident's input— cc-ed on this email) what I think is the best solution. It's not ideal, but it will address the ponding stormwater issues. We propose to shorten the HDPE up and direct it to the toe protection along the fill slope. This will then transition to the rip rap that wraps around the abutments for the bridge. If you look on page two, you will see where I highlighted an area in pink — this is where the water was outletting under the old bridge (you can make out the valley contours). We are proposing to utilize this pre-existing "outlet". This, I believe, satisfies the intent of the buffer rules (no new man-made conveyances through the buffer), prevents stormwater from ponding along side the road, prevents it from cutting a "new" outlet over time and still achieves diffuse flow (via the rip rap). I don't like surprises and figure you don't either. On the offchance that you visit this one in the future, I wanted to be sure you knew of the shift in design that occurred in the field. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks! Nik Nicole J. Thomson Division Environmental Supervisor Assistant Division Environmental Office 919-754-7806 Mobile II"tiuQl���u��,��i���?i��,���Q.���� PO Box 14996 Greensboro, NC 27415-4996 a������ �������,��:s���������� �� ����� ������ ��`��,� ����:����,�,� �,� ,�������� �� ��`�� �V����� �°��������� ��.����� ��������,� ��W�r ����:� a���.� �� ���,����,���� �� �������� �s�����,�. I!Irr�7ail �;urre,�l�ui�dc,i��:e, C�u ai�d ��ruir7 U•ii� �ci�dcr i� �ul����;�E� �C�u U•ic, I"J,�, I ul�li�; I'�Ee,�;ur;� I...aw ai�d rr�7ay I�c rll��:lu�crl �C�u �C�h•ih�rl I�artle,�,