Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20110462 Ver 1_Scoping Comments_20051105United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Raleigh Field Office Post Office Box 33726 Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726 November 5, 2005 Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D. North Carolina Department of Transportation Project Development and Environmental Analysis 1548 Mail Service Center Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548 Dear Dr. Thorpe: This letter is in response to your request for comments from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) on the potential environmental effects of the proposed replacement of the following five bridges: • B-4451, Bridge No. 21 on NC 343. over Joyce Creek, Camden County • B-4452, Bridge No. 20 on NC 343 over Sawyer Creek, Camden County • B-4494, Bridge No. 3 on SR 1232 over Tulls Creek, Currituck County • B-4521, Bridge No. 26 on SR 1320 over Duke Swamp, Gates County • B-4599, Bridge Nos. I. and 2 on US 17 over Knobbs Creek, Pasquotank County These comments provide scoping information in accordance with provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16 U.S.C. 661-667d) and section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543). The Service recommends the following general conservation measures to avoid or minimize environmental impacts to fish and wildlife resources: 1. Wetland and forest impacts should be avoided and minimized to the maximum extent practical; 2. If unavoidable wetland or stream impacts are proposed, a plan for compensatory mitigation to offset unavoidable impacts should be provided early in the planning process. Opportunities to protect mitigation areas in perpetuity,via conservation easements, land trusts or by other means should be explored at the outset; 3. Off-site detours should be used rather than construction of temporary, on-site bridges. For projects requiring an on-site detour in wetlands or open water, such detours should be aligned along the side of the existing structure which has the least and/or least quality of fish and wildlife habitat. At the completion of construction, the detour area should be entirely removed and the impacted areas be planted with appropriate vegetation, including trees if necessary; 4. Wherever appropriate, construction in sensitive areas should occur outside fish spawning and migratory bird nesting seasons. In waterways that may serve as travel corridors for fish, in-water work should be avoided during moratorium periods associated with migration, spawning and sensitive pre-adult life stages. The general moratorium period for anadromous fish is February 15 - June 30; 5. New bridges should be long enough to allow for sufficient wildlife passage along stream corridors; 6. Best Management Practices (BMP) for Protection of Surface Waters should be implemented; 7. Bridge designs should include provisions for roadbed and deck drainage to flow through a vegetated buffer prior to reaching the affected stream. This buffer should be large enough to alleviate any potential effects from run-off of storm water and pollutants; 8. The bridge designs should not alter the natural stream and stream-bank morphology or impede fish passage. To the extent possible, piers and bents should be placed outside the bank-full width of the stream; 9. Bridges and approaches should be designed to avoid any fill that will result in damming or constriction of the channel or flood plain. If spanning the flood plain is not feasible, culverts should be installed in the flood plain portion of the approach to restore some. of the hydrological functions of the flood plain and reduce high velocities of flood waters within the affected area. Section 7(a).(2) of the Endangered Species Act requires that all federal action agencies (or their designated non-federal representatives), in consultation with the Service, insure that any action federally authorized, funded, or carried out by such agencies is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any federally-listed threatened or endangered species. A biological assessment/evaluation may be prepared to fulfill the section 7(a)(2) requirement and will expedite the consultation process. To assist you, a county- by-county list of federally protected species known to occur in North Carolina and information on their life histories and habitats can be found on our web page at http://nc-es.fws.gov/es/countyfr.html . Although the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database does not indicate any known occurrences of listed species near the project vicinities, use of the NCNHP data should not be substituted for actual field surveys if suitable habitat occurs near the project sites. The NCNHP database only indicates the presence of known occurrences of listed, species and does not necessarily mean that such species are not present. It may simply mean that the area has not been surveyed. If suitable habitat occurs within the project vicinities for any listed species, surveys should be conducted to determine presence or absence of the species. If you determine that the proposed actions may affect (i.e., likely to adversely affect or not likely to adversely affect) a listed species, you should notify this office with your determination, the results of your surveys, survey methodologies, and an analysis of the effects of the actions on listed species, including consideration of direct, indirect, and cumulative effects, before conducting any activities that might affect the species. If you determine that the proposed actions will have no effect (i.e., no beneficial or adverse, direct or indirect effect) on listed species, then you are not required to contact our office for concurrence. We reserve the right to review any federal permits that may be required for these projects, at the public notice stage. Therefore, it is important that resource agency coordination occur early in the planning process in order to resolve any conflicts that may arise and minimize delays in project implementation. In. addition to the above guidance, we recommend that the environmental documentation for these projects include the following in sufficient detail to facilitate a thorough review of the action: 1. A clearly defined and detailed purpose and need for the proposed project; 2. A description of the proposed action with an analysis of all alternatives being considered, including the "no action" alternative; 3. A description of the fish and wildlife resources, and their habitats, within the project impact area that may be directly or indirectly affected; 4. The extent and acreage of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, that are to be impacted by filling, dredging, clearing, ditching, or draining. Acres of wetland impact should be differentiated by habitat type based on the wetland classification scheme of the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI). Wetland boundaries should be determined by using the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual and verified by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; 5. The anticipated environmental impacts, both temporary and permanent, that would be likely to occur as a direct result of the proposed project. The assessment should also include the extent to which the proposed project would result in secondary impacts to natural resources, and how this and similar projects contribute to cumulative adverse effects; 6. Design features and construction techniques which would be employed to avoid or minimize impacts to fish and wildlife resources, both direct and indirect, and including fragmentation and direct loss of habitat; 7. If unavoidable wetland or stream impacts are proposed, project planning should include a compensatory mitigation plan for offsetting the unavoidable impacts. The Service-appreciates the opportunity to comment on these projects. Please continue to advise us . during the progression of the planning process, including your official determination of the impacts of the projects. If you have any questions regarding.our response, please contact Mr. Gary Jordan at (919) 856- 4520; ext. 32. Si ere , Pete B 'amin Ecological Services Supervisor cc: Bill Biddlecome, USACE, Washington, NC Christina Breen, NCDWQ, Raleigh, NC Travis Wilson, NCWRC, Creedmoor, NC Chris Militscher, USEPA, Raleigh, NC OF WATER _ O? 4G t if'"1 v I L ANMN& q Michael F. Easley, Governor William G. Ross Jr., Secretary North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director Division of Water Quality November 14, 2005 MEMORANDUM To: GregoryThorpe, Ph.D., Director Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch NC Department of Transportation From. Christina Breen . Transportation Permitting Unit NC Division of Water Quality Subject: Comments on Various Bridge Replacements, B-4451, B-4452 in Camden County, B-4494 in Currituck County, B-4521 in Gates County, and B-4599 in Pasquotank County. In reply to your correspondence dated October 24, 2005 (received November 4, 2005) in which you requested comments for the referenced projects, the NC Division of Water Quality has the following comments: L Proiect-Specifcc Comments B-4451 Bridge No. 21 over Joyce Creek, Camden Co. Joyce Creek are class C; Sw waters of the State. DWQ has no specific comments regarding this project. B-4452 Bridke No. 20 over Sawyers Creek, Camden Co. Sawyers Creek are class C; Sw waters of the State. DWQ has no specific comments regarding this project. B-4494 Bridge No. 3 over Tull Creek, Currituck Co. Tull Creek are class B; Sw waters of the State. DWQ is very concerned with sedimentation and erosion impacts that could result from this project. NC DOT should address these concerns by describing the potential impacts that may occur to the aquatic environments and any mitigating factors that would reduce the impacts. B-4521 Bridge No. 26 over Duke Swamp, Gates Co. Duke Swamp are class C; NSW waters of the State. DWQ is very concerned with sedimentation and erosion impacts that could result from this project. DWQ recommends that highly protective .sedimentation and erosion control BMPs be. implemented to reduce the risk of nutrient runoff to Duke Swamp. DWQ requests that road design plans provide treatment of the storm water runoff through best management practices as detailed in Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters. Refer to 15A NCAC 2B .0224(2) and 15A NCAC 2H'.1006. B-4599 Bridges No. I and 2 over Knobbs Creek, Pasquotank Co._ Knobbs Creek are class C; Sw waters of the State. DWQ has no specific comments regarding this project. o Carolina Transportation Permitting Unit Naturally 1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650 2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604 w 11. General Comments Retarding Brid-ve Replacement Protects 1. If corrugated metal pipe arches, reinforced concrete pipes, or concrete box culverts are used to replace the bridge, then DWQ recommends the use of Nationwide Permit No. 14 rather than Nationwide Permit 23. 2. If the old bridge is removed, no discharge of bridge material into surface waters is preferred. Strict adherence the Corps of Engineers guidelines for bridge demolition will be a condition of the 401 Water Quality Certification. 3. DWQ prefers spanning structures. Spanning structures usually do not require work within the stream and do not require stream channel realignment. The horizontal and vertical clearances provided by bridges allows for human and wildlife passage beneath the structure, does not block fish passage, and does not block navigation by canoeists and boaters. 4. Bridge deck drains should not discharge directly into, the stream; stormwater should be directed across the bridge and pre-treated through site-appropriate means (grassed swales, pre-formed scour holes, vegetated buffers, etc.) before entering the stream Please refer to NCDOT Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters. 5. Live concrete should not.be allowed to contact the water in or.entering into the stream Concrete is mostly made up of lime (calcium carbonate) and when in a dry or wet state (not hardened) calcium carbonate is very soluble in water and has a pH of approximately 12. In an unhardened state concrete or cement will change the pH of fresh water to very basic and will cause fish and other macroinvertebrate kills. 6. If possible, bridge supports (bents) should not be placed in the stream I If temporary access roads or detours are constructed, they should be removed back to original ground elevations immediately upon the completion of the project. Disturbed areas should be seeded or mulched to stabilize the soil and native tree species should be planted witha spacing of not more than 10'x10' If.possible, when using temporary structures the area should be cleared but not grubbed. Clearing the area with chain saws, mowers, bush-hogs, or other mechanized equipment and leaving the stumps and root mat intact, allows the area to re-vegetate naturally and minimizes disturbed soil. 8. A clear bank (rip rap-free) area of at least 10 feet should remain on each side of the steam underneath the bridge. 9. Sedimentation and erosion control measures sufficient to protect water resources must be implemented prior to any ground disturbing activities. Structures should be maintained regularly, especially following rainfall events. 10. Bare soil should be stabilized through vegetation or other means as quickly as feasible to prevent sedimentation of water resources. 11. All work in or adjacent to stream waters should be conducted in a dry work area. Sandbags, rock berms, cofferdams, or other diversion structures should be used where possible to prevent excavation in flowing water. 12. Heavy equipment should be operated from the bank rather than in stream channels in order to minimize sedimentation and reduce the likelihood of introducing other pollutants into streams. This equipment should be inspected daily and maintained to prevent contamination of surface waters from leaking fuels, lubricants, hydraulic fluids, or other toxic materials. III. General Comments if Renlaciniz the Bridge with a Culvert 1. The culvert must be designed to allow for aquatic life and fish passage. Generally, the culvert or pipe invert should be buried at least 1 foot below the natural streambed (measured from the natural thalweg depth). If multiple barrels are required, barrels other than the base flow barrel(s) should be placed on or near stream bankfull or floodplain bench elevation (similar to Lyonsfield design). These should be reconnected to floodplain benches as appropriate. This may be accomplished by utilizing sills on the upstream end to restrict or divert flow to the base flow barrel(s). Sufficient water depth should be provided in the base flow barrel during low flows to accommodate fish movement. If culverts are longer than 40-50 linear feet, alternating or notched baffles should be installed in a manner that mimics existing stream pattern. This should enhance aquatic life passage: 1) by depositing sediments in the barrel, 2) by maintaining channel depth and flow regimes, and 3) by providing resting places for fish and other aquatic organisms. In essence, the base flow barrel(s) should provide a continuum of water depth and channel width without substantial modifications of velocity. 2. If multiple pipes or cells are used, at least one pipe or box should be designed to remain dry during normal flows to allow for wildlife passage. 3. Culverts or pipes should be situated along the existing channel alignment whenever possible to avoid channel realignment. Widening the stream channel should be avoided. Stream channel widening at the inlet or outlet end of structures typically decreases water velocity causing sediment deposition that requires increased maintenance and disrupts aquatic life passage. 4. Riprap should not be placed in the active thalweg channel or placed in the streambed in a manner that. precludes aquatic life passage. Bioengineering boulders or structures should be professionally designed, sized, and installed. In most cases, we prefer the replacement of the existing structure at the same location with road closure. If road closure is not feasible, a temporary detour should be designed andlocated to avoid wetland impacts, minimize the need for clearing and to avoid destabilizing stream banks. If the structure will be on a new alignment, the old structure should be removed and the approach fills removed from the 100- year floodplain. Approach fills should be removed down to the natural ground elevation. The area should be stabilized with grass and planted with native tree species. Tall fescue should not be used in riparian areas. If the area that is reclaimed was previously wetlands, NCDOT should restore the area to wetlands. If successful, the site may be used as wetland mitigation for the subject project or other projects in the watershed. Thank you for requesting our input at this time. The DOT is reminded that issuance of a 401 Water Quality Certification requires that appropriate measures be instituted to ensure that water quality standards are met and designated uses are not degraded or lost. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact Christina Breen at (919) 733-9604. cc: Mr. Bill Biddlecomb, US Army Corps of Engineers, Washington Field Office Mr. Gary Jordan, USFWS Mr. Travis Wilson, NCWRC Mr. Steve Sollod, NC DCM Mr. Garcy Ward, NCDWQ Washington Regional Office Central Files File Copy CACorrespondence\Scoping Comments\B-4451,B-4452, B-4494,B-4521,B4599 41, pF ? , ? •«.e Nps N'P. • ? f ! @?.? gNpsgT?N /` T. STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA oR?? DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION MICHAEL F. EASLEY LYNDO TIPPETT SECRETARY GOVERNOR October 24, 2005 Ms. Cynthia Van der Wiele NCDENR-DWQ/ WETLANDS 1621 Mail Service Center Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621 SUBJECT: Request for comments on Bridge Replacement Projects B-4451, B-4452, B-4494, B-4521, and B-4599. Dear Ms.Van der Wiele: The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) is preparing the planning and environmental studies (Categorical Exclusions) for the replacement of the subject bridges. These bridges are included in NCDOT's 2006-2012 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). The purpose of this letter is to solicit your input concerning the potential impact of the proposed projects upon social, economic, demographic, land use or environmental conditions near the projects. Attached is the vicinity map for the following projects. Project B4451 Bridge No. 21 is located on NC 343 in Camden County and crosses over Joyce Creek. Project B-4452 Bridge No. 20 is located on NC 343 in Camden County and crosses over Sawyer Creek. Project B4494 Bridge No. 3 is located on SR 1232 in Currituck County and crosses over Tulls Creek. Project B-4521 Bridge No. 26 is located on SR 1320 in Gates County and crosses over Duke Swamp. Project B-4599 Bridges No. 1 and No.2 are located on US 17 in Pasquotank County and cross over Knobbs Creek TELEPHONE: 919-733-3141 LOCATION: MAILING ADDRESS: FAX: 919-733-9794 TRANSPORTATION BUILDING NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1-,,.. ,,,_. 1AAAA.1 •,nnnT nar_ RALEIGH NC Please note that there will be no formal interagency scoping meeting for these projects. This letter constitutes solicitation for scoping comments related to the. projects. To allow us to fully evaluate the impacts of the proposed projects, please respond in writing by November 30, 2005 concerning any beneficial or adverse impacts of the proposed projects relating to the interest of your agency. If you have any questions or comments concerning these projects, please contact Mr. Wayne Jacas of this Branch at (919) 733-7844, ext. 228. Sincerely, Y Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Branch Manager Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch GJT/ Attachment e Q C J hnsons Corner VICINITY MAP NOV 0 4 1lJtl. DENDS Ek 4UALI (Y I .. "rK RANCH North Carolina Department of Transportation a Project Development & Environmental Analysis CAMDEN COUNTY BRIDGE NO. 21 ON NC 343 S , e OVER J}AfW S CREEK 8-4451 FIGURE 1 o. i Pierceville ._ a 2 0 South Mills 1237 N ' Bridge No. 21 Q w ? a? d ?12 .' ? .. ? 1237 Tulls Creek 12 9 1 1 1394 1 2 1222 1279 1 6112 *--TO - MOYOCK 13 0 1 Bridge No. T4?? 12, 2s1 Cr e L o 2 272 ?? _ .... 2 2 . Snowden \ NC-168 TO -? 1 CURRITUCK Sligo :1202 12 VICINITY MAP MD ?! 5 North Carolina Department of Transportation Project Development & Environmental Analysis CURRITUCK COUNTY BRIDGE NO.3 ON SR 1232 OVER TULLS CREEK Lea a V E B-4494 FIGURE 1 Nov 0 4 1005 DENR - YVA'!'Ek QUALITY -• '-v'VnMyVA1tKBRANCH VICINITY MAP North Carolina Department of Transportation Project Development & Environmental Analysis GATES COUNTY BRIDGE NO. 26 ON SR 1320 OVER DUKE SWAMP 8-4521 NO V 0 4 DE7vi? • W V;? AND FIGURE 1 VICINITY MAP North Carolina Department of Transportation a Project Development & Environmental Analysis BRIDGES NO. 1 & 2 ON US 17 OVER KNOBBS CREEK 8-4599 Nov 0 4 ?[RD FIGURE 1