R-2574A 4B Meeting Minutes FINAL 20190827

Mead
1 lunt
4B Meeting Minutes
S. 1Subject: Project 38802.1.1 (R-2574A) Camden & Currituck Counties
F.A. Project N/A
US 158 from East of NC 34 (Shawboro Road) at Belcross in Camden County
to NC 168 (Caratoke Highway) in Currituck County
Location: Structure Design Conference Room
Meeting Date: August 22, 2019
Minutes Dated: August 27, 2019
Attendees Representing
Paul Atkinson
NCDOT - Hydraulics Unit
Gordon Cashin
NCDOT-EAU
William Akabi-Davis
NCDOT - Roadway Design
Nicole Hackler
NCDOT -PMU
Jennifer Evans
NCDOT - PMU
Kyle Barnes
USACE
Cathy Brittingham
DCM
Greg Daisey
DCM
Garcy Ward
NC-DWR
Robert Patterson
NC-DWR
Herb Turner
Mott MacDonald
Trent Cormier
Mott MacDonald
Roger Weadon
Mead & Hunt - Hydraulics
Rick DeCola
Mead & Hunt - Project Manager
Travis Cook
Mead & Hunt - Roadway
Carlas Sharpless
Mead & Hunt - Hydraulics
Andrew Nottingham
MI -Engineering
Kyle Edgerton
MI -Engineering
Bill Jernigan
MI -Engineering
Steve Rowe
JMT - Hydraulics
Enrico Roque
JMT - Roadway
Carly Goldsborough
JMT - Hydraulics
C. Russel Barbour
JMT - Roadway
Steve Brown
HDR
Email
atkinsonancdot.aov
gcashin(a�ncdot.gov
wakabidavis(cDncdot.gov
nm hackler(cDncdot.gov
ienniferevans(cDncdot.aov
kyle.w. barnes(cDuasace.army. m it
cathy.brittingham (cDncdenr.gov
greq.daisev(cDncdenr.gov
garcy.ward(5)ncdenr.gov
robert.patterson(a)ncdenr.gov
herb.turner(a�mottmac.com
trent.cormier(cDmottmac.com
roger.weadon(a�meadhunt.com
rick.decola(cDmeadhunt.com
travis.cook(cDmeadhunt.com
carlas.sharpless(cDmeadhunt.com
anottingham(cDmi-engineers.com
kedgerton(cDmi-engineers.com
blernigan(cDmi-engineers.com
srowe(cDimt.com
eroque(a�Omt.com
cgoldsborough(aDlmt.com
cbarbour(Nmt.com
steve.l. brown(a�hdrinc.com
Phone -In
Randy Midgett Division 1 rmidgett(cDncdot.gov
Shane Staples Marine Fisheries shane.staples(cDncdenr.gov
The meeting began at 3:00 PM. After a round of introductions, the meeting was turned over to
Roger Weadon of Mead & Hunt to discuss jurisdictional site impacts for R-2574A sheet by
sheet.
General Comments
• It was asked if JS feature labels could match site labels. Current policy -agreement is to
number sites concurrently and not use the JS labels/names from the natural resource
investigation.
• Identify each site individually on impact sheet. This includes JS Non-Mit
features. Specify each site as mitigable or not in the impact summary. The JS Non-Mit
features should be called out as open water impacts within the swamp areas on the
permit impact drawings.
• The CP4C schedule date is unknown.
Page 1 of 2

General Comments Continued
• It was noted that the deep canals/trenches in Run Canal Swamp adjacent to the existing
roadway were most likely excavated for borrow material and that they are not a natural
hydraulic feature.
• Prior to CP4C:
o Add Clean Water Management Trust Fund boundaries (Camden/Currituck
border)
o Add Great Swamp significant natural heritage area boundaries
Sheet 4
• It was asked if the proposed tail ditch near L STA 26+00 right would impact the offsite
jurisdictional feature. It was clarified that the proposed ditch grading does not extend to
the feature.
Sheet 6
• Turn off blue scratch line for break line
Sheet 9
• NCDWR questioned ditch in wetlands but did not state any objections to the design. It
was explained that proposed ditch replaces an existing ditch, which is also channelized
through the wetlands.
Sheet 11
• Add 30' Coastal AEC boundary. The boundary was stated as being 30' from normal
water level. It is referenced as "normal high water" on the CAMA page within the
NCDENR website. Need clarification/verification from agencies as to what water
level to use for plotting the boundary.
Sheet 17
• Proposed Box Culvert will be set 1' deeper than the surveyed channel bottom elevation.
o Some waters are anadromous fish waters so that should also be consideration.
o Permit requirements state that proposed culverts inverts should be buried one
foot deeper than the existing channel bottom. It was noted that the channel is
routinely excavated most likely causing the surveyed channel to be deeper than
the stable natural conditions and explaining why the surveyed channel is
currently 1' lower than the existing pipe culvert.
Respectfully submitted,
MEAD & HUNT, Inc.
ec: Attendees
Attachments
Page 2 of 2