Draft Environmental Assessment
Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
A conversion of land protected under Section 6(f)(3) of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act, Public Law 108-198 and Federal Lands-to-Parks Program and Historic Surplus Property Program: New Uses for Federal Properties. [Washington, D.C.]: U.S. Dept. of the Interior, National Park Service, 1993.
July 17, 2017
Submitted by:
PA Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Bureau of Recreation & Conservation 400 Market Street Harrisburg, PA 17105
Submitted to:
National Park Service, Northeast Region U.S. Customs House 200 Chestnut Street, 3rd Floor Philadelphia, PA 19106
The Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF), Stateside Assistance grant program, provides funds to states, and through states to local agencies, for the acquisition and development of outdoor recreation resources. Lands that have received funding through LWCF are protected by Section 6(f)3 of the Act unless a conversion is approved by the Secretary of the Interior as delegated to the National Park Service.
The Federal Lands to Parks (FLP) Program allows Federal surplus property to be transferred to state and local governments to be used and maintained exclusively, in perpetuity, for public park or recreational purposes (41 CFR 102-75-680). National Park Service is the administrator. Subsequent to the official transfer of the property, if it becomes unsuitable for recreation or if the recipient’s needs change to the point where the property cannot be appropriately used for recreation, NPS may authorize a land exchange to assure no net loss of recreational facilities for the public.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 SUMMARY ...... 1
2.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 2 2.1 Purpose, Need and Background ...... 2 2.2 Description of Alternatives ...... 3 2.2.1 No Action ...... 3 2.2.2 Proposed Action (Preferred Alternative) ...... 3 2.2.3 Alternatives Considered and Eliminated from Further Analysis ...... 6
3.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ...... 8 3.1 Hickory Run State Park ...... 8 3.2 Replacement Lands ...... 16
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ...... 22 4.1 Hickory Run State Park ...... 22 4.2 Replacement Lands ...... 26
5.0 CONCLUSION ...... 30
6.0 COORDINATION AND CONSULTATION ...... 31 6.1 Agency Consultation ...... 31 6.2 Public Outreach ...... 31 6.3 Agency Meetings ...... 31
7.0 REFERENCES ...... 33
8.0 LIST OF PREPARERS ...... 36
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 – Preliminary Impacts to Hickory Run State Park (2013) ...... 7 Table 2 – Soil Characteristics in Conversion Area ...... 9 Table 3 – Soil Characteristics in Replacement Lands ...... 17
APPENDICES
Appendix A – Figures Appendix B – Photographs Appendix C – Coordination and Consultation Appendix D – Environmental Screening Form Hickory Run State Park Appendix E – Environmental Screening Form Replacement Lands
Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
1.0 SUMMARY
The Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (PADCNR) proposes to convert from federal protection a portion of Hickory Run State Park (HRSP) to facilitate the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission’s (PTC’s) Hawk Falls Bridge Replacement Project. The existing bridge carries the four-lane, limited access turnpike (I-476) over Mud Run. The PTC’s right-of-way (ROW) bisects HRSP, and approximately 14.3 acres of land adjacent to the existing ROW will be acquired for transportation use and a temporary construction easement (TCE) will be required from an additional 16.3 acres to gain construction access to the new bridge site and to demolish the existing bridge.
HRSP is located in Kidder and Penn Forest Townships, Carbon County, Pennsylvania. The park covers approximately 15,990 acres and has over 40 miles of hiking trails, three state park natural areas, and miles of trout streams.
The park land to be converted is currently under federal protection through the National Park Service (NPS) Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) as well as the Federal Lands to Parks (FLP) Program. As specified by Section 6(f)(3) of the LWCF Act, the acquisition of park land for transportation use and the TCE, which allows for a temporary non-recreational use for more than six months duration, are both considered conversions of the Section 6(f) protected park land. The total park land that is proposed to be converted from Section 6(f) is 30.6 acres. This same park land is also subject to the restrictions of the FLP Program; however, this program does not consider the TCE to be a conversion. The total park land that is proposed to be converted from FLP is 14.3 acres.
PADCNR proposes to mitigate the conversion of park land from both programs with the acquisition and protection of Tax Parcels 22-51A-3.08 and 22B-51A-15A . The two parcels are located along Old Stage Road in Penn Forest Township, Carbon County, and were identified by the PADCNR as potential replacement lands as part of the Hawk Falls Bridge Replacement project. The Replacement Lands are contiguous with the eastern boundary of HRSP and are 38.0 acres in total. The land supports a red oak – mixed hardwood forest.
The general location of the HRSP Conversion Area and the Replacement Lands is shown on Figures 1 and 2 located in Appendix A.
The existing Hawk Falls Bridge (I-476 over Mud Run) was constructed in 1957 and is nearing the end of its service life. The bridge is considered functionally obsolete and structurally deficient. Several alternatives for bridge rehabilitation and replacement were evaluated, and the preferred alternative, the Modified East Alignment, was determined to have the least impact to the adjacent HRSP.
Based upon the effects of the alternative, the PADCNR is requesting the NPS approve the proposed conversion and replacement.
Draft Environmental Assessment Page | 1
Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
2.0 INTRODUCTION
In 1935, the NPS purchased Hickory Run to establish a national recreation demonstration area. In 1945, the Hickory Run National Recreation Demonstration Area (RDA) was transferred to Pennsylvania through the FLP Program and became HRSP. In 1981, a LWCF grant (42-00879) for handicapped standards improvements to four priority areas of the park identified all of HRSP as encompassed within the Section 6(f) boundary. Additional development projects throughout HRSP were funded through LWCF grants under grant numbers 42-00020, 42-00580, and 42- 00975. All of the HRSP lands adjacent to the Pennsylvania Turnpike were included in the Section 6(f) boundary and were also part of the FLP federal land transfer; therefore, any conversion of land will require approval from the NPS.
This Environmental Assessment (EA) has been prepared to assess the proposed conversion of land under federal protection by the NPS from HRSP to two tax parcels adjacent to the existing park. The EA is in accordance with the Council on Environmental Quality National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) regulations (40CFR 1500-1508) and the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949, as amended. NEPA applies to proposed federal actions including the disposal of federal property under the FLP Program and the conversion of lands within the LWCF Section 6(f) boundary. In accordance with the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949, as amended, and Section 6(f)(3) of the LWCF Act, a deed holder must request NPS approval to replace the deeded property with another suitable property that has the same or greater value and recreational utility.
The current boundary of HRSP and lands included in the Section 6(f) boundary are depicted in Figure 2 (Appendix A). The figure also depicts the general location of the proposed Section 6(f) conversion lands. The remainder of the original HRSP lands, depicted in Figure 2 (Appendix A), will not be affected and will remain within the Section 6(f) boundary if the proposed conversion is approved.
Figure 3 (Appendix A) depicts the required right-of-way to be acquired from the park. The required right-of-way is the portion of the park that would be converted from the FLP Program, if the proposed conversion is approved. The TCE and the remainder of HRSP within the original RDA property will not be affected and will remain restricted under FLP.
2.1 Purpose, Need and Background The purpose of this project is to convert federal protection from approximately 30.6 acres of HRSP to 38.0 acres of land adjacent to the existing park. The conversion will take place in order to allow for the replacement of the I-476 Bridge over Mud Run (Figures 3 and 4, Appendix A) with a new structure. The current bridge is functionally obsolete and structurally deficient and cannot be rehabilitated. A rehabilitation feasibility analysis was completed in 2015 to determine if the National Register-eligible Hawk Falls Bridge could be rehabilitated and still meet the project’s purpose and need. The analysis resulted in the conclusion that while rehabilitation would be possible, it would be more costly to complete, result in the replacement of the majority of the historic material of the bridge, result in a service life well below the 100-year service life of a new bridge, require a longer duration of construction, and require the construction of a second adjacent bridge to meet
Draft Environmental Assessment Page | 2
Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
current design standards. The bridge replacement will eliminate the structural and safety conditions of the existing bridge, minimize costly future maintenance and repairs, and minimize impacts to vehicular traffic and to the adjacent HRSP during construction.
The bridge is referred to as the “Hawk Falls Bridge” due to the proximity of Hawk Falls and Hawk Falls Trail located in HRSP. Photographs 1 through 10 in Appendix B show the existing Hawk Falls Bridge and surrounding parkland that is within the conversion area. The location of these photographs are depicted on Figure 4, Appendix A.
The PADCNR sponsor proposes to convert 30.6 acres of HRSP and replace it with the 38.0- acre replacement land parcel located on Old Stage Road in Penn Forest Township, Carbon County. There is no development proposed for the replacement land, which was recently purchased by the PTC for the purpose of conveying the land to the PADCNR. Figure 5, Appendix A depicts the existing boundary of the of the proposed replacement lands, and Photographs 11 through 15 in Appendix B show the condition of the replacement lands at various vantage points throughout the parcels. The location of these photographs are depicted on Figure 5, Appendix A.
This EA is required to help the NPS evaluate the environmental consequences of the proposed action on the human environment and allow the affected public to understand the context for the proposed action.
2.2 Description of Alternatives 2.2.1 No Action
The no action alternative would involve no physical improvements to the bridge. No park conversion and no environmental impacts are associated with this alternative.
Lack of improvements to the Hawk Falls Bridge would lead to further structural and safety concerns due to increasing traffic volumes, continued structural deterioration of the bridge, and functional inadequacies of the existing median and shoulder widths. Acceptance of the no action alternative would result in continued costly maintenance of the existing structure, which has reached the end of its functional life. The existing bridge would continue to deteriorate under the no action alternative, and ongoing and increasing maintenance or even closure would be required. This alternative would not meet the identified project needs; therefore, it is not a prudent alternative.
2.2.2 Proposed Action (Preferred Alternative)
The proposed action is the NPS approval of the proposed land conversion of Section 6(f) and FLP land from HRSP. The total park land that is proposed to be converted from Section 6(f) is 30.6 acres. This same park land is also subject to the restrictions of the FLP Program; however, this program does not consider the TCE to be a conversion. The total park land that is proposed to be converted from FLP is 14.3 acres. Following the conversion, approximately 15,975 acres of HRSP will
Draft Environmental Assessment Page | 3
Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
remain under protection as parkland and public access will be provided in the entire park. The park will continue to provide recreational opportunities including: hiking, orienteering, picnicking, swimming, disc golf, hunting, fishing, camping, ice skating, cross country skiing, and snowmobiling.
The conversion would allow the PTC to proceed with the replacement of the I-476 Bridge over Mud Run (Hawk Falls Bridge). The proposed bridge replacement alternative is called the Modified East Alignment. The Modified East Alignment involves the complete replacement of the Hawk Falls Bridge on a new alignment. The existing Hawk Falls Bridge (Bridge NB-610) is a 738’-0” long, three-span deck truss bridge with deck I-beam approach spans. The bridge carries four lanes of I- 476 traffic, two in each direction, over Mud Run. The proposed bridge will carry two traffic lanes and shoulders in each direction. The proposed design requires acquisition of a total of 14.3 acres of land from HRSP. Some of the required ROW is for proposed stormwater management basins. Additionally, 16.3 acres of land within HRSP will be used for TCEs for construction access and staging for a period in excess of six months and is, therefore, also permanently converted from the Section 6(f) boundary (Figure 4, Appendix A). This temporary use does not alter the FLP protection of this acreage of the park. Additionally, the complete replacement of another bridge directly to the north of the Hawk Falls Bridge is included in the proposed project. This existing, three-span mainline bridge, measuring 111’-0” in length, carries I-476 over S.R. 534. The existing bridge over S.R. 534 is structurally sound; however, it is proposed for replacement on a new alignment because the proposed roadway alignment for the Hawk Falls Bridge cannot be tied back to the existing I-476 alignment in the distance between the two bridges. The Modified East Alignment was determined to be the most favorable alignment, and the PADCNR concurred with this selection in their letter dated June 17, 2013 (Appendix C).
Further discussion of alternatives that were evaluated as part of the bridge replacement project, as well as their associated effects on the conversion of HRSP lands, is provided in Section 2.2.3.
Description of Hickory Run State Park (HRSP)
HRSP is located in northeastern Pennsylvania, on the western edge of the Pocono Mountains. The 15,990 acres of mixed hardwood forest are largely undeveloped. The park’s large size and dense understory of mountain laurel and rhododendron provide visitors with isolation and a feeling of remoteness. The park is readily accessible from the large urban areas of eastern Pennsylvania, New York, and New Jersey because of its proximity to I-80 and I-81, I-476, and S.R. 940.
The proposed project will result in a conversion of approximately 30.6 acres of land from HRSP. A portion of the lands to be converted are located in the Mud Run Natural Area of the park, immediately adjacent to the current roadway right of way. The land surrounding the existing bridge over Mud Run is very steep, with no park designated trails or access points, and therefore is typically not utilized by park visitors (Photographs 1-2, Appendix B). The recreational use of the land that is being converted is primarily passive, including hunting and fishing.
Draft Environmental Assessment Page | 4
Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
The area surrounding the proposed land conversion includes the Hawk Falls trail and waterfall area and the Mud Run Natural Area. The surrounding area is used for hiking and fishing by visitors. The Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission (PFBC) manages the streams for their fisheries, enforces fishing regulations, and stocks fish. All streams in the park are open for fishing. Mud Run is stocked with trout and is approved only for fly fishing. These frequently used areas are located in the valley of Mud Run, and there will be no change to the recreational use of these areas.
On-going coordination between representatives from the PADCNR, HRSP, and the PTC has occurred throughout the project. The agencies have met nine times to review the potential impact to the park, to discuss the lands to be converted, to review potential replacement options, and to conduct a field reconnaissance of the potential replacement lands located along Old Stage Road in Penn Forest Township, Carbon County.
Description of replacement lands
The replacement lands are located west of Old Stage Road in Penn Forest Township, Carbon County, and adjacent to HRSP on the southeastern side of the park. The replacement lands are 38.0 acres in size.
There are no current plans to develop the parcels by the HRSP officials. The proposed replacement lands comply with the Pennsylvania Outdoor Recreation Plan by preserving land abutting a state park that was slated for development, and by opening up the area for passive recreational use. Although not currently part of the state park trail system, there is a network of foot and equestrian trails on this parcel. This parcel also has 580 feet of frontage on Old Stage Road, which may provide an opportunity for future trailhead access if PADCNR determines that to be a desirable use of the property (Figure 5, Appendix A).
In 2013, representatives of PADCNR provided recommendations for adjacent lands that may be of interest for park replacement. The replacement lands were part of a larger parcel that was subdivided and listed for sale in April 2014. HRSP officials added the replacement lands parcels to the State’s list of properties approved for acquisition and PADCNR approved the parcels for acquisition on July 23, 2014. PADCNR noted that the parcels were suitable replacement lands for the HRSP Conversion (Appendix C).
The replacement lands are relatively undisturbed. The land parcels support a red oak – mixed hardwood forest and prior disturbance is limited. There are no wetlands or waters on the site. The Pennsylvania Natural Heritage Program (PNHP) defines this land and the surrounding area as an outstanding natural feature of statewide importance. This location is denoted as Keipers Run Core Habitat Area in the county natural area inventory.
Draft Environmental Assessment Page | 5
Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
The replacement lands will be transferred to the PADCNR and HRSP prior to construction of the new Hawk Falls Bridge. The replacement lands will be managed by HRSP officials along with the rest of the park property.
2.2.3 Alternatives Considered and Eliminated from Further Analysis
The existing legal ROW owned by the PTC is 200 feet centered on the roadway centerline. Due to the existing width of the Hawk Falls Bridge and its structural configuration (truss), it is not possible to replace the structure on existing alignment while maintaining four lanes of traffic. An Alignment Study evaluated four alternative alignments for the replacement of the bridge and considered construction access, staging, traffic control and environmental impacts. As a result, the PTC determined that the most feasible alignment to be progressed is the Modified East Alternative. The alternative met the project needs and was the most favorable when evaluating environmental impacts and cost.
Under the proposed Modified East Alternative, the bridge will carry four lanes of traffic consisting of two 12-foot lanes, a 12-foot outside shoulder and a 6-foot inside shoulder in each direction. The proposed project also includes reconstruction of the existing roadway approaches and the replacement of an existing mainline bridge that carries the I-467 over Hickory Run Road (PA State Route 534; Photograph 8, Appendix B).
The proposed conversion lands also include the area for stormwater basins. Some of the basins will be located in the vacated roadway but others will be located outside the shoulders of the roadway. The new roadway and bridges and the proposed stormwater management basins are shown on Figure 4 (Appendix A). The area of HRSP to be converted to transportation use is shown on both Figures 3 and 4 (Appendix A).
The PTC initiated a detailed alternatives analysis, which evaluated the conversion of parkland associated with bridge alternatives, and included the following options:
Rehabilitation Alternative - consisting of the rehabilitation of the existing bridge. Straddle Alternative - generally consists of constructing two separate bridges, one on each side of the existing Hawk Falls Bridge. West Alternative - a new bridge constructed off-alignment to the west of the mainline, allowing the existing mainline roadway and bridge to be fully utilized throughout most of the construction. East Alternative - a new bridge constructed off-alignment to the east of the mainline, allowing the existing mainline roadway and bridge to be fully utilized throughout most of the construction.
Draft Environmental Assessment Page | 6
Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
Modified East Alternative - generally the same as the East Alternative; however, immediately north of the new Hawk Falls Bridge, the northbound and southbound roadways begin to transition back to the existing roadway section sooner.
The proposed alternative alignments (Straddle, West, East, and Modified East) associated with a new bridge structure all have potential impacts to HRSP. The alternatives were presented to representatives of the PADCNR and HRSP in April 2013. The potential impacts to HRSP, in the form of required ROW, from the alternatives under consideration may be found in Table 1. On June 17, 2013, the PADCNR and HRSP agreed that the Modified East Alternative is the preferred alignment (Appendix C).
Table 1 – Preliminary Impacts to Hickory Run State Park (2013)
Alternative Alignment Straddle West East Modified East
Conversion Land 12 ac. 15 ac. 16 ac. 11 ac. Required from HRSP
Note: The acreage of proposed conversion does not include the required ROW impacts associated with the development of storm water management (SWM) basins. Due to similar design criteria of the alternatives, SWM requirements are generally equal for all alternatives, requiring an additional 4 to 5 acres of ROW. The acreage also does not include any TCEs for access roads and work areas.
Draft Environmental Assessment Page | 7
Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
3.0 Affected Environment
Representatives of Lotus Environmental Consulting, LLC and A.D. Marble assessed HRSP and the Replacement Lands to determine the existing conditions and potential impacts of the proposed parkland conversion.
3.1 Hickory Run State Park
The proposed conversion land consists of approximately 30.6 acres of land from HRSP, which is located in Penn Forest Township, Carbon County. The land to be converted represents less than 0.1 percent of the 15,990-acre park and includes 24.5 acres within a designated Natural Area, which is managed to have limited human alteration. The conversion area is a narrow strip of land, which varies from just a few feet in width to 260 feet in width, immediately adjacent to the PTC legal right-of-way. The conversion area has no identified trails or recreational facilities within the area to be converted and generally consists of open field areas in the vicinity of S.R. 534, wooded land, and the densely vegetated corridor of Mud Run. Notable features in the conversion area include Mud Run, as well as lands associated with the Mud Run Natural Area. The conversion area lands can be located on the Hickory Run and Christmans USGS 7.5’ Quadrangle maps (Figure 1, Appendix A).
The NPS Environmental Screening Form was used to identify the natural, cultural, and socioeconomic features present in the conversion area (Appendix D). The following resources are not present in the conversion area and are therefore not discussed in this report: marine/estuarine habitats, accessibility for people with disabilities, minority or low income populations, agency or tribal land use plans or policies, and other important environmental resources.
Geological resources: soils, bedrock, slopes, streambeds, landforms, etc.
Review of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (USDA-NRCS) Web Soil Survey (2009) revealed that six soil types underlie the project area including: Leck Kill very stony loam (LkD), Made land (Ma), Meckesville very stony loam (McB and McD), Tioga and Middlebury very stony loams (TmB), and Very stony land (VeF). There is no prime farmland soil within the project area. Characteristics of these soils are described in Table 2.
Draft Environmental Assessment Page | 8
Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
Table 2 – Soil Characteristics in Conversion Area
Water Table Soil Type Slope Drainage Hydric Soil (inches) Leck Kill very stony loam (LkD) 8-25% Well-drained >79 No Made land (Ma) N/A N/A >79 No Meckesville very stony loam 0-8% Well-drained >79 No (McB) Meckesville very stony loam 8-25% Well-drained >79 No (McD) Tioga and Middlebury very 0-8% Well-drained 54 No stony loams (TmB) Very stony land (VeF) 25-120% Well-drained >79 No
According to Physiographic Provinces of Pennsylvania map (PADCNR 2015a), the project area is within the Appalachian Plateaus Province and the Ridge and Valley Province. These sections consist of sandstone, siltstone, shale, conglomerate, and anthracite coal.
The Boulder Field is an outstanding geologic feature located within Hickory Run State Park but outside the limits of the conversion (PADCNR 2015). The Boulder Field was formed more than 15 thousand years ago by the end moraine of the Wisconsin Ice Sheet. The moraine consisted of unsorted rock and soil fragments that built up at the front end of the ice sheet. The Boulder Field spans 400 feet by 1,000 feet and is at least 10 feet deep. A trailhead and trail that leads 3.5 miles to the Boulder Field is located immediately east of I- 476 on S. R. 534. The Boulder Field is also a National Natural Landmark.
Air quality
The national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) set by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) establish standards for the six principal air pollutants: carbon monoxide, lead, nitrogen dioxide, particulate matter, ozone, and sulfur oxides. Areas in Pennsylvania that routinely exceed these standards are described as nonattainment areas. Carbon County is a nonattainment area for ozone pollutants for which criteria is currently available (PADEP Bureau of Air Quality, Attainment Status by Principal Pollutants website, accessed March 31, 2015). Vehicular traffic on I-476 and S.R. 534 are the primary sources of air emissions within HRSP. Ambient air quality within the project study area is typical for Carbon County.
Sound (noise impacts)
A traffic noise screening analysis was conducted in 2014 to determine the existing and future projected noise levels in HRSP, specifically in the vicinity of Hawk Falls and the Hawk Falls trail. The screening analysis was conducted in accordance with PennDOT’s Publication 24, Project Level Highway Traffic Noise Handbook (December 2013) and the FHWA’s Title 23 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 772 (23 CFR 772; July 2011).
Noise monitoring was performed at eight (8) locations near the Hawk Falls waterfall and along park trails outside of the conversion area. A traffic count was simultaneously conducted on I-476 during each monitoring period. Following the field monitoring, noise
Draft Environmental Assessment Page | 9
Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
conditions were predicted using FHWA’s Traffic Noise Model (TNM). The monitoring results, along with the concurrent collected traffic data, were used to validate the modeling effort.
Ambient noise levels within HRSP are low (51 to 59 dB(A)) due to the rural setting and lack of noise generating sources. Hawk Falls itself is a source of noise and the noise levels increase to 76 dB(A), at the viewing area of the falls along the Hawk Falls Trail.
Water quality/quantity
The main stream resource in the conversion area is Mud Run, located under the existing I- 476 Hawk Falls Bridge, running east to west through the park. Mud Run is listed as High Quality-Cold Water Fishes (HQ-CWF) by the PA Department of Environmental Protection in PA Code Chapter 93. The HQ-CWF designation is representative of good water quality, whereby the stream may have documented water chemistry data that exceeds levels necessary to support the propagation of fish, shellfish and wildlife and recreational activities, or the stream may have biological assessment qualifiers that supports a high quality aquatic community.
Other streams outside of the conversion area and identified in the vicinity that are contributing tributaries to Mud Run include Hawk Run, Tributary 04181 to Hawk Run, and Panther Creek, which are all listed as HQ-CWF in PADEP Chapter 93.
Stream flow characteristics
The stream flow of Mud Run in the conversion area is generally classified as turbulent flow, in a channel that is approximately 40 feet in average width, and generally about 14 inches in depth. There are varying depths due to the mixed habitat including riffle, runs, and pools along Mud Run. The segment within the conversion area is a graded stream where the turbulent flows have the ability to propel gravel, cobble, and even boulders; therefore, there is equilibrium among erosion, transportation, and deposition through the stream of Mud Run. The substrate of the stream is typically composed of gravel, cobble, and boulder, with some exposed areas of bedrock, with very small amounts of sand or silt.
Floodplains/wetlands
There were no U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetland Inventory (NWI) mapped wetlands identified in the conversion area. A wetland delineation was conducted in 2014. The investigation was completed using the multi-parameter approach outlined in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual and the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region (ERDC/EL TR-12-9). A Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (Pre-JD) was completed in the field on April 16, 2015, and was attended by representatives of the USACE and the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection.
The wetland areas within the conversion area are indicated on Figure 4 in Appendix A. Wetland W1 is classified as a Palustrine Emergent (PEM) wetland. The wetland is located along the floodplain of Mud Run and appears to have a high water table. Wetland W5 is
Draft Environmental Assessment Page | 10
Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
classified as a Palustrine Emergent, Scrub-Scrub, and Forested (PEM/PSS/PFO) wetland. The wetland is located along the toe-of-slope of S.R. 534 and extends into wooded land to the north. Wetland W5A is classified as a PEM/PFO wetland. The wetland is located on the east side of I-476 and just north of S.R. 534. The wetland is located at the outlet of a culvert pipe carrying water under I-476. Generally the wetland areas are small in size and lack significant diversity in vegetation and habitat.
Based upon review of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) data, Mud Run is located in a Zone A flood hazard area, which is defined as subject to inundation by the 1- percent-annual-chance flood event (100-YR floodplain) generally determined using approximate methodologies. Because detailed hydraulic analyses have not been performed, no Base Flood Elevations (BFEs) or flood depths are shown.
Land use/ownership patterns; property values; community livability
The entire conversion area is within the boundary of the 15,990-acre HRSP. The Park is owned by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and managed by the PADCNR. As state- owned property, there is no varied land use or development patterns other than public land, and it is tax exempt.
Circulation, transportation
S.R. 534 travels through the conversion area. The road provides access from White Haven to Albrightsville, Pennsylvania. S.R. 534 is also a primary access road to the HRSP. I-476, while adjacent to the conversion area, is a limited access highway and offers no direct access to S.R. 534 or the park in this area. The Hawk Falls trailhead and parking area are located along S.R. 534 and east of I-476, outside of the conversion area. The trail is used to access Mud Run for fly fishing and to visit the falls.
Rare, threatened and endangered species
An Environmental Review of the HRSP conversion area was conducted using the Pennsylvania Natural Heritage Program’s (PNHP’s) Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Inventory (PNDI) tool. A PNDI web-site inquiry generates on-line search results concerning the potential impacts of a project to special concern species and resources. In Pennsylvania, four government agencies have jurisdiction over the protection of these resources:
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service - Federally-listed, proposed and candidate species
Pennsylvania Game Commission - PA state-listed birds and mammals
Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission - PA state-listed fish, reptiles, amphibians, and aquatic organisms
Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources - PA state- listed plants, natural communities, terrestrial invertebrates and geological features
Draft Environmental Assessment Page | 11
Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
The Environmental Review receipt, dated April 30, 2014 (Appendix C), identified a potential conflict with two Special Concern Species (SCS) under the jurisdiction of the PADCNR: screw-stem (Bartonia paniculata) and buttonbush dodder (Cuscuta cephalanthi). Further review was required with PADCNR in regards to these plant species. In coordination with staff from DCNR, several additional SCS were noted as having potential to occur, including, Piedmont staggerbush (Lyonia mariana, PA Endangered), which has a previous record of occurring in HRSP. A botanical survey was conducted throughout the park conversion land and adjacent lands between June and September 2014. One of the three target species, screw-stem, was identified within the survey area, but outside of the limits of the proposed conversion. The PADCNR concurred with the findings of the botanical survey in a letter dated January 15, 2015 (Appendix C).
The PNDI Environmental Receipt was updated on May 8, 2015 (Appendix C), and no additional conflicts were identified. A third PNDI Environmental Receipt dated December 12, 2016 (Appendix C) identified potential impacts to an endangered species under the jurisdiction of the PFBC. Further coordination with PFBC determined that the SCS species was the Northern Cricket Frog (Acris crepitans). In a letter dated February 9, 2017, the PFBC determined that habitat within the study area was not suitable for the Northern Cricket Frog and that no further coordination was required. In addition to the two species identified previously, the December 12, 2016 receipt identified Marsh Willow-herb (Epilobium palustre) as an SCS under the jurisdiction of PADCNR. In a response dated December 13, 2016, PADCNR determined the project would have no impact on species or resources under their jurisdiction and confirmed that protective fencing will provide avoidance of impacts to the adjacent population of screw-stem. Copies of all correspondence are included in Appendix C.
Unique ecosystems
HRSP contains three designated natural areas: Boulder Field, Mud Swamp, and Mud Run. State Park Natural Area policy allows for outstanding, unique, or sensitive resources such as Mud Run to be set aside for protection through designation as Natural Areas to ensure their continued quality for future generations.
The portion of the conversion lands south of S.R. 534 was designated as the Mud Run Natural Area in 1996. The Mud Run Natural Area contains the Mud Run Gorge and covers 1,281 acres. A mixed variety of vegetation types and habitats are found in this natural area. The upland areas are covered by mixed hardwoods and very thick rhododendron patches in some areas. The stream bottom has scattered pine (Pinus strobus) and hemlock (Tsuga canadensis), mountain laurel, and very thick stands of rhododendron. One rather large area exists in the northern section of the unit along S.R. 534 (PADCNR 2003). Management objectives for this unit of the park focus on maintaining the natural condition and maintaining ecological values with minimal human intervention.
Within the conversion area itself, the habitat ranges from open field areas in the vicinity of S.R. 534 (Photograph 6), mid-stage successional disturbed lands (Photograph 3), forest land (Photograph 4), and the dense rhododendron riparian bottomlands (Photograph 1) (Appendix B).
Draft Environmental Assessment Page | 12
Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
The PNHP also defines this area as an outstanding natural feature of statewide importance. The boundaries of the PNHP natural area include the PADCNR Mud Run Natural Area as well as some additional adjacent lands outside the park boundary. The parkland to be converted includes approximately 24.5 acres within the Mud Run Natural Area.
Unique or important wildlife/ wildlife habitat
The conversion area is generally described as forest land surrounding both sides of I-476, with open field areas in the vicinity of the S.R. 534 crossing. The forest type is generally characterized by red oaks (Quercus rubra), red maple (Acer rubrum) and beech (Fagus grandifolia), with few individuals of eastern hemlock (Tsuga canadensis), sassafras (Sassafras albidum), and white pine (Pinus strobus). There is a light herbaceous cover dominated by wood fern (Dryopteris intermedia). Riparian corridors and slopes along Mud Run are comprised of a dense understory of rhododendron (Rhododendron maximum) and mountain laurel (Kalmia latifolia) providing cover for wildlife.
According to the Hickory Run State Park Resource Management Plan (PADCNR 2003), a wide variety of wildlife is found in the park, and the diversity of vegetation provides the necessary food and cover for the different wildlife communities. These conditions support animals such as bear, deer, turkeys, coyotes, bobcat, raccoons, grouse, squirrels, and porcupine.
Unique or important fish/habitat
Mud Run is designated as a Class A Wild Trout Water by the Pennsylvania Fish & Boat Commission (PFBC). Mud Run contains a population of wild brown trout and is open to fishing under the classification of Delayed Harvest Artificial Lures Only. Mud Run, and its tributary Hawk Run, flow through and adjacent to the park conversion land. In total, approximately 265 linear feet of these streams are located within the conversion land.
Introduce or promote invasive species (plant or animal)
The conversion area does include a small area of an invasive plant species, common reed (Phragmites australis). Common reed is a vigorously growing invasive that is typically associated with disturbed wet areas, including roadsides and ditches. The common reed is identified in a small wetland at the northeast quadrant of I-476 and S.R. 534. PADCNR requested the PTC treat the common reed with herbicides to prevent it from spreading during construction. In August 2015, the area was treated with AquaNeat. AquaNeat is an effective aquatic herbicide for use on emerged aquatic weeds and brush in aquatic and other non-crop areas. A second application was applied in 2016.
Recreation resources, land, parks, open space, conservation areas, recreational trails, facilities, services, opportunities, public access, etc.
The conversion area itself is entirely within HRSP; however, there are no identified trails or recreational facilities within the area to be converted. There is limited public use to the land due to the dense forest cover; however, open field areas in the vicinity of S.R. 534, as well as Mud Run, are accessible by foot. The area of the park south of S.R. 534 is managed
Draft Environmental Assessment Page | 13
Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
as a natural area, and development of recreational facilities is discouraged in favor of managing the land in a natural state. The area is open to hunting and fishing in season.
As previously noted, the Hawk Falls trailhead and parking area are located along S.R. 534, east of I-476, and outside of the conversion area. The Hawk Falls Trail, which is outside of the conversion area, is widely used in the summer months by hikers and fishermen. Although, hunting, fishing, and hiking opportunities exist, the 30.6 acres of park land to be converted has no trails and includes only 265 linear feet of Mud Run, immediately upstream and downstream from the existing turnpike right-of-way. The strip of land varies in width from just a few feet to 260 feet. Much of this land is steeply sloping and not easily accessible to park users.
Overall aesthetics, special characteristics/features
There are no special characteristics or aesthetic features present within the portion of HRSP to be converted. The 25-foot high waterfall, known as Hawk Falls, and the 0.6-mile Hawk Falls trail are located approximately 300 feet to the east of the parkland to be converted.
Historical/cultural resources, including landscapes, ethnographic, archeological, structures, etc.
Background research and a reconnaissance-level survey were completed in the fall of 2012 to determine the presence of previously identified and potential historic resources within HRSP. The 15,990-acre HRSP includes several natural and recreation areas, as well as the remnants of a nineteenth-century village and two camps built by the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) in the 1930s. As part of this project, HRSP and the Hickory Run Recreational Demonstration Area (RDA) were evaluated and recommended eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (National Register) under Criterion A and C. The park is recommended eligible under Criterion A in the area of conservation/recreation as a representation of the results of a massive federal effort to construct and improve outdoor recreational facilities across the United States. The RDA program, overseen by the NPS, was an attempt to provide public recreational facilities that blended into the local environment and assured the conservation and protection of that environment. The park is one of only five RDAs built in Pennsylvania. The park is also significant as it was developed by the Works Progress Administration (WPA) and CCC, two of the most important federal relief programs created under President Roosevelt’s New Deal aimed at employing Americans during the throes of the Great Depression. Likewise, the buildings and structures built by the WPA and CCC also represent the theme of Social/Humanitarian efforts, as these programs constituted a massive social and humanitarian program initiated by the federal government to employ and, therefore, shelter and feed, thousands of unemployed Americans. The Hickory Run RDA was recommended eligible under Criterion C in the area of architecture as a significant and distinguishable entity whose components lack individual distinction. The buildings and structures that date to the period of significance epitomize the Rustic architectural style and philosophy of architecture espoused by the NPS. An Historic Resource Survey Form (HRSF) was completed for Hickory Run RDA in 2014 (A.D. Marble & Company 2014d). The resource was determined eligible for listing in the National Register in a letter from the
Draft Environmental Assessment Page | 14
Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission (PHMC) dated October 24, 2014 (Appendix C).
A Phase IA archaeological survey of the conversion area was conducted between November 2013 and May 2014 (A.D. Marble & Company 2014c). The survey was performed in accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, and in accordance with the requirements set forth by the PHMC-BHP in Cultural Resource Management in Pennsylvania: Guidelines for Archaeological Investigations (2008).
The purpose of the survey was to assess the archaeological sensitivity of the Area of Potential Effects (APE) of the proposed conversion and the adjacent Hawk Falls Bridge replacement. The survey intended to identify areas within the APE that may contain historic and precontact (Native American) archaeological resources and warrant Phase IB identification-level survey. The APE encompassed all areas that may be subject to the park conversion. A total of 9.25 acres (9 percent) of the APE are considered to have moderate or high archaeological probability. The remainder is considered to have no or low archaeological probability. Two areas along Mud Run and two upland areas immediately east and west of I-476 are sensitive for undocumented precontact archaeological deposits. One area along Hickory Run Road (S.R. 534) to the east of I-476 is sensitive for undocumented historic archaeological deposits. Phase IB archaeological testing was recommended at each of these areas if earth disturbance is anticipated. The PHMC-BMP agreed with this finding in a letter dated October 14, 2014 (Appendix C).
In 2015, following the Phase IA assessment, the APE was refined and as a result, the location of historic archaeological sensitivity and one precontact sensitivity area were removed from the APE. The testable portion of the APE was reduced to three locations measuring approximately 3.11 acres combined. Phase IB investigations were completed in 2015, and no archaeological sites were identified. The PHMC concurred with this finding in a letter dated January 11, 2016 (Appendix C).
Socioeconomics, including employment, occupation, income changes, tax base, infrastructure
The conversion area is within the boundary of HRSP. The Park is owned by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and managed by the PADCNR. There are no facilities associated with park operations that are located on the proposed conversion land. As previously noted, the conversion land is state-owned property and, therefore, is exempt from state and local property taxes.
Energy resources (geothermal, fossil fuels, etc.)
According to the 2003 Hickory Run State Park Resource Management Plan (PADCNR 2003), the NPS did not acquire all mineral ownership rights at the time the land was acquired for the Hickory Run National Recreational Demonstration Area. Today the park has no mineral resources worth mining on a large scale. The park’s timber is its primary harvested resource.
Draft Environmental Assessment Page | 15
Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
Land/structures with history of contamination/hazardous materials (even if remediated)
A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) investigation (Lotus Environmental Consulting 2015a) was conducted for the conversion lands. The investigation followed the PennDOT guidelines (Publication 281, The Transportation Project Development Process, Waste Site Evaluation, Volumes I and II, PennDOT Bureau of Environmental Quality (2010). PennDOT’s procedures follow American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) standards and meet federal and state laws and regulations related to and/or governing the assessment of environmental impacts, waste investigations, and hazardous substances.
The investigation consisted of a records search, historical resource review, and site inspection. The records search concluded that no mapped sites were found in the search of available ("reasonably ascertainable") government records either on the replacement lands or within the 1-mile search radius.
Based upon the review of the historic aerial photos and topographic maps, it appears that the conversion area has been largely undeveloped throughout the review period. Much of the land area may have been cleared for logging in the mid to late 1800s based on PADCNR history of HRSP (PADCNR 2003). With the establishment of the park in 1945, it appears that the land has been undisturbed since. Structures noted in the vicinity of the S.R. 534 overpass are presumably rural residential structures, including the presumed barn on the eastern side of the S.R. 534 overpass. There is no information to suggest that the historic land use is associated with a sensitive waste concern.
Site reconnaissance surveys of the study area were conducted on April 28, May 6, and May 9, 2014. There was a walkthrough of the segments of the conversion lands that were disturbed from prior farming activities or construction of I-476. None of the previously disturbed areas appear to have any indications of a sensitive waste issue.
Based on the results of the background review and the field investigations, there are no issues identified on site that represent a current or past sensitive waste issue. 3.2 Replacement Lands
The proposed park replacement land is located in Penn Forest Township, Carbon County. The property was formerly owned by Dolores Sywensky and Joyce Jackson (Parcels 22- 51A-3.08 and 22B-51A-15A) and identified by the PADCNR as potential replacement lands for the 30.6 acres to be converted as part of the Hawk Falls Bridge Replacement project. The parcels are located west of Old Stage Road and abut HRSP. Both parcels are being proposed as replacement lands for the HRSP conversion. The PADCNR identified these parcels as properties approved for acquisition on July 23, 2014 (Appendix C). The parcels, 38.0 acres in total, support a red oak – mixed hardwood forest. The replacement parcels and the HRSP conversion area can be located on the Blakeslee and Pohopoco Mountain USGS 7.5’ Quadrangle maps (Figure 1).
The NPS Environmental Screening Form was used to identify the natural, cultural, and socioeconomic features present on the replacement lands parcel (Appendix E). The following resources are not present in the replacement lands area and are therefore not discussed in this report: water quality/quantity, stream flow characteristics,
Draft Environmental Assessment Page | 16
Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
marine/estuarine habitats, floodplains/wetlands, unique and important fish habitat, accessibility for people with disabilities, minority or low income populations, agency or tribal land use plans or policies and other important environmental resources.
Geological resources: soils, bedrock, slopes, streambeds, landforms, etc.
Review of the USDA-NRCS Web Soil Survey revealed that two soil types underlie the replacement lands parcel. The soils that underlie the replacement lands are Meckesville very stony loam (McB) and Tunkhannock gravelly loam (TuB). Tunkhannock gravelly loam is present on approximately 12.9 acres of the replacement lands and is considered prime farmland. Characteristics of soils can be seen in Table 3.
Table 3 – Soil Characteristics in Replacement Lands
Bedrock Depth Water Table Hydric Soil Type Slope Drainage (inches) (inches) Soil Meckesville very stony 0-8% Well-drained >79 >79 No loam (McB) Tunkhannock gravelly 3-8% Well-drained >79 >79 No loam (TuB)
According to Physiographic Provinces of Pennsylvania map (PADCNR 2015), the replacement parcels are within the Appalachian Plateaus Province, in the Glaciated Pocono Plateau Section. This section is underlain mainly by tough, erosion-resistant sandstones that are relatively flat lying. Relief is generally less than 200 feet, with elevations ranging from 1,200 to 2,320 feet. The area was glaciated at least three different times in the past million years (PADCNR 2015).
There is one main formation identified in the replacement lands, the Duncannon Member of Catskill Formation, which is described as grayish-red sandstone, siltstone, and mudstone in fining-upward cycles, with conglomerate occurring at the base of some cycles (USGS 2001).
The property is south of the mapped Wisconsinan glacial boundary for northeast Pennsylvania. The area itself appears to fall within the glacial deposit limit of the Late Illinoian Era, and surficial geology is described as a mix of all sizes of material weathered to a yellowish-red color; 6 to 30 feet thick.
Air quality
The NAAQS set by the EPA establishes standards for the six principal air pollutants: carbon monoxide, lead, nitrogen dioxide, particulate matter, ozone, and sulfur oxides. Areas in Pennsylvania that routinely exceed these standards are described as nonattainment areas. Carbon County is a nonattainment area for ozone pollutants for which criteria is currently available (PADEP Bureau of Air Quality, Attainment Status by Principal Pollutants website, accessed 31 March 2015). Ambient air quality within the replacement land is typical for Carbon County.
Draft Environmental Assessment Page | 17
Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
Sound (noise impacts)
The ambient noise levels on the replacement parkland are expected to be low due to the rural setting and the low density of nearby residential uses. Old Stage Road is adjacent to the replacement parcels and is not a significant source of traffic noise. There are no significant noise generating sources in or adjacent to the park replacement land.
Land use/ownership patterns; property values; community livability
Land use of the replacement lands is listed as wooded or undeveloped land. The replacement lands are currently owned by the PTC. The land has previously existed as wooded or undeveloped land under prior ownership. The lands are located along Old Stage Road, which has seen the conversion of adjacent vacant and wooded land to residential land uses in the early 1970s. It is anticipated that the overall value the replacement lands, and land in the vicinity, has increased with the increased residential development and subdivision of larger parcels.
Land cover of the parcel includes approximately 38.0 acres of wooded land.
Circulation, transportation
The replacement lands are located on Old Stage Road (Township Road 516), with approximately 580 feet of frontage along Old Stage Road. Old Stage Road is a two-lane, local connecting road between S.R. 903 to the north and Township Road 472 (Stoney Mountain Road) to the south and generally provides access to residential communities in the area.
Rare, threatened and endangered species
An Environmental Review of the replacement parcels was conducted using the PNHP’s PNDI tool. The Environmental Review receipt, dated May 22, 2017 (Appendix C), identified variable sedge (Carex polymorpha) a state-listed endangered species under the jurisdiction of the PADCNR as potentially present on replacement lands, and an unidentified endangered species under the jurisdiction of the Pennsylvania Game Commission (PGC). The habitat for variable sedge includes permanently damp but well- drained soils adjacent to wetlands and streams. Although there are no streams or wetlands located on the replacement parcels, Keiper’s Run is located nearby. No botanical surveys for this species have been conducted to confirm presence or absence.
Unique ecosystems
The property is located within the Keiper Run Core Habitat Area, designated by the PADCNR PNHP. Core habitat denotes the area most closely associated with the species of concern habitat. This area can support little disturbance without adversely affecting the habitat of the species of concern. PADCNR provides the following description of the area:
“Keipers Run flows under Rt. 903 and through a forested valley. One plant species of concern was found here during surveys in 2001. The variable sedge (Carex polymorpha) is an S2, G3 plant species of concern that is considered globally
Draft Environmental Assessment Page | 18
Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
vulnerable and threatened in Pennsylvania. This species occurs in permanently damp but well drained places such as adjacent to wetlands, streamlets, and low places. This plant can be successional and may respond positively to light disturbance. A small portion of this site is located within Hickory Run State Park.” (Nature Conservancy 2005)
Unique or important wildlife/wildlife habitat
The replacement parcels contain a red oak-mixed hardwood forest typical of the county. Abundant species included red oak (Quercus rubra), white oak (Quercus alba), red maple (Acer rubrum), with an understory of low sweet blueberry (Pennsylvanicun angustifolium), sheep laurel (Kalmia angustifolia), wintergreen (Gaultheria procumbens) and wood ferns (Dryopteris intermedia).
Common wildlife species typically associated with these habitat types would include larger mammals such as white tailed deer and black bear, but also raccoon, opossum, and gray squirrels, various frogs, snakes, and numerous birds including turkeys, red-tailed hawk, owls and turkey vultures. The site offers excellent wild habitat for foraging, with numerous oaks and a dominant understory of blueberry species.
Introduce or promote invasive species (plant or animal)
There were no significant populations of invasive species noted on the replacement lands. However, the highest probability of occurrence was noted to be along the roadside adjacent to the property (Old Stage Road) where people and vehicles could enter the area and possibly transport invasive species to the area.
Recreation resources, land, parks, open space, conservation areas, rec. trails, facilities, services, opportunities, public access, etc.
The replacement lands currently exist as parcels of vacant wooded land that have been subdivided for residential development. There is no designated park or public use associated with the existing lands. However, it is important to note the replacement lands are adjacent to the eastern boundary of HRSP. There are small, unmarked trails on the replacement lands that are connected to undesignated trails that exist on the HRSP property (see Figure 5, Appendix A). The replacement lands offer an opportunity for conservation of a woodland habitat and open space that is adjacent to the park and is within the Keipers Run Core Habitat, a priority area. This property also offers an opportunity for future trailhead access from Old Forge Road.
The recreational value of these 38.0 acres of land is as undeveloped open space, hunting and possibly hiking and trailhead access. This recreational value is comparable or greater than the recreational value of the 30.6 acres of land to be converted. The land to be converted is a narrow corridor adjacent to the Pennsylvania Turnpike, is steeply sloping and has no trails, although it does contain 265 linear feet of Mud Run, a recreational fishery.
Draft Environmental Assessment Page | 19
Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
Overall aesthetics, special characteristics/features
The site is a wooded lot, with characteristics similar to the species composition of the adjacent HRSP. The view shed is generally limited by dense forest cover, obstructing one’s line of site, with no noted opportunities for viewing adjacent lands or parcels.
Historical/cultural resources, including landscapes, ethnographic, archeological, structures, etc.
An archaeological and historic architectural reconnaissance survey of the park replacement land was conducted in August 2014. The aim of the survey was to determine the potential of the replacement parkland to contain archaeological sites and historic architectural resources. The survey consisted of a review of historic maps and aerial photographs, local archaeological site and historic architectural property information, and a field view.
It was determined that there are no known archaeological sites within the replacement land boundaries, however, the parcels have moderate potential for precontact sites. Moderate probability areas are those that are greater than 50 meters from a water source, not on a stream bench or floodplain, and on 0 to 8 percent slopes. Like other sites in the local area that occur in settings similar to those of the park replacement land, the sites would likely be small temporary camps that may date to the Precontact era, and specifically to the Late Archaic and Late Woodland Periods. Historic map and aerial photograph research revealed a lack of historic-era settlement, and therefore, the parcels contain low potential for historic-era sites.
A Cultural Resources Reconnaissance Report (A.D. Marble 2014e) was prepared describing these findings and PHMC-BHP concurred in a letter dated December 19, 2014 (Appendix C).
Socioeconomics, including employment, occupation, income changes, tax base, infrastructure
The replacement lands currently exist as vacant wooded parcels that that have an assessed land value for use in determining county and local municipal taxes. However, the property is currently owned by the PTC, and as a state agency it is exempt from state and local taxes.
Energy resources (geothermal, fossil fuels, etc.)
Similar to the adjacent HRSP, the replacement lands have no mineral resources worth mining on a large scale: however the wooded lots do have the opportunity to be harvested for timber.
Land/structures with history of contamination/hazardous materials (even if remediated)
A Phase I ESA investigation was conducted for the replacement lands. The investigation followed the PennDOT guidelines (Publication 281, The Transportation Project Development Process, Waste Site Evaluation, Volumes I and II, PennDOT Bureau of Environmental Quality, (2010). PennDOT’s procedures follow ASTM standards and meet
Draft Environmental Assessment Page | 20
Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
federal and state laws and regulations related to and/or governing the assessment of environmental impacts, waste investigations, and hazardous substances.
The investigation consisted of a records search, historical resource review and site inspection. The records search concluded that no mapped sites were found in the search of available ("reasonably ascertainable") government records either on the replacement lands or within the 1 mile search radius.
Based upon the review of the historic aerial photos and topographic maps, the site has existed largely as undeveloped wooded land throughout the review timeframe. The only areas subject to development have been associated with land clearing for an adjacent utility corridor outside of the replacement land, which carries an underground petroleum pipeline and overhead electric line. Land clearing of the corridor was completed between 1943 and 1951 for the petroleum pipeline and then between 1965 and 1970 for the overhead electric line.
Site reconnaissance surveys of the replacement lands were conducted on June 11 and August 14, 2014. There were no building structures identified within the parcels.
Based on the results of the background review and the field investigations, there are no issues identified on-site that represent a current or past sensitive waste issue.
Draft Environmental Assessment Page | 21
Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
4.0 Environmental Impact
The proposed action (preferred alternative; see Section 2.2.2.) will involve converting federal protection of approximately 30.6 acres of HRSP to 38.0 acres of land adjacent to HRSP. The park land to be converted is currently under federal protection through the NPS LWCF as well as the FLP Program. As specified by Section 6(f)(3) of the LWCF Act, the acquisition of park land for transportation use and the TCE, which allows for a temporary non-recreational use for more than six months duration, are both considered conversions of the Section 6(f) protected park land. The total park land that is proposed to be converted from Section 6(f) is 30.6 acres. This same park land is also subject to the restrictions of the FLP Program; however, this program does not consider the TCE to be a conversion. The total park land that is proposed to be converted from FLP is 14.3 acres. The assessment of impacts below describes the larger conversion area based on the Section 6(f)(3) interpretation. The conversion of land protected by the FLP is a lesser amount, and associated impacts to resources would be proportionally less, for purposes of this NEPA evaluation.
The following section of this document will address the environmental impact associated with the loss of the proposed conversion lands from the HRSP as well as the incorporation of the proposed replacement lands into HRSP. In this section, each environmental resource was analyzed in regard to the activities involved with the project and a level of impact was determined. Each resource received one of the following levels of impact: not applicable, no/negligible impact, minor impact, or impacts exceed minor.
4.1 Hickory Run State Park
Geological resources: soils, bedrock, slopes, streambeds, landforms, etc.
The proposed removal of the conversion land from HRSP will have no impact to geological resources. The conversion lands do not contain, nor are directly associated with Boulder Field, the unique geologic resource identified within the park.
Air quality
The area of land to be converted does not include land uses or activities that contribute significantly to the air quality environment. It is anticipated the conversion of the land will not impact air quality.
Sound (noise impacts)
No noise impacts are predicted for HRSP as a result of the proposed parkland conversion. Future 2040 noise levels are predicted to increase by a total of 2 to 3 dB(A) over existing conditions to a range of 45 to 60 dB(A). These levels are less than the noise abatement criteria of 66 dB(A), and the increase is less than 10 dB(A), therefore no noise impacts are predicted. Noise levels are reflective of a park environment and the noise levels in the vicinity of Hawk Falls are dominated by the sound of the waterfall. Since no impacts were identified, noise abatement consideration is not warranted.
Draft Environmental Assessment Page | 22
Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
Water quality/quantity
Mud Run flows for approximately 265 linear feet through the conversion area and is listed as HQ-CWF. The proposed conversion of the land would not alter the water chemistry or biological characteristics of the water that contribute to the high water quality of the stream; therefore, no significant impact to water quality or quantity is anticipated.
Stream flow characteristics
The conversion of the land from HRSP will not alter the existing stream flow characteristics of Mud Run, including such features as drainage area, gradient, profile and planform, and substrate; therefore, there are no anticipated impacts to the stream flow characteristics of Mud Run as a result of the conversion.
Floodplains/wetlands
The proposed conversion includes two areas of wetland (Wetlands W1 and W5A). In itself, the conversion of the land would not negatively impact the wetlands. The proposed conversion would not alter the existing floodplain of Mud Run, which is located in a FEMA designated Zone A flood hazard area; therefore, there are no anticipated impacts to floodplains associated with the conversion.
Land use/ownership patterns; property values; community livability
The proposed conversion of land would include the removal of approximately 14.3 acres of land currently under the ownership of HRSP, which is classified as public land and used for passive public recreation, and therefore is largely detached from future development, land use, and property value changes in the area; therefore, no impact is anticipated. An additional 16.3 acres will be removed from the Section 6(f) boundary but will remain part of HRSP following the temporary use for construction access.
Circulation, transportation
A portion of S.R. 534, a state-maintained roadway, is adjacent to a portion of HRSP to be converted. The proposed conversion of land will not alter the current use and operation of S.R. 534, or change the state-maintained status of the roadway. There are no other access points to HRSP that are provided by the conversion lands; therefore, no impact to circulation and transportation is anticipated.
Rare, threatened and endangered species
Based on the results of the botanical survey and the location of the confirmed population outside the park conversion area, there are no anticipated impacts to the screw-stem population as a result of the proposed conversion. In a letter dated December 13, 2016 (Appendix C), PADCNR concurred that the screw-stem population is outside of the proposed park conversion limits, and the use of protective fence will prevent any possible damage from future construction.
Draft Environmental Assessment Page | 23
Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
No other rare, threatened or endangered species are known to occur in the area of HRSP to be converted, and no impact to species of concern is anticipated.
Unique ecosystems
The proposed parkland conversion will include approximately 24.5 acres within the Mud Run Natural Area. Conversion of this land will remove less than 2 percent of this natural area from the Section 6(f) boundary. The 16.3 acres converted due to temporary use will continue to be state park land and will be managed and protected as part of the state park system. I-476 already bisects the Mud Run Natural Area, and the area to be converted is immediately adjacent to this existing intrusion. The presence of a slightly wider transportation corridor through the natural area is expected to have a minimal effect on the remaining 1,270 acres of the natural area.
The State Park Natural Area Policy (7 Pa. Code §128.102) allows, through Natural Area designation, for outstanding, unique, or sensitive resources such as Mud Run to be set aside for protection to ensure their continued quality for future generations.
The permanent removal of 9.7 acres of land from the Mud Run Natural Area requires a statement of justification, determination of appropriateness and a 30-day public comment period prior to the approval of the Secretary of PADCNR. An additional 16.3 acres will be used for temporary access and remain within the Natural Area boundary.
Unique or important wildlife/wildlife habitat
The proposed conversion of approximately 30.6 acres of HRSP will not result in any significant impacts to wildlife and their habitats. The proposed area of land to be converted is small compared to the size of the whole park and will not result in a significant loss of habitat for any wildlife species. There are no unique or important wildlife habitats within the area to be converted.
Unique or important fish/habitat
The conversion of parkland will remove approximately 14.3 acres of land within the watersheds of Mud Run and Hawk Run from the management and protection of the state park system and remove 50 linear feet of fishable streams from the recreational resources of the park. An additional 215 linear feet of Mud Run will be removed from Section 6(f) but will remain within the park boundaries. The proposed conversion would not impact the stream’s ability to function as a natural trout water or change the designation as a Class A Wild Trout Water by the PFBC, and recreational uses of the stream would be maintained; therefore, there is no anticipated impact to unique or important fish habitat. The temporary use of an additional 16.3 acres for construction access will also not impact the stream’s ability to function as a natural trout water or change the designation. Access to this reach of the waterway will be open to public fishing following its temporary use for construction access.
Draft Environmental Assessment Page | 24
Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
Introduce or promote invasive species (plant or animal)
The conversion area does include a small area of an invasive plant species, common reed (Phragmites australis), which would be removed from HRSP. The proposed land conversion would not introduce or promote invasive species to the park. Furthermore, the PTC is coordinating with PADCNR on a management plan to eradicate the common reed from the conversion area to prohibit propagation of the species in the area. The spread of invasive species will be minimized by limiting the area of disturbance within the TCE during construction of the new bridge and demolition of the existing bridge. At the completion of the project, revegetation of the TCE will specify the use of native seed mixes and plant materials.
Recreation resources, land, parks, open space, conservation areas, recreational trails, facilities, services, opportunities, public access, etc.
The proposed conversion of land would permanently remove approximately 14.3 acres of public park land from HRSP and 30.6 acres from the Section 6(f) boundary. The land surrounding the existing bridge over Mud Run is very steep, with no park designated trails or access points, and therefore is typically not utilized by park visitors (Photographs 1-2, Appendix B). The recreational use of the land that is being converted is primarily passive, including hunting and fishing. The area to be converted consists of wooded land which is generally managed as a natural area and inaccessible to the public, with the exception of 0.5 acres of open field areas in the vicinity of S.R. 534 and 265 feet of the Mud Run stream corridor which are accessible by foot. There are no identified trails or facilities within the area to be converted.
There will be no adverse impacts to recreation in the park. The remaining parkland will continue in recreational use and be fully accessible to the public for swimming, boating, fishing, hiking, picnicking, and all other current recreational uses. The land to be converted represents less than 0.1 percent of the 15,990-acre park and is within a designated natural area that is managed to have limited human alteration. The majority of recreational facilities in the park are located approximately 5 miles to the west along S.R. 0534.
Overall aesthetics, special characteristics/features There are no special characteristics or aesthetic features present within the portion of HRSP to be converted. Hawk Falls and Hawk Falls trail are located approximately 300 feet to the east of the parkland to be converted and will not be affected by the parkland conversion. The proposed land conversion would have no adverse effects on the overall aesthetics of the area or nearby special characteristics or features.
Historical/cultural resources, including landscapes, ethnographic, archeological, structures, etc.
The proposed park conversion has the potential to affect one National Register (NR) eligible historic resource, the HRSP/RDA. The National Register boundary includes approximately 15,990 acres, which includes all of the original RDA conveyed to and established by the NPS in 1935 (A.D. Marble & Company 2014d). The historic resource includes approximately 115 contributing buildings, as well as numerous dams, bridges, and other associated features, including hiking trails, picnic areas, and fire rings
Draft Environmental Assessment Page | 25
Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
constructed between 1936 and 1945. The historic resource excludes approximately 12 resources that are considered non-contributing due to their construction date outside of the period of significance. Conversion of approximately 30.6 acres of the NR eligible resource represents less than 0.1 percent of the resource. No built features and no contributing resources are present within the land to be converted and the conversion will not diminish the resource’s integrity.
Under the direction of 36 CFR 800.4 and 800.5, the Definition of Effect and Criteria of Adverse Effect were applied to this undertaking. This analysis resulted in a recommendation that the proposed land conversion will have No Adverse Effect on the HRSP/RDA because the integrity of this resource’s significant features will be retained. A Determination of Effects Report was prepared and submitted to the PHMC-BHP. PHMC- BHP concurred with this recommendation in a letter dated September 6, 2016 (Appendix C).
Socioeconomics, including employment, occupation, income changes, tax base, infrastructure
The proposed conversion of the land by itself would not impact socioeconomics of the area, as the existing lands are undeveloped state-owned lands that would be transferred to another state agency or used for temporary construction access.
Energy resources (geothermal, fossil fuels, etc.)
The proposed land conversion would not impact the existing use or utilization of energy resources in the area.
Land/structures with history of contamination/hazardous materials (even if remediated)
The proposed conversion lands do not include areas that represent a current or past sensitive waste issue; therefore, no impact is anticipated to land or structures with a history of contamination or hazardous materials.
4.2 Replacement Lands
Geological resources: soils, bedrock, slopes, streambeds, landforms, etc.
The transfer of the park replacement parcels to PADCNR will have no impact on geologic resources. The replacement lands offer similar geological resources to the adjacent HRSP lands; therefore, there is no impact anticipated.
Air quality
The transfer of the replacement parkland will have no impact on air quality. Air quality would not be impacted by the proposed incorporation of replacement lands into HRSP.
Draft Environmental Assessment Page | 26
Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
Sound (noise impacts)
Noise impacts are not anticipated from the incorporation of replacement lands into HRSP.
Land use/ownership patterns; property values; community livability
The replacement lands will provide additional open space protection and recreational opportunities that will add to the existing park inventory. The addition of this parcel to HRSP will not affect jobs, income, or result in a need for additional infrastructure. The parcel was previously in private ownership; therefore, public ownership will cause a loss of property value from the local tax base. This impact may be offset somewhat by the benefits to surrounding property values that come from the preservation of nearby open space.
Circulation, transportation
There are no proposed alterations or improvements to the replacement lands (e.g., parking lots or park access roads); therefore, existing circulation and transportation characteristics will not be altered as a result of the inclusion of the replacement lands in HRSP. Old Stage Road would not see any change in existing traffic volumes or patterns and would not be impacted by the conversion.
Rare, threatened and endangered species
DCNR identified variable sedge (Carex polymorpha), a state-listed endangered species, as potentially present on replacement land, and PGC indicated an unidentified species or resource of concern may be present. Each agency determined that due to the nature of the project, no impact is likely and no further coordination is necessary. Copies of this correspondence are include in Appendix C. Transfer of these parcels to the state park system as part of HRSP will allow for management and protection of the habitat and possible population of this species. These parcels had been subdivided for residential development, and the transfer of the land to the park system would protect this land from possible habitat disturbance related to any residential use or development.
Unique ecosystems
The park replacement parcels are located within the Keipers Run Core Habitat Area which is habitat for the variable sedge (Carex polymorpha). Transfer of these parcels to the state park system as part of HRSP will allow for management and protection of the habitat, which is one of the purposes of the PNHP identifying such areas. These parcels had been subdivided for residential development, and the transfer of the land to the park system would protect this land from possible habitat disturbance related to any residential use or development providing further protection for this sensitive ecosystem.
Unique or important wildlife/wildlife habitat
There is no unique or important wildlife/wildlife habitat present on the park replacement parcels; therefore, the transfer of these parcels from the PTC to DCNR will have no impact on important wildlife or wildlife habitat. The replacement parcels contain a red oak-mixed
Draft Environmental Assessment Page | 27
Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
hardwood forest with adequate plant diversity to provide food and cover for wildlife. The replacement lands are contiguous with the existing Hickory Run Park System and would further expand and improve available wildlife habitat within the park.
Introduce or promote invasive species (plant or animal)
There were no significant populations of invasive species noted on the replacement lands; therefore, it is not anticipated that the addition of the replacement lands into HRSP would introduce or promote invasive species.
Recreation resources, land, parks, open space, conservation areas, recreational trails, facilities, services, opportunities, public access, etc.
The replacement lands currently exist as parcels of undeveloped wooded land. The replacement lands contain an informal trail system at present consisting of small, unmarked paths that connect to undesignated paths or trails on HRSP property (see Figure 5, Appendix A). The trails and land will provide for the potential use of the replacement lands for hiking or other public recreational opportunities. Inclusion of the lands in the HRSP system would provide additional land for hunting, hiking, and other passive recreational activities. Management objectives for the conversion area focus on maintaining the natural condition and maintaining ecological values with minimal human intervention. The proposed replacement land would also be suitable for meeting these management objectives.
Overall aesthetics, special characteristics/features
There are no special characteristics or aesthetic features present within the replacement parkland. The site is a wooded lot with aesthetic value consistent with other portions of the park. The addition of the replacement lands to the park will have the added benefit of buffering portions of the park along Old Stage Road from residential development that has occurred in the area.
Historical/cultural resources, including landscapes, ethnographic, archeological, structures, etc.
No historic architectural properties are located in or adjacent to the park replacement parcels, and the proposed transfer of land to HRSP will have no effect on the National Register-eligible HRSP/RDA. As a result, no additional historic architectural investigations are warranted.
No ground disturbance is proposed to occur in either replacement parcel as a result of the parkland transfer, and therefore, no archaeological Phase I identification-level investigation fieldwork is warranted. However, if ground disturbance is to occur in the parcels in the future, Phase I investigation would be warranted.
Draft Environmental Assessment Page | 28
Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
Socioeconomics, including employment, occupation, income changes, tax base, infrastructure
The addition of the replacement land to HRSP will not affect jobs or income or result in a need for additional infrastructure. As previously noted, there will be a loss of taxable property to the tax base. This impact may be offset by the benefits to surrounding property values that come from the preservation of nearby open space. Overall, it is expected that socioeconomic impacts will be negligible.
Energy resources (geothermal, fossil fuels, etc.)
The replacement lands will be used for passive recreation and will not use any additional energy resources, and would not alter the existing use or utilization of energy resources in the area. No impact to energy resources is anticipated.
Land/structures with history of contamination/hazardous materials (even if remediated)
The proposed replacement lands do not include areas that represent a current or past sensitive waste issue; therefore no impact is anticipated to land or structures with a history of contamination or hazardous materials.
Draft Environmental Assessment Page | 29
Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
5.0 Conclusion
The 38.0-acre parcel in Penn Forest Township, Carbon County is proposed as the substitution parcel for the conversion of Section 6(f) protection of approximately 30.6 acres of HRSP. Of this 30.6 acres, only 14.3 acres are also subject to the conversion policy of the FLP Program. The remaining 16.3 acres will be used temporarily for construction access and work areas, and following construction will continue to be part of HRSP and subject to FLP protections. The land to be converted represents less than 0.1 percent of the 15,990-acre park. The requirements of Federal Lands to Parks and the LWCF policy will ensure that, while the recreational experience and resources of the conversion and substitution parcels may differ, the proposed substitute parcel is of equal or greater value than the conversion lands and has comparable recreational value and therefore meets the requirements of the NPS policy. The remaining land at HRSP will continue to be a highly viable recreational resource. The substitution will have no impact on recreational uses at HRSP.
Draft Environmental Assessment Page | 30
Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
6.0 Coordination and Consultation
6.1 Agency Consultation
The following agencies were contacted for information on resources within the HRSP or within the Replacement Lands. Copies of agency correspondence is included in Appendix C.
Hickory Run State Park PA Department of Conservation and Natural Resources PA Historical and Museum Commission U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service PA Fish & Boat Commission PA Game Commission PA Department of Environmental Protection U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
6.2 Public Outreach
The public has the opportunity to comment on the conversion and replacement land through a review of this Draft Environmental Assessment (EA). The Draft EA will be available for review at the Hickory Run State Park Office and on the PTC project website: https://www.patpconstruction.com/mpA89/.
Interested stakeholders will have the opportunity to request a public meeting during the comment period. All comments received during the public comment period will be addressed in the Final EA.
6.3 Agency Meetings
The PTC and project team met with representatives from the PADCNR and HRSP throughout the development of the land conversion proposal. The purpose of the meetings was to present information on bridge alternatives, potential impacts to the park, review various alternative replacement lands, and to obtain feedback from PADCNR and HRSP on the construction access. The following is a breakdown of the meetings held on the project to date:
October 9, 2012 - HRSP: Project introductory meeting with HRSP. January 28, 2013 – PADCNR/HRSP: Review the roadway alignments under consideration. April 8, 2013 – PADCNR/HRSP: Continue ongoing coordination and communication. To review modifications to alignments under consideration. June 7, 2013 – PADCNR: To review requirements for the FLP Program and to review a list of replacement lands of interest.
Draft Environmental Assessment Page | 31
Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
May 16, 2014 – PADCNR/HRSP: Project update on bridge design, replacement lands, and construction access roads. February 6, 2015 – PADCNR/HRSP: Project update on bridge design and construction access roads. March 8, 2016 – PADCNR/HRSP: Project update on bridge design and construction access roads. June 14, 2016 - PADCNR/HRSP: Project update for Secretary Dunn. March 10, 2017 – PADCNR: Project update and new LWCA requirements.
The project team also met with the PHMC in February 2014, October 2015, and February 2017. The purpose of the February 2014 meeting was to initiate consultation with PHMC for the replacement of the PTC Hawk Falls Bridge and to discuss the level of documentation required for resources within the proposed Area of Potential Effects (APE). The purpose of the October 2015 meeting was to present the rehabilitation study and obtain agency feedback. The purpose of the February 2017 meeting was to discuss mitigation of the adverse effect to the Hawk Falls Bridge with the USACE cultural resources specialist.
The project team met with the PA Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP) and the Carbon County Conservation District in March 2015 for a Pre-Application Meeting. The team met with the PADEP and the USACE for the Jurisdictional Determination field view in April 2015 and for a pre-application meeting in January 2017.
Draft Environmental Assessment Page | 32
Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
7.0 References
A.D. Marble & Company. 2014a. Botanical Survey Report Hawk Falls Bridge NB-610 MP A88.59. A.D. Marble & Company, Conshohocken, Pennsylvania.
A.D. Marble and Company. 2014b. Hawk Falls Bridge Replacement, NB-610, Milepost A-88.59 Traffic Noise Screen Analysis. A.D. Marble & Company, Conshohocken, Pennsylvania.
A.D. Marble & Company. 2014c. Phase IA Archaeological Survey Report Hawk Falls Bridge NB-610, MP A88.59. A.D. Marble & Company, Conshohocken, Pennsylvania.
A.D. Marble & Company. 2014d. Historic Resources Survey Form for Hickory Run Recreational Demonstration Area (RDA). On file at the PHMC, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.
A.D. Marble & Company. 2014e. Cultural Resources Reconnaissance Report Hawk Falls Bridge Hickory Run State Park Replacement Parcels 22-51A-3.08 and 22B-51A-15A. A.D. Marble & Company, Conshohocken, Pennsylvania.
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The Pennsylvania Code. Chapter 93. Retrieved from internet [29- May-14]. http://www.pacode.com/secure/data/025/chapter93/s93.9c.html.
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). Revised July 13, 2011. Federal-Aid Policy Guide, Title 23, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 772. FHWA, Washington, D.C.
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). Revised December 2013. Highway Traffic Noise: Analysis and Abatement Guidance. FHWA, Washington, D.C.
Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2012. Digital Flood Insurance Rate Map Database, Pennsylvania - various layers clipped to counties. Resource files requested from FEMA Map Service Center. Data CD; created on March 5, 2012.
Lotus Environmental Consulting, LLC. 2015a. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment. Pennsylvania Turnpike I-476 (I-476); Hawk Falls Bridge Replacement Project; Penn Forest Township and Kidder Township; Carbon County, Pennsylvania. Lotus Environmental Consulting, LLC, Conshohocken, Pennsylvania.
Lotus Environmental Consulting, LLC. 2015b. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment. Pennsylvania Turnpike I-476 (I-476); Hawk Falls Bridge Replacement Project; Replacement Parcels (Former Sywensky & Jackson Property); Penn Forest Township; Carbon County, Pennsylvania. Lotus Environmental Consulting, LLC, Conshohocken, Pennsylvania.
Lotus Environmental Consulting, LLC. 2015c. Wetland Identification and Delineation Report. Pennsylvania Turnpike I-476 (I-476); Hawk Falls Bridge Replacement Project; Penn Forest Township and Kidder Township; Carbon County, Pennsylvania. Lotus Environmental Consulting, LLC, Conshohocken, Pennsylvania.
Draft Environmental Assessment Page | 33
Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
Modjeski and Masters, Inc., et.al. 2013. Hawk Falls Bridge; Alignment Study Report. Modjeski and Masters, Inc. Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania.
Nature Conservancy. 2005. A Natural Areas Inventory of Carbon County, Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Natural Heritage Program (PNHP). Retrieved from internet [Mar. 2015]. http://www.naturalheritage.state.pa.us/CNHI.aspx
Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources. 2015. Boulder Field at Hickory Run State Park. Print.
Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources. 2003. Hickory Run State Park Resource Management Plan. PADCNR, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.
Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources. 2009. DCNR State Parks 201109. GIS Data. Retrieved from internet [14-May-12]; http://www.pasda.psu.edu/uci/MetadataDisplay.aspx?entry=PASDA&file=DCNR_StateParks2011 09.xml&dataset=114.
Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources. 2015a. Landforms of Pennsylvania. From Map 13, Physiographic Provinces of Pennsylvania. Retrieved from internet. [Mar. 2015]. http://www.dcnr.state.pa.us/topogeo/field/map13/index.htm
Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources. 2015b. 30 Outstanding Geologic Features. Retrieved from internet. [Mar. 2015]. http://maps.dcnr.pa.gov/storymaps/geologic.html.
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection. 2004. Historic Streams. GIS Data. Retrieved from internet [18-Feb-12]. http://www.pasda.psu.edu/uci/MetadataDisplay.aspx?entry=PASDA&file=HistoricStreams2004.x ml&dataset=1233.
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection. 2015. Attainment Status by Principal Pollutants. Retrieved from internet. [31 Mar. 2015]. http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/community/regulations_and_clean_air_plans/218 27/attainment_status/1830776.
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP). 2009. eMap PA. http://www.emappa.dep.state.pa.us/emappa/viewer.htm, Retrieved from internet. [March 2015].
Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT). 2013. Project Level Highway Traffic Noise Handbook, Publication No. 24. PennDOT, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.
Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission. 2015a. Northeast Region - Regulated Trout Waters. Retrieved from internet [29-July-15]; http://fishandboat.com/fishpub/summary/troutregs_ne.htm
Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission. 2015b. Pennsylvania Wild Trout Waters (Natural Reproduction) - May 2015. Retrieved from internet [29-July-15]; http://fishandboat.com/trout_repro.pdf
Draft Environmental Assessment Page | 34
Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission. 2008. Cultural Resource Management in Pennsylvania: Guidelines for Archaeological Investigations. Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (USDA-NRCS). 2009. Web Soil Survey. http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/HomePage.htm. Retrieved from internet. [March 2015].
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). Duncannon Member or Catskill Formation. 2001. Mineral Resources On-line Spatial Data. http://mrdata.usgs.gov/geology/state/sgmc- unit.php?unit=PADcd;17
Draft Environmental Assessment Page | 35
Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
8.0 LIST OF PREPARERS
Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources o Jeffrey Johns
Lotus Environmental Consulting, LLC o Katherine M. Farrow o J. Benjamin Reiman o Andrea Finn o Connor Sullivan
A.D. Marble o Sharon Yates o Emily Hesch o Michael Marra
Modjeski & Masters – Structural Design o Thomas P. Murphy, P.E. o Daniel E. McCaffrey, P.E.
Alfred Benesch & Company – Roadway Design, Stormwater Design o Brian W. Baldwin, P.E.
Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission o Bernard J. Zielinski, P.E. o Carl Brudin III o Dave Willis
Draft Environmental Assessment Page | 36
Appendix A Figures
Legend Hickory Run State Park Boundary (2016) ± Hickory Run State Park
Conversion Area
Replacement Lands DocumentName: fig_HawkFalls Br_EA FIGURE 1_rev_cjs Source Layer: Hickory Run, Blakeslee, Christmans, and Pohopoco Mountain Quadrangle Maps, Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed
New York Figure 1 - Project Location Map Hickory Run State Park Conversion Project Location Carbon County, Pennsylvania
Pennsylvania Ohio
SCALE: 1 inch = 4,000 feet DATE: May 2017
New Jersey PREPARED BY: Lotus Environmental Consulting, LLC Maryland West Virginia PREPARED FOR: PA Dept. of Conservation and Natural Resources n u R l il M le ing Sh 115 «¬ Legend
940 Hickory Run State Park «¬ I-80 ¨¦§ Section 6(f) Land Only Hickory Run State Park Federal Lands to Parks Boundary (1951) and Section 6(f) Land Section 6(f) Conversion Area
n Fourth Ru PA Turnpike n u R ty n a Interstates h S State Routes Local Roads
B
l a Hickory Run State Park c k Surface Waters
C
r e Ir e ish k town Run
New York
n Ru g rin L d Sp a San u r
n e l Project Location u R
R u S
n w o 76 k I-4 a i w m h
a p R O Pennsylvania ¨¦§ H u n
un y ulds R e o s G r
e
J
534 w e n Section 6(f) Conversion Area «¬ N Ru West Virgi Maryland ory nia ck Hi Key Map Scale: 1 inch = 125 miles
Mud Run
Coordinate System: NAD83 Pennsylvania South W K e o Projection: Lambert Conformal Conic ip l e f rs Datum: North American 1983 R R un u n P Ê a n th e r
C
r 0 4,000 8,000 e e k Feet _ 2 r e v _ s j c _ v e r _ 2
E Figure 2: Hickory Run State Park Boundary R U G I F
A Hickory Run State Park Conversion E _ r Carbon County, Pennsylvania B s l l a k 903 F e Cre k kes «¬ w Dra a H _ H g i f e SCALE: 1 inch = 4000 feet DATE: May 2017 : l e l
C m a
r
N e t e PREPARED BY: Lotus Environmental Consulting, LLC n k e m u c o Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA PREPARED FOR: PA Dept. of Conservation and Natural Resources D Great Valley/ Route 29 Multimodal Study ±
n
u
R
d u M
¨¦§476 «¬534
Run awk 81 To H 041 Trib
¨¦§476
d Run Mu Hawk Falls H Trail Hawk a wk Falls Run k Panther Cree
MudRun
Hawk Run
1,000 500 0 1,000 Feet
Source Data: New York Legend DCNR State Parks 201109. Pennsylvania. Dept. of Figure 3 Conservation and Natural Resources. Bureau of State Parks. Surface Waters Property Line Conversion Area 2011. Project Location Streams Historic. Pennsylvania Department of Wetlands Proposed Required Right-of-Way Hickory Run State Park Conversion Environmental Protection. 2004. Carbon County, Pennsylvania Pennsylvania Hickory Run State Park Trails Proposed Construction Easement Ohio
Coordinate System: NAD 1983 NSRS2007 StatePlane New Jersey Pennsylvania North FIPS 3701 Ft US Hickory Run State Park Projection: Lambert Conformal Conic Conversion Area SCALE: 1 inch = 500 feet DATE: May 2017 Datum: NAD 1983 NSRS2007 Gravel Parking (PA DCNR) PREPARED BY: Lotus Environmental Consulting, LLC West Virginia Maryland PREPARED FOR: PA Dept. of Conservation and Natural Resources
Key Map Scale: 1 inch = 125 miles DocumentName: fig_HawkFalls Br_EA FIGURE 3_rev_cjs Great Valley/ Route 29 Multimodal Study
Mud Run
± Matchline
SWM Basin
SWM Basin
!
! ! ! !
¨¦§476 !
! 2 5 ! 4
3
! ! 1 SWM Wetland Basin W1
aw H k Run
Run Mud
P an t Matchline he Hawk r C r e Falls e k
Mud Run
Source Data: New York Legend DCNR State Parks 201109. Pennsylvania. Dept. of Figure 4 - Plate 1 of 2 Conservation and Natural Resources. Bureau of State Parks. Surface Waters Proposed Bridge Structure Proposed Bridge Alignment 2011. Project Location Streams Historic. Pennsylvania Department of Wetlands Proposed Design Hickory Run State Park Conversion Environmental Protection. 2004. Pennsylvania Hickory Run State Park Trails Property Line Carbon County, Pennsylvania
Ohio Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane New Jersey Hickory Run State Park Proposed Construction Easement Pennsylvania North FIPS 3701 Feet Projection: Lambert Conformal Conic SCALE: 1 inch = 250 feet DATE: May 2017 Datum: North American 1983 Gravel Parking (PA DCNR) Proposed Required Right-of-Way PREPARED BY: Lotus Environmental Consulting, LLC Maryland West Virginia ! Photo Location PREPARED FOR: PA Dept. of Conservation and Natural Resources Key Map Scale: 1 inch = 125 miles Great Valley/ Route 29 Multimodal Study
± Matchline
¨¦§476
534
! ! «¬
8
! ! !
! un k R 6 9 Haw
SWM Basin 4181 To
! 0 ! Trib SWM Basin 10
SWM Basin
! !
Wetland
W5A ! ! 7
Wetland W5
Hawk Falls Trail Hawk Matchline H Falls a w k Run
Hawk Run
Source Data: New York Legend DCNR State Parks 201109. Pennsylvania. Dept. of Figure 4 - Plate 2 of 2 Conservation and Natural Resources. Bureau of State Parks. Surface Waters Proposed Bridge Structure Proposed Bridge Alignment 2011. Project Location Streams Historic. Pennsylvania Department of Wetlands Proposed Design Hickory Run State Park Conversion Environmental Protection. 2004. Pennsylvania Hickory Run State Park Trails Property Line Carbon County, Pennsylvania
Ohio Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane New Jersey Hickory Run State Park Proposed Construction Easement Pennsylvania North FIPS 3701 Feet Projection: Lambert Conformal Conic SCALE: 1 inch = 250 feet DATE: May 2017 Datum: North American 1983 Gravel Parking (PA DCNR) Proposed Required Right-of-Way PREPARED BY: Lotus Environmental Consulting, LLC Maryland West Virginia ! Photo Location PREPARED FOR: PA Dept. of Conservation and Natural Resources Key Map Scale: 1 inch = 125 miles Great Valley/ Route 29 Multimodal Study 1650 Legend 1 1 65 1650 6 0 6 0 1660 1660 Replacement Land Boundary Frost Ln Hickory Run State Park 1620 S Old Stage Rd Kipling Ln Pound Ln 1660 Surface Waters PA-903 1680 Spencer Ln 1680 1670 Wetlands 0 5 9 1680 1 1680 1680 Freshwater Pond Trail 1630 Continues FEMA 100 YR Floodplain 1680 1 67 0 PNHP Natural Areas Bryant Gln Small Trail (2 ft wide) 1680 1680
1 1680 5 7 1680 Wide Trail (4 ft wide)
0 1680
15 8 0 1590 ! Photo Location Land Cover Key
Key Gln Classification: 1690 Red oak - mixed hardwood forest 1620 1690
1630
1 6 1690
1
Thomas Ln 1680
0 0
4 6 1 Wilde Gln !12 !11 Utility Corridor 1 6 90 1690 Keats Ln !15 Scott Ln 1680
1550 16 6 0 1560 476 1690 ¨¦§
1680 1 1690 Carmen Gln 6 9 0 0 !14 3 ! 5 1670 Key Map Scale: 1 inch = 2 miles 1 Hickory Run State Park 1650
1680 Keipers Run Natural Area 1690
1600 Coordinate System: NAD83 Pennsylvania South 1540 1630 Projection: Lambert Conformal Conic 1520 Datum: North American 1983 1510 Surrey Gln 1 !13 6 90 9 0 Ê 1560 1530 1650 6 1580 Trail 1 1570 1540 Continues 15 9 1550 0 400 800 0 159 0 1 1 1620 1680 5 1 56 1620 1630 0 Feet 30 5 0 169 40 15 50
0 0 1590 17 Keipers Run 158 0 Figure 5: Replacement Land and 1680 1600 Revised Section 6(f) Boundary 1570 0 0 7 8 6 Hickory Run State Park Conversion 6
1 1 1700 1640 Carbon County, Pennsylvania
1610 1 SCALE: 1 inch = 400 feet DATE: March 2017 630
50 PREPARED BY: Lotus Environmental Consulting, LLC 16
McKuen Trl 20 0 Utility Corridor 1 6 6 16 PREPARED FOR: PA Dept. of Conservation and Natural Resources DocumentName: fig_HawkFalls Br_EA FIGURE 5_rev_cjs Great Valley/ Route 29 Multimodal Study
Appendix B Photographs
Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
Photograph 1 – View looking southwest at I-476 (Hawk Falls Bridge) over Mud Run in Hickory Run State Park.
Photograph 2 – View looking north at the I-476 (Hawk Falls Bridge) from the east side of the bridge. Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
Photograph 3 – View looking northeast at adjacent lands within Hickory Run State Park that are proposed for conversion. The area is a fomerly disturbed parcel.
Photograph 4 – View looking northeast from the I-476 right-of-way at a forest along the southern approach to the bridge. Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
Photograph 5 – View looking north from a point just north of the existing Hawk Falls Bridge. The wooded land pictured to the right is within the proposed conversion area.
Photograph 6 – View looking northwest across an open field portion of Hickory Run State Park that is included in the conversion. Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
Photograph 7 – View looking west toward the S.R. 534 Bridge and across proposed conversion lands. The area is formerly disturbed land.
Photograph 8 – View looking northeast at the S.R. 534 Bridge from the west side of the bridge. Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
Photograph 9 – View looking northwest across an open field area in the northeast quadrant of the SR 534 Bridge.
Photograph 10 – View looking south along I-476 toward the S.R. 534 Bridge. Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
Photograph 11 – View looking northwest along the roadway of Old Stage Road. The parcel pictured to the left is replacement land for the Hawk Falls Bridge replacement.
Photograph 12 – View looking southwest through a clearing at the center of the proposed replacement lands. Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
Photograph 13 – View looking northeast through the proposed replacement lands at the red oak forest from the western limit of the parcel.
Photograph 14 – View looking northwest at an unmarked trail along the western limit of the parcel. Hickory Run State Park Conversion Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
Photograph 15 – View looking southwest through a clearing at the center of the proposed replacement lands.
Appendix C Coordination and Consultation
Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Coordination
PHMC Coordination – Hickory Run State Park
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission Bureau for Historic Preservation Commonwealth Keystone Building, 2nd Floor 400 North Street Harrisburg, PA 17120-0093
www.phmc.state.pa.us
24 October 2014
Sharon Yates A.D. Marble & Company 375 East Elm Street, Suite 101 Conshohocken, PA 19428
Re: ER 2014-0633-025-C Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission/COE – Hawk Falls Bridge NB- 610, MP A88.59 Carbon County, Pennsylvania Determination of Eligibility: Hickory Run Recreational Demonstration Area (RDA) Feasibility Analysis: Hawk Falls Bridge
Dear Ms. Yates:
Thank you for submitting information concerning the above referenced project. The Bureau for Historic Preservation (the State Historic Preservation Office) reviews projects in accordance with state and federal laws. Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, and the implementing regulations (36 CFR Part 800) of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, is the primary federal legislation. The Environmental Rights amendment, Article 1, Section 27 of the Pennsylvania Constitution and the Pennsylvania History Code, 37 Pa. Cons. Stat. Section 500 et seq. (1988) is the primary state legislation.
Historic Structures We concur that the Hickory Run Recreational Demonstration Area (RDA) is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (National Register) under Criterion A in the areas of Conservation/Recreation, Politics/Government, and Social/Humanitarian and under Criterion C in the area of Architecture. The RDA is representative of federal efforts to construct and improve outdoor recreational facilities across the United States as well as associated with widespread federal relief programs of the New Deal. The RDA retains representative examples of the Rustic architectural style. Future submission will need to consider the effects of the above listed project on the Hickory Run Recreational Demonstration Area (RDA).
We have reviewed the existing bridge evaluation memo provided for the above-listed project. Although not noted in the memo, the Hawk Falls Bridge is eligible for listing in the National Register as a good example of mid-20th century bridge engineering that deviated from the standard design structures used by the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission. As the bridge is eligible for listing in the National Register and the proposed project has the potential to adversely affect the resource, it is necessary to show that consideration has been given to alternatives that avoid or minimize effects to the bridge and its character defining features.
S. Yates Page 2 of 2 ER 2014-0633-025-C
The evaluation of existing bridge memo does not provide a project purpose or need. In addition, although the memo describes the existing bridge and overall cost of rehabilitation, the memo does not provide a detailed alternatives analysis, comparing potential rehabilitation and replacement options, including a cost comparison. The memo states that 120 truss members and 29 floorbeams “require strengthening to support the ultimate cross section”; however, the memo does not detail what strengthening measures would be as well as no supporting data in the form of photographs that show deterioration or plans that show the members of the structure that require repair and/or replacement is provided; therefore the required level of repairs/replacement is unclear. In addition, there is no discussion as to if the bridge could be adequately rehabilitated in a manner that would preserve the character defining features.
Based on the information provided, it appears the bridge could be rehabilitated for the intended use but that rehabilitation is not deemed feasible due to cost. However, sufficient information to substantiate this conclusion is not provided. Supporting documentation to validate the conclusion that rehabilitation of the bridge would be excessively costly in comparison to replacement is not included. Please provide a detailed alternatives analysis, including the above listed information, to our office for review and comment.
While we understand Federal involvement in the project has not yet been determined, if the project requires federal approval in the form of permitting, funding, and/or licensing and is therefore, to be reviewed under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, we would recommend the inclusion of Kitty Henderson of the Historic Bridge Foundation and Nathan Holth of Historic Bridges.org as potential consulting parties for the project. Both organizations have extensive knowledge of historic bridges and actively participate in bridge projects in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
If you need further information concerning historic structures, please contact Barbara Frederick at (717) 772-0921.
Sincerely,
Douglas C. McLearen, Chief Division of Archaeology and Protection
DCM/bcf
C: Nikki Minnichbach, Philadelphia COE
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission Bureau for Historic Preservation Commonwealth Keystone Building, 2nd Floor 400 North Street Harrisburg, PA 17120-0093 www.phmc.state.pa.us
30 November 2015
Ms. Sharon Yates A.D. Marble & Company 375 East Elm Street Conshohocken, PA 19428 RE: ER No. 2014-0633-025-H PTC/COE: Hawk Falls Bridge Project Kidder and Penn Forest Townships, Carbon County Dear Ms. Yates:
Thank you for submitting information concerning the above referenced project. The Bureau for Historic Preservation (the State Historic Preservation Office) reviews projects in accordance with state and federal laws. Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, and the implementing regulations (36 CFR Part 800) of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, is the primary federal legislation. The Environmental Rights amendment, Article 1, Section 27 of the Pennsylvania Constitution and the Pennsylvania History Code, 37 Pa. Cons. Stat. Section 500 et seq. (1988) is the primary state legislation. These laws include consideration of the project's potential effects on both historic and archaeological resources.
Above Ground Resources Thank you and the project team for meeting with our staff on October 2, 2015 to discuss additional information for the above-referenced project as requested in our letter dated June 1, 2015 as well as the additional information subsequently received. As noted in our previous correspondence, the Hawk Falls Bridge is individually eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places, and the proposed project has the potential to adversely affect the resource; therefore, it is necessary to show that consideration has been given to alternatives that avoid or minimize effects to the bridge. Character-defining features of the Hawk Falls Bridge include its location spanning the gorge, the continuous deck surface, trusses (including top and bottom chords, vertical and diagonal members) and the connection between the trusses and the deck surface.
The additional information memo clarifies that the rehabilitation option would necessitate the construction of a new supplementary bridge adjacent to the existing, as the existing bridge cannot be widened to accommodate two-way traffic (eliminating safety conditions) due to strength and geometric limitations. The information also anticipates the lifespan of a rehabilitated or reconstructed bridge would range from 20 to 57 years compared to the 100-year lifespan of a replacement bridge. It is also noted that rehabilitation of a bridge of this size and scale to your knowledge has never been undertaken due to the uncertainties of cost and outcome. Furthermore, the total option costs range from $45 - $65 million (rehabilitation/reconstruction) versus $25.5 million for replacement; however, it is noted that the costs regarding rehabilitation/reconstruction are approximate, as the full extent of deterioration would not be known until work began. Finally, we understand that the existing bridge, even after rehabilitation/reconstruction, would still remain fracture-critical and therefore, would not meet the project purpose and need of eliminating structural and safety conditions as the fracture of any tension member in the truss would result in the collapse of the entire structure.
2014-0633-025-H S. Yates Page 2 of 2
Therefore, based on the additional information provided, it is our opinion that efforts to avoid or minimize effects of the project on the National Register-eligible Hawk Falls Bridge have been considered and in our opinion, the proposed project will have an Adverse Effect on the historic property. However, please provide additional information regarding the anticipated effect of the project on the National Register-eligible Hickory Run Recreational Demonstration Area (RDA), within which the project is located.
We have also reviewed the rendering of the proposed replacement bridge. Conceptually the proposed structure, in our opinion, is appropriate as it minimizes visual intrusions to the surrounding National Register-eligible Hickory Run RDA; however, more information regarding overall effects, such as required right-of-way, approach work, and other project details associated with the proposed design, should be provided to our office for review and consideration.
Finally, we are in receipt of the letter sent to the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation dated November 16, 2015, which details the consulting parties invited to participate in consultation under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. We have no additional organizations or individuals to suggest. Please note, however, that our comments do not preclude consideration of additional consulting party comments under Section 106 for the proposed project.
If you need additional information concerning this review, please contact Emma Diehl at [email protected] or (717) 787-9121.
Sincerely,
Douglas C. McLearen, Chief Division of Archaeology and Protection
DCM/ekd
C: Nicole C. Minnichbach, ACOE
May 9, 2016
Mr. Bernard Zielinksi, P.E. Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission PO Box 67676 Harrisburg, PA 17106-7676
RE: ER 2014-0633-025-L; COE: Hawk Falls Bridge NB 610, Milepost A88.59; Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County; Determination of Effects Report
Dear Mr. Zielinski,
Thank you for submitting information concerning the above referenced project. The Pennsylvania State Historic Preservation Office (PA SHPO) reviews projects in accordance with state and federal laws. Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966, and the implementing regulations (36 CFR Part 800) of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, is the primary federal legislation. The Environmental Rights amendment, Article 1, Section 27 of the Pennsylvania Constitution and the Pennsylvania History Code, 37 Pa. Cons. Stat. Section 500 et seq. (1988) is the primary state legislation. These laws include consideration of the project's potential effects on both historic and archaeological resources.
Above Ground Resources Thank you for providing the Determination of Effects Report for our review and comment. We are requesting additional information to complete our review. Figure 2 (Area of Potential Effects and Historic Resources) illustrates the proposed location of stormwater detention ponds/basins within the National Register-eligible boundary of the Hickory Run State Park/RDA. These features are briefly discussed in Section 10: Minimization and Mitigation; however, the physical introduction of these features and their visibility from the Hawk Falls Trail is not discussed in Section 2: Project Description or Section 8: Application of Determination of Effect and Criteria of Adverse Effect. Please confirm the location of these proposed features within the Hickory Run State Park/RDA. If the proposed locations are correctly illustrated in Figure 2, please assess the effects of the introduction of these new physical elements on the Hickory Run State Park/RDA and visibility from the Hickory Run Trail.
If you need further information concerning this review, please contact Emma Diehl at [email protected] or (717) 787-9121.
Sincerely,
Douglas C. McLearen, Chief Division of Archaeology and Protection
C: Nicole C. Minnichbach, ACOE
Commonwealth Keystone Building | 400 North Street | 2nd Floor | Harrisburg, PA 17120 | 717.783.8947
September 6, 2016
Ms. Sharon Yates A.D. Marble & Company 375 East Elm Street, Suite 101 Conshohocken, PA 19428
RE: ER 2014-0633-025-M; PTC/COE: Hawk Falls Bridge Project; Kidder and Penn Forest Townshps, Carbon County; Revised Determination of Effect Report
Dear Ms. Yates,
Above Ground Resources Thank you for providing the revised Determination of Effect report (dated July 2016) for our review and comment. Based on the additional information received, we concur with the findings presented therein. The proposed project will have an Adverse Effect on the Hawk Falls Bridge, which is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. To comply with the regulations of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (Advisory Council), the federal agency must follow the procedures outlined in 36 CFR 800.6, when the effect is adverse. The federal agency or those acting on their behalf will need to notify the Advisory Council of the effect finding and continue to consult with the PA SHPO as well as other consulting parties to seek ways to avoid, minimize, and/or mitigate the effects on historic properties.
As noted in our letter of November 30, 2015, the renderings of the proposed replacement bridge in our opinion, is an appropriate treatment as it minimizes visual intrusions to the National Register-eligible Hickory Run RDA. As previously noted, however, our comments should not preclude consideration of additional consulting party comments under Section 106 for the purposed project.
We look forward to continued consultation for the proposed project. For questions or concerns regarding this review and/or for future consultation, please contact Emma Diehl at [email protected] or (717) 787.9121.
Sincerely,
Douglas C. McLearen, Chief Division of Archaeology and Protection
C: Nicole Minnichbach, ACOE Bernard Zielinksi, PTC Carl Brudin, PTA
Commonwealth Keystone Building | 400 North Street | 2nd Floor | Harrisburg, PA 17120 | 717.783.8947
PHMC Coordination – Replacement Parcel
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission Bureau for Historic Preservation Commonwealth Keystone Building, 2nd Floor 400 North Street Harrisburg, PA 17120-0093 www.phmc.state.pa.us
December 19, 2014
A.D. Marble & Company Attn: Sharon Yates 375 East Elm Street, Suite 101 Conshohocken, PA 19428
RE: ER# 2014-0633-025-E PTC/COE: Cultural Resources Reconnaissance Report, Hawk Falls Bridge Project – Hickory Run State Park Replacement Parcels 22-51A-3.08 and 22B-51A-15A, Penn Forest Township, Carbon County
Dear Ms. Yates:
The Bureau for Historic Preservation (the State Historic Preservation Office) reviews projects in accordance with state and federal laws. Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, and the implementing regulations (36 CFR Part 800) of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, is the primary federal legislation. The Environmental Rights amendment, Article 1, Section 27 of the Pennsylvania Constitution and the Pennsylvania History Code, 37 Pa. Cons. Stat. Section 500 et seq. (1988) is the primary state legislation. Our comments are as follows:
Archaeology
The above referenced report indicates there is some potential for archaeological resources to be located within portions of the parcels identified above. We concur with this assessment. It is our understanding that these parcels may be the subject of a land transfer between the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission and the Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources and that no project-related ground disturbing activities are proposed at this time. Based on this, we agree that Phase I archaeological survey is not necessary at this time. If in the future, ground disturbing activities are proposed on the parcels, we concur with the Phase I archaeological testing methodology proposed in the above referenced Cultural Resources Reconnaissance Report.
Historic Structures
The property listed below, which is listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places, is located near the project area. In our opinion, the activity described
Page Two Ms. Yates December 19, 2014
in your proposal will have no effect on this resource. Should the scope and/or nature of the project activities change, please contact our office immediately. We appreciate your cooperation.
Hickory Run State Park
If you have any questions or comments concerning our review for archaeological resources, please contact Mark Shaffer at (717) 783-9900. If you have any questions or comments concerning our review for historic structures, please contact Emma Diehl at (717) 787-9121.
Sincerely,
Douglas C. McLearen, Chief Division of Archaeology and Protection cc: COE, Philadelphia
PNDI Receipts and Coordination – Hickory Run State Park
BUREAU OF FORESTRY
January 15, 2015 PNDI Number: 20140430449049
Abigail Finkenbinder A.D. Marble and Company 3913 Hartzdale Drive, Suite 1302 Camp Hill, PA 17011 Email: [email protected] (hard copy not to follow)
Re: Hawk Falls Bridge NB-610 MP A88.59 Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County
Dear Ms. Finkenbinder,
Thank you for the submission of the Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Inventory (PNDI) Environmental Review Number 20140430449049 for review. PA Department of Conservation and Natural Resources screened this project for potential impacts to species and resources of concern under DCNR’s responsibility, which includes plants, terrestrial invertebrates, natural communities, and geologic features only.
No Impact Anticipated per botanical survey and avoidance to Bartonia paniculata (screwstem) population
PNDI records indicate species or resources under DCNR’s jurisdiction are located in the vicinity of the project. On June 24-26, and September 3-4, 2014, A.D. Marble conducted a botanical survey for target plant species of concern Bartonia paniculata (screwstem), Cuscuta pentagona (field dodder), and Lyonia mariana (stagger-bush). One known population of B. paniculata was re-found, but the population is located outside the limit of disturbance for the project. To further protect the population, the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission (or contractor) will place protective fencing that follows the temporary construction easement line to prevent construction vehicles from entering areas past the easement line where the population of B. paniculata occurs. In addition, the known population of C. pentagona was not found during the survey. Suitable habitat for L. mariana was found within the proposed project, but no individuals of this species were found. No additional current PA Threatened & Endangered or plant species of concern were found within the proposed project area. Therefore, based on the information you submitted concerning the nature of the project, the botanical survey results, the immediate location, and our detailed resource information, DCNR has determined that no impact is likely. No further coordination with our agency is needed for this project.
This response represents the most up-to-date review of the PNDI data files and is valid for two (2) years only. If project plans change or more information on listed or proposed species becomes available, our determination may be reconsidered. Should the proposed work continue beyond the period covered by this letter, please resubmit the project to this agency as an “Update” (including an updated PNDI receipt, project narrative and accurate map). As a reminder, this finding applies to potential impacts under DCNR’s jurisdiction only. Visit the PNHP website for directions on contacting the Commonwealth’s other resource agencies for environmental review.
Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact Frederick Sechler, Jr., Ecological Information Specialist, by phone (717-705-2819) or via email ([email protected]).
Sincerely,
Rebecca H. Bowen, Section Chief Pennsylvania Natural Heritage Program, Bureau of Forestry, Ecological Services Section
conserve sustain enjoy P.O. Box 8552, Harrisburg, PA 17015-8552 717-787-3444 (fax) 717-772-0271
An Equal Opportunity Employer dcnr.state.pa.us Printed on Recycled Paper Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Project Search ID: PNDI-618037 PNDI Receipt: project_receipt_hawk_falls_nb_610_618037_FINAL_2.pdf 1. PROJECT INFORMATION
Project Name: Hawk Falls NB 610 Date of Review: 12/12/2016 11:29:35 AM Project Category: Transportation, Structures and Bridges, Bridge Replacement adjacent to existing alignment (within 100 feet up/down stream) Project Area: 94.68 acres County(s): Carbon Township/Municipality(s): KIDDER; PENN FOREST ZIP Code: 18210; 18229; 18624 Quadrangle Name(s): CHRISTMANS; HICKORY RUN Watersheds HUC 8: Lehigh Watersheds HUC 12: Mud Run Decimal Degrees: 41.005012, -75.635049 Degrees Minutes Seconds: 41° 0' 18.424" N, 75° 38' 6.1747" W
2. SEARCH RESULTS
Agency Results Response PA Game Commission No Known Impact No Further Review Required PA Department of Conservation and Potential Impact FURTHER REVIEW IS REQUIRED, See Natural Resources Agency Response PA Fish and Boat Commission Potential Impact FURTHER REVIEW IS REQUIRED, See Agency Response U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service No Known Impact No Further Review Required
As summarized above, Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Inventory (PNDI) records indicate there may be potential impacts to threatened and endangered and/or special concern species and resources within the project area. If the response above indicates "No Further Review Required" no additional communication with the respective agency is required. If the response is "Further Review Required" or "See Agency Response," refer to the appropriate agency comments below. Please see the DEP Information Section of this receipt if a PA Department of Environmental Protection Permit is required.
Note that regardless of PNDI search results, projects requiring a Chapter 105 DEP individual permit or GP 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 or 11 in certain counties (Adams, Berks, Bucks, Carbon, Chester, Cumberland, Delaware, Lancaster, Lebanon, Lehigh, Monroe, Montgomery, Northampton, Schuylkill and York) must comply with the bog turtle habitat screening requirements of the PASPGP.
Page 1 of 6 Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Project Search ID: PNDI-618037 PNDI Receipt: project_receipt_hawk_falls_nb_610_618037_FINAL_2.pdf
Page 2 of 6 Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Project Search ID: PNDI-618037 PNDI Receipt: project_receipt_hawk_falls_nb_610_618037_FINAL_2.pdf
Page 3 of 6 Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Project Search ID: PNDI-618037 PNDI Receipt: project_receipt_hawk_falls_nb_610_618037_FINAL_2.pdf 3. AGENCY COMMENTS Regardless of whether a DEP permit is necessary for this proposed project, any potential impacts to threatened and endangered species and/or special concern species and resources must be resolved with the appropriate jurisdictional agency. In some cases, a permit or authorization from the jurisdictional agency may be needed if adverse impacts to these species and habitats cannot be avoided.
These agency determinations and responses are valid for two years (from the date of the review), and are based on the project information that was provided, including the exact project location; the project type, description, and features; and any responses to questions that were generated during this search. If any of the following change: 1) project location, 2) project size or configuration, 3) project type, or 4) responses to the questions that were asked during the online review, the results of this review are not valid, and the review must be searched again via the PNDI Environmental Review Tool and resubmitted to the jurisdictional agencies. The PNDI tool is a primary screening tool, and a desktop review may reveal more or fewer impacts than what is listed on this PNDI receipt. The jursidictional agencies strongly advise against conducting surveys for the species listed on the receipt prior to consultation with the agencies.
PA Game Commission RESPONSE: No Impact is anticipated to threatened and endangered species and/or special concern species and resources.
PA Department of Conservation and Natural Resources RESPONSE: Further review of this project is necessary to resolve the potential impact(s). Please send project information to this agency for review (see WHAT TO SEND).
DCNR Species: (Note: The Pennsylvania Conservation Explorer tool is a primary screening tool, and a desktop review may reveal more or fewer species than what is listed below. After desktop review, if a botanical survey is required by DCNR, we recommend the DCNR Botanical Survey Protocols, available here: http://www.gis.dcnr.state.pa.us/hgis- er/PNDI_DCNR.aspx.)
Scientific Name Common Name Current Status Proposed Status Survey Window Bartonia paniculata Screw-stem Special Concern Special Concern flowers August - October Species* Species* Cuscuta cephalanthi Button-bush Dodder Special Concern Threatened fl. June-sept, frt. Jul-Oct Species* Epilobium palustre Marsh Willow-herb Special Concern Special Concern flowers july - september Species* Species*
PA Fish and Boat Commission RESPONSE: Further review of this project is necessary to resolve the potential impact(s). Please send project information to this agency for review (see WHAT TO SEND).
PFBC Species: (Note: The Pennsylvania Conservation Explorer tool is a primary screening tool, and a desktop review may reveal more or fewer species than what is listed below.)
Scientific Name Common Name Current Status Sensitive Species** Endangered
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service RESPONSE:
Page 4 of 6 Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Project Search ID: PNDI-618037 PNDI Receipt: project_receipt_hawk_falls_nb_610_618037_FINAL_2.pdf No impacts to federally listed or proposed species are anticipated. Therefore, no further consultation/coordination under the Endangered Species Act (87 Stat. 884, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq. is required. Because no take of federally listed species is anticipated, none is authorized. This response does not reflect potential Fish and Wildlife Service concerns under the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act or other authorities.
* Special Concern Species or Resource - Plant or animal species classified as rare, tentatively undetermined or candidate as well as other taxa of conservation concern, significant natural communities, special concern populations (plants or animals) and unique geologic features. ** Sensitive Species - Species identified by the jurisdictional agency as collectible, having economic value, or being susceptible to decline as a result of visitation.
WHAT TO SEND TO JURISDICTIONAL AGENCIES
If project information was requested by one or more of the agencies above, upload* or email* the following information to the agency(s). Instructions for uploading project materials can be found here. This option provides the applicant with the convenience of sending project materials to a single location accessible to all three state agencies. Alternatively, applicants may email or mail their project materials (see AGENCY CONTACT INFORMATION). *Note: U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service requires applicants to mail project materials to the USFWS PA field office (see AGENCY CONTACT INFORMATION). USFWS will not accept project materials submitted electronically (by upload or email).
Check-list of Minimum Materials to be submitted: ____Project narrative with a description of the overall project, the work to be performed, current physical characteristics of the site and acreage to be impacted. ____A map with the project boundary and/or a basic site plan(particularly showing the relationship of the project to the physical features such as wetlands, streams, ponds, rock outcrops, etc.) In addition to the materials listed above, USFWS REQUIRES the following ____SIGNED copy of a Final Project Environmental Review Receipt
The inclusion of the following information may expedite the review process. ____Color photos keyed to the basic site plan (i.e. showing on the site plan where and in what direction each photo was taken and the date of the photos) ____Information about the presence and location of wetlands in the project area, and how this was determined (e.g., by a qualified wetlands biologist), if wetlands are present in the project area, provide project plans showing the location of all project features, as well as wetlands and streams.
4. DEP INFORMATION The Pa Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) requires that a signed copy of this receipt, along with any required documentation from jurisdictional agencies concerning resolution of potential impacts, be submitted with applications for permits requiring PNDI review. Two review options are available to permit applicants for handling PNDI coordination in conjunction with DEP’s permit review process involving either T&E Species or species of special concern. Under sequential review, the permit applicant performs a PNDI screening and completes all coordination with the appropriate jurisdictional agencies prior to submitting the permit application. The applicant will include with its application, both a PNDI receipt and/or a clearance letter from the jurisdictional agency if the PNDI Receipt shows a Potential Impact to a species or the applicant chooses to obtain letters directly from the jurisdictional agencies. Under concurrent review, DEP, where feasible, will allow technical review of the permit to occur concurrently with the T&E species consultation with the jurisdictional agency. The applicant must still supply a copy of the PNDI Receipt with its permit application. The PNDI Receipt should also be submitted to the appropriate agency according to directions on the PNDI Receipt. The applicant and the jurisdictional agency will work together to resolve the potential impact(s). See the DEP PNDI policy at https://conservationexplorer.dcnr.pa.gov/content/resources.
Page 5 of 6
BUREAU OF FORESTRY
December 13, 2016 PNDI Number: PNDI-618037
Abigail Koenig A.D. Marble, Inc. 3913 Hartzdale Drive, Suite 1302 Camp Hill, PA 17020 Email: [email protected] (hard copy not to follow)
Re: Hawk Falls NB 610 (update to PNDI # 20140430449049) Penn Forest and Kidder Townships, Carbon County, PA
Dear Ms. Koenig,
Thank you for the submission of the Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Inventory (PNDI) Environmental Review Environmental Review Receipt Number PNDI-618037 for review. PA Department of Conservation and Natural Resources screened this project for potential impacts to species and resources of concern under DCNR’s responsibility, which includes plants, terrestrial invertebrates, natural communities, and geologic features only.
No Impact Anticipated per botanical survey and avoidance to Bartonia paniculata (screwstem) population
PNDI records indicate species or resources under DCNR’s jurisdiction are located in the vicinity of the project. On June 24-26, and September 3-4, 2014, A.D. Marble conducted a botanical survey for target plant species of concern Bartonia paniculata (screwstem), Cuscuta pentagona (field dodder), and Lyonia mariana (stagger-bush). One known population of B. paniculata was re-found, but the population is located outside the limit of disturbance for the project. To further protect the population, the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission (or contractor) will place protective fencing that follows the temporary construction easement line to prevent construction vehicles from entering areas past the easement line where the population of B. paniculata occurs. In addition, the known population of C. pentagona was not found during the survey. Suitable habitat for L. mariana was found within the proposed project, but no individuals of this species were found. No additional current PA Threatened & Endangered or plant species of concern were found within the proposed project area. Therefore, based on the information you submitted concerning the nature of the project, the botanical survey results, the immediate location, and our detailed resource information, DCNR has determined that no impact is likely. No further coordination with our agency is needed for this project.
DCNR recommends the following to help prevent the spread of invasive plant species and to encourage the use of native plants:
- Avoid using seed mixes that include invasive plant species if the project requires re-vegetating the area (http://www.ernstseed.com/seed-mixes/). Please also attempt to use weed-free straw or hay mixes when possible. A complete list of all Pennsylvania invasive plant species can be found here: http://www.dcnr.state.pa.us/cs/groups/public/documents/document/dcnr_20026634.pdf. - The area of disturbance should be minimized to the fullest extent that would allow for this project; this will help to lessen the area of indirect disturbance to adjacent wetland and forested habitats.
This response represents the most up-to-date review of the PNDI data files and is valid for two (2) years only. If project plans change or more information on listed or proposed species becomes available, our determination may be reconsidered. Should the proposed work continue beyond the period covered by this letter, please resubmit the project to this agency as an “Update” (including an updated PNDI receipt, project narrative and accurate map). As a reminder, this finding applies to potential impacts under DCNR’s jurisdiction only. Visit the PNHP website for directions on contacting the Commonwealth’s other resource agencies for environmental review.
Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact Frederick Sechler, Jr., Ecological Information Specialist, by phone (717-705-2819) or via email ([email protected]).
conserve sustain enjoy P.O. Box 8552, Harrisburg, PA 17015-8552 717-787-3444 (fax) 717-772-0271
An Equal Opportunity Employer dcnr.state.pa.us Printed on Recycled Paper PNDI Number: PNDI-618037
Sincerely,
Greg Podniesinski, Section Chief Natural Heritage Section, DCNR Bureau of Forestry
conserve sustain enjoy
P.O. Box 8552, Harrisburg, PA 17015-8552 717-787-3444 (fax) 717-772-0271
An Equal Opportunity Employer dcnr.state.pa.us Printed on Recycled Paper Division of Environmental Services Natural Diversity Section 450 Robinson Lane Bellefonte, PA 16823 814-359-5237
February 9, 2017 IN REPLY REFER TO SIR# 47021
A.D. Marble Abigail Koenig 3913 Hartzdale Drive Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17020
RE: Species Impact Review (SIR) – Rare, Candidate, Threatened and Endangered Species PNDI Search No. 618037_2 Hawk Falls NB 610 CARBON County: Kidder Township, Penn Forest Township
Dear Abigail Koenig:
This responds to your inquiry about a Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Inventory (PNDI) Internet Database search “potential conflict” or a threatened and endangered species impact review. These projects are screened for potential conflicts with rare, candidate, threatened or endangered species under Pennsylvania Fish & Boat Commission jurisdiction (fish, reptiles, amphibians, aquatic invertebrates only) using the Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Inventory (PNDI) database and our own files. These species of special concern are listed under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, the Wild Resource Conservation Act, and the Pennsylvania Fish & Boat Code (Chapter 75), or the Wildlife Code.
Per my request, you supplied additional information and photographs of the project site. According to the additional information, waterways, wetlands and soils on the project site are not consistent with those known to support Northern Cricket Frog (Acris crepitans). Therefore, I conclude that the project site habitat is not suitable for the species of concern and I do not foresee the proposed project resulting in adverse impacts to the Northern Cricket Frog (Acris crepitans).
This response represents the most up-to-date summary of the PNDI data and our files and is valid for two (2) years from the date of this letter. An absence of recorded species information does not necessarily imply species absence. Our data files and the PNDI system are continuously being updated with species occurrence information. Should project plans change or additional information on listed or proposed species become available, this determination may be reconsidered, and consultation shall be re- initiated. SIR # 47021 Page 2 February 9, 2017
If you have any questions regarding this review, please contact Kathy Gipe at 814-359-5186 and refer to the SIR # 47021. Thank you for your cooperation and attention to this important matter of species conservation and habitat protection.
Sincerely,
Christopher A. Urban, Chief Natural Diversity Section
CAU/KDG/dn
PNDI Receipts and Coordination – Replacement Parcel
Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Project Search ID: PNDI-631705 PNDI Receipt: project_receipt_hawk_falls_replacement_parcel_k_631705_1.pdf 1. PROJECT INFORMATION
Project Name: Hawk Falls Replacement Parcel (KOP) Date of Review: 5/22/2017 06:11:07 PM Project Category: Recreation, Other Project Area: 39.13 acres County(s): Carbon Township/Municipality(s): PENN FOREST ZIP Code: 18210 Quadrangle Name(s): BLAKESLEE; POHOPOCO MOUNTAIN Watersheds HUC 8: Lehigh Watersheds HUC 12: Mud Run Decimal Degrees: 41.000109, -75.595810 Degrees Minutes Seconds: 41° 0' 0.3921" N, 75° 35' 44.9147" W
2. SEARCH RESULTS
Agency Results Response PA Game Commission Potential Impact FURTHER REVIEW IS REQUIRED, See Agency Response PA Department of Conservation and Potential Impact FURTHER REVIEW IS REQUIRED, See Natural Resources Agency Response PA Fish and Boat Commission No Known Impact No Further Review Required U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service No Known Impact No Further Review Required
As summarized above, Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Inventory (PNDI) records indicate there may be potential impacts to threatened and endangered and/or special concern species and resources within the project area. If the response above indicates "No Further Review Required" no additional communication with the respective agency is required. If the response is "Further Review Required" or "See Agency Response," refer to the appropriate agency comments below. Please see the DEP Information Section of this receipt if a PA Department of Environmental Protection Permit is required.
Note that regardless of PNDI search results, projects requiring a Chapter 105 DEP individual permit or GP 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 or 11 in certain counties (Adams, Berks, Bucks, Carbon, Chester, Cumberland, Delaware, Lancaster, Lebanon, Lehigh, Monroe, Montgomery, Northampton, Schuylkill and York) must comply with the bog turtle habitat screening requirements of the PASPGP.
Page 1 of 7 Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Project Search ID: PNDI-631705 PNDI Receipt: project_receipt_hawk_falls_replacement_parcel_k_631705_1.pdf
Page 2 of 7 Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Project Search ID: PNDI-631705 PNDI Receipt: project_receipt_hawk_falls_replacement_parcel_k_631705_1.pdf
Page 3 of 7 Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Project Search ID: PNDI-631705 PNDI Receipt: project_receipt_hawk_falls_replacement_parcel_k_631705_1.pdf RESPONSE TO QUESTION(S) ASKED
Q1: The proposed project is in the range of the Indiana bat. Describe how the project will affect bat habitat (forests, woodlots and trees) and indicate what measures will be taken in consideration of this. Round acreages up to the nearest acre (e.g., 0.2 acres = 1 acre). Your answer is: No forests, woodlots or trees will be affected by the project.
Q2: Is tree removal, tree cutting or forest clearing of 40 acres or more necessary to implement all aspects of this project? Your answer is: No
3. AGENCY COMMENTS Regardless of whether a DEP permit is necessary for this proposed project, any potential impacts to threatened and endangered species and/or special concern species and resources must be resolved with the appropriate jurisdictional agency. In some cases, a permit or authorization from the jurisdictional agency may be needed if adverse impacts to these species and habitats cannot be avoided.
These agency determinations and responses are valid for two years (from the date of the review), and are based on the project information that was provided, including the exact project location; the project type, description, and features; and any responses to questions that were generated during this search. If any of the following change: 1) project location, 2) project size or configuration, 3) project type, or 4) responses to the questions that were asked during the online review, the results of this review are not valid, and the review must be searched again via the PNDI Environmental Review Tool and resubmitted to the jurisdictional agencies. The PNDI tool is a primary screening tool, and a desktop review may reveal more or fewer impacts than what is listed on this PNDI receipt. The jursidictional agencies strongly advise against conducting surveys for the species listed on the receipt prior to consultation with the agencies.
PA Game Commission RESPONSE: Further review of this project is necessary to resolve the potential impact(s). Please send project information to this agency for review (see WHAT TO SEND).
PGC Species: (Note: The Pennsylvania Conservation Explorer tool is a primary screening tool, and a desktop review may reveal more or fewer species than what is listed below.)
Scientific Name Common Name Current Status Sensitive Species** Endangered
PA Department of Conservation and Natural Resources RESPONSE: Further review of this project is necessary to resolve the potential impact(s). Please send project information to this agency for review (see WHAT TO SEND).
DCNR Species: (Note: The Pennsylvania Conservation Explorer tool is a primary screening tool, and a desktop review may reveal more or fewer species than what is listed below. After desktop review, if a botanical survey is required by DCNR, we recommend the DCNR Botanical Survey Protocols, available here: http://www.gis.dcnr.state.pa.us/hgis- er/PNDI_DCNR.aspx.)
Scientific Name Common Name Current Status Proposed Status Survey Window Carex polymorpha Variable Sedge Endangered Threatened Frts June - early August
Page 4 of 7 Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Project Search ID: PNDI-631705 PNDI Receipt: project_receipt_hawk_falls_replacement_parcel_k_631705_1.pdf PA Fish and Boat Commission RESPONSE: No Impact is anticipated to threatened and endangered species and/or special concern species and resources.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service RESPONSE: No impacts to federally listed or proposed species are anticipated. Therefore, no further consultation/coordination under the Endangered Species Act (87 Stat. 884, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq. is required. Because no take of federally listed species is anticipated, none is authorized. This response does not reflect potential Fish and Wildlife Service concerns under the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act or other authorities.
* Special Concern Species or Resource - Plant or animal species classified as rare, tentatively undetermined or candidate as well as other taxa of conservation concern, significant natural communities, special concern populations (plants or animals) and unique geologic features. ** Sensitive Species - Species identified by the jurisdictional agency as collectible, having economic value, or being susceptible to decline as a result of visitation.
WHAT TO SEND TO JURISDICTIONAL AGENCIES
If project information was requested by one or more of the agencies above, upload* or email* the following information to the agency(s). Instructions for uploading project materials can be found here. This option provides the applicant with the convenience of sending project materials to a single location accessible to all three state agencies. Alternatively, applicants may email or mail their project materials (see AGENCY CONTACT INFORMATION). *Note: U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service requires applicants to mail project materials to the USFWS PA field office (see AGENCY CONTACT INFORMATION). USFWS will not accept project materials submitted electronically (by upload or email).
Check-list of Minimum Materials to be submitted: ____Project narrative with a description of the overall project, the work to be performed, current physical characteristics of the site and acreage to be impacted. ____A map with the project boundary and/or a basic site plan(particularly showing the relationship of the project to the physical features such as wetlands, streams, ponds, rock outcrops, etc.) In addition to the materials listed above, USFWS REQUIRES the following ____SIGNED copy of a Final Project Environmental Review Receipt
The inclusion of the following information may expedite the review process. ____Color photos keyed to the basic site plan (i.e. showing on the site plan where and in what direction each photo was taken and the date of the photos) ____Information about the presence and location of wetlands in the project area, and how this was determined (e.g., by a qualified wetlands biologist), if wetlands are present in the project area, provide project plans showing the location of all project features, as well as wetlands and streams.
Page 5 of 7 Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Project Search ID: PNDI-631705 PNDI Receipt: project_receipt_hawk_falls_replacement_parcel_k_631705_1.pdf 4. DEP INFORMATION The Pa Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) requires that a signed copy of this receipt, along with any required documentation from jurisdictional agencies concerning resolution of potential impacts, be submitted with applications for permits requiring PNDI review. Two review options are available to permit applicants for handling PNDI coordination in conjunction with DEP’s permit review process involving either T&E Species or species of special concern. Under sequential review, the permit applicant performs a PNDI screening and completes all coordination with the appropriate jurisdictional agencies prior to submitting the permit application. The applicant will include with its application, both a PNDI receipt and/or a clearance letter from the jurisdictional agency if the PNDI Receipt shows a Potential Impact to a species or the applicant chooses to obtain letters directly from the jurisdictional agencies. Under concurrent review, DEP, where feasible, will allow technical review of the permit to occur concurrently with the T&E species consultation with the jurisdictional agency. The applicant must still supply a copy of the PNDI Receipt with its permit application. The PNDI Receipt should also be submitted to the appropriate agency according to directions on the PNDI Receipt. The applicant and the jurisdictional agency will work together to resolve the potential impact(s). See the DEP PNDI policy at https://conservationexplorer.dcnr.pa.gov/content/resources.
Page 6 of 7
BUREAU OF FORESTRY
May 30, 2017 PNDI Number: 631705
Sharon Yates A.D. Marble 2200 Renaissance Blvd. Suite 260 King of Prussia, PA 19406 Email: [email protected] (hard copy will not follow)
Re: Hawk Falls Replacement Parcel (KOP) Penn Forest Township, Carbon County, PA
Dear Sharon Yates,
Thank you for the submission of the Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Inventory (PNDI) Environmental Review Receipt Number 631705 for review. PA Department of Conservation and Natural Resources screened this project for potential impacts to species and resources under DCNR’s responsibility, which includes plants, terrestrial invertebrates, natural communities, and geologic features only.
No Impact Anticipated
PNDI records indicate species or resources under DCNR’s jurisdiction are located in the vicinity of the project. However, based on the information you submitted concerning the nature of the project, the immediate location, and our detailed resource information, DCNR has determined that no impact is likely. No further coordination with our agency is needed for this project.
This response represents the most up-to-date review of the PNDI data files and is valid for two (2) years only. If project plans change or more information on listed or proposed species becomes available, our determination may be reconsidered. Should the proposed work continue beyond the period covered by this letter, please resubmit the project to this agency as an “Update” (including an updated PNDI receipt, project narrative and accurate map). As a reminder, this finding applies to potential impacts under DCNR’s jurisdiction only. Visit the PNHP website for directions on contacting the Commonwealth’s other resource agencies for environmental review.
Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact Jaci Braund, Ecological Information Specialist, by phone (717-214-3813) or via email ([email protected]).
Sincerely
Greg Podniesinski, Section Chief Natural Heritage Section
conserve sustain enjoy P.O. Box 8552, Harrisburg, PA 17015-8552 717-787-3444 (fax) 717-772-0271
An Equal Opportunity Employer dcnr.state.pa.us Printed on Recycled Paper June 28, 2017
Ms. Sharon Yates A.D. Marble 2200 Renaissance Boulevard, Suite 260 King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406 [email protected]
PNDI Receipt: project_receipt_hawk_falls_replacement_pa_631705_FINAL_1.pdf Re: Hawk Falls Replacement Parcel (KOP) Penn Forest Township, Carbon County, Pennsylvania
Dear Ms. Yates,
Thank you for submitting Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Inventory (PNDI) Environmental Review Receipt project_receipt_hawk_falls_replacement_pa_631705_FINAL_1.pdf for review. The Pennsylvania Game Commission (PGC) screened this project for potential impacts to species and resources of concern under PGC responsibility, which includes birds and mammals only.
No Impact Anticipated PNDI records indicate species or resources of concern are located in the vicinity of the project. However, based on the information you submitted concerning the nature of the project, the immediate location, and our detailed resource information, the PGC has determined that no impact is likely. Therefore, no further coordination with the PGC will be necessary for this project at this time.
This response represents the most up-to-date summary of the PNDI data files and is valid for two (2) years from the date of this letter. An absence of recorded information does not necessarily imply actual conditions on site. Should project plans change or additional information on listed or proposed species become available, this determination may be reconsidered.
Should the proposed work continue beyond the period covered by this letter, please resubmit the project to this agency as an “Update” (including an updated PNDI receipt, project narrative and accurate map). If the proposed work has not changed and no additional information concerning listed species is found, the project will be cleared for PNDI requirements under this agency for two additional years.
This finding applies to impacts to birds and mammals only. To complete your review of state and federally-listed threatened and endangered species and species of special concern, please be sure that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the PA Department of Conservation and Natural
Ms. Sharon Yates -2- June 28, 2017
Resources, and/or the PA Fish and Boat Commission have been contacted regarding this project as directed by the online PNDI ER Tool found at www.naturalheritage.state.pa.us.
Sincerely,
Olivia A. Braun Environmental Planner Division of Environmental Planning & Habitat Protection Bureau of Wildlife Habitat Management Phone: 717-787-4250, Extension 3128 Fax: 717-787-6957 E-mail: [email protected]
A PNHP Partner
OAB/oab cc: File
Appendix D Environmental Screening Form Hickory Run State Park
More Data Needed to A. ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES No/Negligible Determine Indicate potential for adverse impacts. Use Not Applicable - Impacts - Exists Impacts Degree of a separate sheet to clarify responses per Resource does but no or Minor Exceed Minor Impact instructions for Part A on page 9. not exist negligible impacts Impacts EA/EIS required EA/EIS required 1. Geological resources: soils, bedrock, X slopes, streambeds, landforms, etc. 2. Air quality X
3. Sound (noise impacts) X
4. Water quality/quantity X
5. Stream flow characteristics X
6. Marine/estuarine X
7. Floodplains/wetlands X 8. Land use/ownership patterns; property X values; community livability 9. Circulation, transportation X 10. Plant/animal/fish species of special concern and habitat; state/federal listed X or proposed for listing 11. Unique ecosystems, such as biosphere reserves, World Heritage sites, old X growth forests, etc. 12. Unique or important wildlife/ wildlife X habitat 13. Unique or important fish/habitat X 14. Introduce or promote invasive species X (plant or animal) 15. Recreation resources, land, parks, open space, conservation areas, rec. trails, facilities, services, opportunities, public X access, etc. Most conversions exceed minor impacts. See Step 3.B 16. Accessibility for populations with X disabilities 17. Overall aesthetics, special X characteristics/ features 18. Historical/cultural resources, including landscapes, ethnographic, X archeological, structures, etc. See Appendix B for SHPO correspondence. 19. Socioeconomics, including employment, occupation, income X changes, tax base, infrastructure 20. Minority and low-income populations X 21. Energy resources (geothermal, fossil X fuels, etc.) 22. Other agency or tribal land use plans or X policies 23. Land/structures with history of contamination/hazardous materials X even if remediated 24. Other important environmental X resources to address.
B. Mandatory Criterial To Be If your LWCF proposal is approved, would it… Yes No Determined 1. Have significant impacts on public health or safety? X 2. Have significant impacts on such natural resources and unique geographic characteristics as historic or cultural resources; park, recreation, or refuge lands, wilderness areas; wild or scenic rivers; national X natural landmarks; sole or principal drinking water aquifers; prime farmlands; wetlands (E.O. 11990); floodplains (E.O 11988); and other ecologically significant or critical areas. 3. Have highly controversial environmental effects or involve unresolved conflicts concerning alternative X uses of available resources [NEPA section 102(2)(E)]? 4. Have highly uncertain and potentially significant environmental effects or involve unique or unknown X environmental risks? 5. Establish a precedent for future action or represent a decision in principle about future actions with X potentially significant environmental effects? 6. Have a direct relationship to other actions with individually insignificant, but cumulatively significant, X environmental effects? 7. Have significant impacts on properties listed or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic X Places, as determined by either the bureau or office. (Attach SHPO/THPO Comments) 8. Have significant impacts on species listed or proposed to be listed on the List of Endangered or X Threatened Species, or have significant impacts on designated Critical Habitat for these species. 9. Violate a federal law, or a state, local, or tribal law or requirement imposed for the protection of the X environment? 10. Have a disproportionately high and adverse effect on low income or minority populations (Executive X Order 12898)? 11. Limit access to and ceremonial use of Indian sacred sites on federal lands by Indian religious practitioners or significantly adversely affect the physical integrity of such sacred sites (Executive X Order 13007)? 12. Contribute to the introduction, continued existence, or spread of noxious weeds or non-native invasive species known to occur in the area, or actions that may promote the introduction, growth, or expansion X of the range of
Environmental Reviewers The following individual(s) provided input in the completion of the environmental screening form. List all reviewers including name, title, agency, field of expertise. Keep all environmental review records and data on this proposal in state compliance file for any future program review and/or audit. The ESF may be completed as part of a LWCF pre-award site inspection if conducted in time to contribute to the environmental review process for the proposal. 1. Katherine M. Farrow and Ben Reiman, Lotus Environmental Consulting, LLC 2. Sharon Yates, AD Marble & Company 3. The following individuals conducted a site inspection to verify field conditions. List name of inspector(s), title, agency, and date(s) of inspection. 1. Ben Reiman and Connor Sullivan, Lotus Environmental Consulting, LLC 2. Dave Madl Kevin Fazzini , Hickory Run State Park (2014) 3. Michael Lenert, PhD and Shauna Haas, AD Marble & Company State may require signature of LWCF sub-recipient applicant here: Date:
Appendix E Environmental Screening Form Old Stage Road Replacement Lands
More Data Needed to A. ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES No/Negligible Determine Indicate potential for adverse impacts. Use Not Applicable - Impacts - Exists Impacts Degree of a separate sheet to clarify responses per Resource does but no or Minor Exceed Minor Impact instructions for Part A on page 9. not exist negligible impacts Impacts EA/EIS required EA/EIS required 1. Geological resources: soils, bedrock, X slopes, streambeds, landforms, etc. 2. Air quality X
3. Sound (noise impacts) X
4. Water quality/quantity X
5. Stream flow characteristics X
6. Marine/estuarine X
7. Floodplains/wetlands X 8. Land use/ownership patterns; property X values; community livability 9. Circulation, transportation X 10. Plant/animal/fish species of special concern and habitat; state/federal listed X or proposed for listing 11. Unique ecosystems, such as biosphere reserves, World Heritage sites, old X growth forests, etc. 12. Unique or important wildlife/ wildlife X habitat 13. Unique or important fish/habitat X 14. Introduce or promote invasive species X (plant or animal) 15. Recreation resources, land, parks, open space, conservation areas, rec. trails, facilities, services, opportunities, public X access, etc. Most conversions exceed minor impacts. See Step 3.B 16. Accessibility for populations with X disabilities 17. Overall aesthetics, special X characteristics/ features 18. Historical/cultural resources, including landscapes, ethnographic, X archeological, structures, etc. See Appendix B for SHPO correspondence. 19. Socioeconomics, including employment, occupation, income X changes, tax base, infrastructure 20. Minority and low-income populations X 21. Energy resources (geothermal, fossil X fuels, etc.) 22. Other agency or tribal land use plans or X policies 23. Land/structures with history of contamination/hazardous materials X even if remediated 24. Other important environmental X resources to address.
B. Mandatory Criterial To Be If your LWCF proposal is approved, would it… Yes No Determined 1. Have significant impacts on public health or safety? X 2. Have significant impacts on such natural resources and unique geographic characteristics as historic or cultural resources; park, recreation, or refuge lands, wilderness areas; wild or scenic rivers; national X natural landmarks; sole or principal drinking water aquifers; prime farmlands; wetlands (E.O. 11990); floodplains (E.O 11988); and other ecologically significant or critical areas. 3. Have highly controversial environmental effects or involve unresolved conflicts concerning alternative X uses of available resources [NEPA section 102(2)(E)]? 4. Have highly uncertain and potentially significant environmental effects or involve unique or unknown X environmental risks? 5. Establish a precedent for future action or represent a decision in principle about future actions with X potentially significant environmental effects? 6. Have a direct relationship to other actions with individually insignificant, but cumulatively significant, X environmental effects? 7. Have significant impacts on properties listed or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic X Places, as determined by either the bureau or office. (Attach SHPO/THPO Comments) 8. Have significant impacts on species listed or proposed to be listed on the List of Endangered or X Threatened Species, or have significant impacts on designated Critical Habitat for these species. 9. Violate a federal law, or a state, local, or tribal law or requirement imposed for the protection of the X environment? 10. Have a disproportionately high and adverse effect on low income or minority populations (Executive X Order 12898)? 11. Limit access to and ceremonial use of Indian sacred sites on federal lands by Indian religious practitioners or significantly adversely affect the physical integrity of such sacred sites (Executive X Order 13007)? 12. Contribute to the introduction, continued existence, or spread of noxious weeds or non-native invasive species known to occur in the area, or actions that may promote the introduction, growth, or expansion X of the range of
Environmental Reviewers The following individual(s) provided input in the completion of the environmental screening form. List all reviewers including name, title, agency, field of expertise. Keep all environmental review records and data on this proposal in state compliance file for any future program review and/or audit. The ESF may be completed as part of a LWCF pre-award site inspection if conducted in time to contribute to the environmental review process for the proposal. 1. Katherine M. Farrow and Ben Reiman, Lotus Environmental Consulting, LLC 2. Sharon Yates, AD Marble & Company 3. The following individuals conducted a site inspection to verify field conditions. List name of inspector(s), title, agency, and date(s) of inspection. 1. Ben Reiman and Connor Sullivan, Lotus Environmental Consulting, LLC 2. Dave Madl Kevin Fazzini , Hickory Run State Park (2014) 3. Michael Lenert, PhD and Shauna Haas, AD Marble & Company State may require signature of LWCF sub-recipient applicant here: Date: