“A discussion of types of potential environmental ... · The Army Corps of Engineers, Final 33 CFR ... Both the Corps Final Rule and the statewide ... watershed approach to making

44

7. Potential Environmental Mitigation Activities

The term mitigation is used in environmental review of proposed transportation projects to refer to

measures that reduce the project’s impact on the environment. The avoidance and minimization of

environmental impacts are the goals of mitigation. Traditionally, the consideration and selection of

mitigation measures is done at the project level in the final design stage of project development, in

conjunction with regulatory requirements and permits. This traditional approach is referred to as single

project-based mitigation, and can be conducted on-site or off-site. An alternative to the traditional

approach is advanced compensatory mitigation that allows for developing compensatory mitigation

strategies and mechanisms well in advance of a project, or multiple projects, at the planning rather than

project final design stage. Advanced compensatory mitigation in the form of ecosystem approaches are

gaining acceptance because they can lead to greater predictability in transportation project timelines

and result in higher quality, more strategically located, mitigation sites. A wetland mitigation bank is an

example of advanced compensatory mitigation that has gained acceptance with both PennDOT and

wetland regulatory agencies. This type of mitigation can also be referred to as ecosystem-based or

watershed-based meaning that it can take place away from the impact site at an ecosystem scale that

enables mitigation to occur in the most important ecological areas of the region/watershed. In

identifying the “types of potential environmental mitigation activities,” general examples of both of

these types of mitigation approaches are presented and discussed where applicable in Table 7.1. In

practice advanced compensation mitigation is utilized mostly for natural resources such as (wetlands

and threatened and endangered species); however the concept is being discussed for other resources.

The information presented in Table 7.1 is intended to be a list of options/strategies for potential

mitigation activities. Mitigation options are presented for the resource categories that are presumed to

“have the greatest potential to restore and maintain environmental functions” (wetlands; streams;

wildlife, threatened and endangered species; cultural resources; public recreation areas; and farmlands).

In addition, some general discussion of the potential areas to carry out these mitigation options are

included. Table 7.2 illustrates example location-based factors in evaluating the suitability for various

natural resource mitigation activities.

“A discussion of types of potential environmental mitigation

activities and potential areas to carry out these activities,

including activities that have the greatest potential to restore

and maintain the environmental functions affected by the

metropolitan transportation plan. This discussion may focus on

policies, programs or strategies, rather than at the project

level.”

SAFETEA-LU Regulations for Long Range Transportation Plan

Development (23 C.F.R. § 450.322(f)(7))

45

TABLE 7.1: TYPES OF POTENTIAL MITIGATION ACTIVITIES AND POTENTIAL AREAS TO CARRY ACTIVITIES

OUT

Resources (“with the greatest potential to restore and maintain environmental functions”)*

Process and “types of potential environmental

mitigation activities”

“Potential Areas to carry out these activities”

*Quoted text from SAFETEA-LU Regulations for Long Range Transportation Plan Development (23 C.F.R. § 450.322(f)(7))

Wetlands

Avoidance, minimization, and compensation of impacts are the key elements of the basic approach of protecting wetland resources. SAFETEA-LU Title 23, Chapter 1 section 133 specifies a preference for mitigation banking to compensate for unavoidable losses to wetlands caused by transportation projects receiving Federal assistance The Army Corps of Engineers, Final Rule on Wetland Mitigation 33 CFR 332.3(b), Compensatory Mitigation for Losses of Aquatic Resources, Recommends a hierarchy for wetland mitigation types as follows: 1. Mitigation bank credits 2. In-lieu fee program credits 3. Permittee-responsible mitigation using watershed approach 4. On-site and/or in-kind permittee- responsible mitigation 5. Off-site and/or out-of-kind permittee- responsible mitigation In the SPC region, the preference of the Army Corps of Engineers and PA DEP is to mitigate project wetland impacts of less than 0.05 acres in a bank within the service area. If this is not possible, mitigation is not required. If the impacts are greater than 0.05 acres, on-site mitigation is preferred. If this is not possible or practical, credits may be deducted from a bank within the service area. If mitigation elsewhere within the service area and/or use of a bank is not possible or practical, out-of-watershed or out-of-kind mitigation is considered.

Both the Corps Final Rule and the statewide umbrella wetland banking instrument utilize a watershed approach to making compensatory mitigation decisions that support the improvement of aquatic resources in a watershed. The statewide banking instrument establishes service areas by watershed as the geographic area within which impacts can be mitigated at a specific mitigation bank. A map of the wetland mitigation service areas in PA is included in the Appendix. There are several existing wetland mitigation bank sites that were established by PennDOT: - One 3.0 acre bank site located in Plum

Creek Township, Armstrong County. The wetlands created at this site include Palustrine Emergent, Scrub-Shrub, Aquatic Bed and Forested habitats. The mitigation bank provides beneficial functions to the Cherry Run Watershed.

- One 5 acre bank site in Worth Township, Butler County; One in Conemaugh Township Indiana County. The wetlands created at this site include Palustrine Emergent, Scrub-Shrub, Aquatic Bed and Forested habitats. The mitigation bank provides beneficial functions to the Slippery Rock Creek Watershed by improving water quality, wildlife habitat, recreation and storage of excess floodwaters.

- One 2.50 acre bank site located in

Conemaugh Township, Indiana County. The wetlands created at this location include Palustrine Emergent, Scrub-Shrub, Aquatic Bed and Forested habitats. The mitigation bank will provide beneficial functions to the Blacklegs Creek watershed by improving water quality, wildlife habitat, base flow to Blacklegs

http://www.spcregion.org/lrpenv/downloads/APPENDIX.pdf

46





Wetlands (continued)

Creek, and storage of excess flood waters. - One 6.28 acre bank site located in Bullskin

Township Fayette County. The wetlands created at this location include Palustrine Emergent and Forested habitats. It provides beneficial functions to the nearby Jacobs Creek.

- A 4.5 acre wetland banking site is planned

for New Bethlehem Township, Washington County. The wetland banking site is in review by regulatory agencies right now.

33 CFR 332.3(d) lists factors in compensatory mitigation project site selection, including - Hydrologic conditions - Aquatic habitat diversity - Compatibility of adjacent land uses and

watershed management plans - Effects on ecologically important aquatic

or terrestrial resources and habitat for threatened and endangered species

- Development trends - Habitat status and trends - Water quality goals - Flood management goals PennDOT, PADEP, USACOE, and FHWA have a MOA establishing the statewide umbrella wetland mitigation banking instrument that oversees the establishment, operation, and administration of the wetland mitigation system. This MOA lists the watershed scale features and considerations in site selection for compensatory mitigation banks including: - Areas of high aquatic resource diversity - habitat connectivity and other landscape

scale functions - watershed, species recovery and

comprehensive plans, - municipal coordination, - soils data, - hydrologic data, - natural communities, - local or regional goals for the restoration

or protection of particular habitat types or functions

47





Wetlands (continued) - land use and land cover Table 7.2 lists conceptual spatial factors in evaluating suitability for wetland protection and wetland restoration sites. A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the Game Commission and PennDOT allows PennDOT to create wetland mitigation sites on State Game Lands at no cost to the Game Commission, therefore areas within state game lands are a “potential area to carry out” wetland mitigation activities.

48





Streams Compensatory stream mitigation may be required for impacts to perennial and intermittent streams and should be designed to restore or enhance stream uses that are adversely impacted by the project, stream mitigation options include:

- Mitigation bank credits - Stream channel restoration

projects - Stream bank stabilizations - Fluvial Geomorphology

(FGM) techniques - Natural Stream Design - Riparian buffer plantings - Fish/aquatic habitat

improvements - Specialized culverts - Specialized agricultural

crossings and livestock fencing

- Pasture management programs

- Dam removals - Improving flood prone areas - Assistance to watershed

groups - Detailed stream mitigation

plan - Mine drainage remediation - Consistency with watershed

management plans. - Conservation banking - Bridge Pier removal - Integral bridge abutments (as

an avoidance of in-stream construction work)

- Following culvert design standards established with PA F&BC (depressed culverts, fish baffles, natural stream bottom material)

Mitigation decisions are typically made during the Section 404/401/Chapter 105 permit review process. Most stream mitigation consists of stream restorations commensurate with the stream quality and amount of impact associated with the transportation project. The “potential areas to carry out” mitigation measures depend on the projects that have potential stream impacts and the specific permit requirements. Table 6.1 shows the sample projects that the preliminary environmental scan determined may have stream involvement. The regulations with regard to aquatic resource compensatory mitigation (33CFR 332) also cover in general stream mitigation. ___ Advanced mitigation approaches are not commonly used in the region to mitigate for stream impacts.

49





Wildlife, Threatened, and Endangered Species

The section 7 informal or formal consultation process for individual projects determines the potential effects of individual projects on species and habitats as well as mitigation measures that may reduce adverse effects. Mitigation measures may take many forms, such as: - Measures within the project area to

protect species/habitat. - Measures within the project area to

enhance habitat. - preservation of existing habitat - enhancement or restoration of

degraded or a former habitat - establishment of buffer areas

around existing habitats - modifications of land use practices Mitigation for State-listed species (that are not federally listed) must be resolved with the appropriate state jurisdictional agency. Some examples project-based measures to mitigate impact to threatened and endangered species encountered in this region include: - Restricting the clearing of trees to the

period between November 16 and March 31 to avoid potential impacts to roosting Indiana bats. - Preventing the disturbance of Indiana

bats from blasting activities near sensitive subterranean areas

- Restrictions on construction timing in streams with T&E fish species to avoid T&E fish spawning periods.

- Surveys to determine the presence of Threatened or Endangered mussels.

- Relocation of listed mussel and plant species out of construction areas.

- With projects known to be in the vicinity of known Massasagua Rattlesnake populations, all project activities within streams and wetlands be completed between June 1 and August 31 as an avoidance measure. On-site field monitoring during construction to ensure that the snake is not active within the disturbance

The mitigation actions and areas to carry these activities out associated with T&E species are determined through the informal or formal Section 7 consultations. Potential areas are dependent largely on the species or type of habitat involved. A full list of the Federal and PA threatened and endangered species is in the Appendix.

http://www.spcregion.org/lrpenv/downloads/APPENDIX.pdf

50





Wildlife, Threatened, and Endangered Species

area of the project. - Coordination with the PA Game

Commission in the banding of the nesting Peregrine falcon on bridge structures and providing nesting boxes where applicable.

- Western PA Conservancy to identify plant species in a project area in order to avoid the area during construction.

- Avoidance of rare and threatened plant populations.

- If avoidance is not possible, relocating rare and threatened plant populations.

___ Potential advanced compensatory mitigation (these are not currently utilized for T&E mitigation in the region): - Conservation Banking:

permanently preserved lands managed for species that are either endangered, threatened, or at risk.

- Funding additional species survey work or habitat research and predictive modeling for T&E.

- Recovery Credit Systems: The US F&WS website defines a Recovery Credit System as “A tool available to Federal agencies to promote and enhance the recovery of listed species on non-Federal lands. Using RCSs, Federal agencies are able to more clearly show how benefits accrued on non-Federal lands offset unavoidable effects of Federal actions elsewhere.”

___ U.S. FWS adopted “The Final Guidance for the Establishment, Use and Operation of Habitat Conservation Banks Under Section 7 or 10 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended”. It lists the following eligibility and site selection factors for conservation bank establishment: - local, private, or state lands not previously

designated for conservation purposes. - ecological suitability including location, size,

configuration of proposed band and the habitat quality, topography, surrounding land use and current species use.

- strategic location that would add to already established conservation areas.

51





NRHP Eligible or listed historic sites/districts

Mitigation Section 106 consultation process in accordance with 36 CFR Part 800.6 with cultural resources consulting parties (Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, State Historic Preservation Office, etc.) Examples of mitigation measures include: - Context Sensitive Solutions - Design modifications &

minimization - Creating beneficial use to the

resource - Landscaping to reduce visual

impacts - Interpretative displays or

educational materials to present historic information to the public (Marketing of historic bridges)

- Regional Geomorphological synthesis of a limited drainage

- Conducting archeological data recovery based on project location.

- Archaeological Monitoring as a supplement or as one aspect of a mitigation plan.

- Production of archaeological data synthesis/context studies

- Develop educational activities to educate public about archaeology

- Relocation of historical building - Relocating a historic bridge to a

new site - Photo Documentation - Historic archival recordation ___ Advanced Compensatory Mitigation: - Encouraging and assisting counties

and municipalities with cultural resource surveys. (Greene County farm structures survey conducted by PHMC is an example).

- Encouraging preservation projects tailored to local/municipal needs

- Development of archaeological predictive modeling to assess project areas for the probability of archaeological impacts.

Advanced compensatory resource mitigation for cultural resources are not as accepted or prevalent as for natural resources are on an ecological basis. Therefore, cultural resource impacts are mitigated on an individual project and individual resource basis. The “potential areas to carry out” mitigation measures depend on the projects that have cultural resource impacts and the specific Section 106 Consultations. Table 6.1 shows the projects that the preliminary environmental scan determined may have cultural resource involvement. Depending on the effects on historic resources, these project areas are potential areas for mitigation measures related to eligible or listed historic resources. The local historic preservation plans (such as the ones listed in Section 5) may contain assistance in identifying potential mitigation measures. A regional geomorphological synthesis requires not only research, but hands on field work by a professional geologist, and a final report is submitted which will help guide design of future projects in the study area. Archaeological Monitoring usually coincides with activities which are confined to areas in which deep impacts are expected (along major waterways), and that extensive previous disturbance is obvious. More than likely the potential areas to carry out this type of activities are within urban settings. ___ Advanced mitigation approaches would require coordination potentially with FHWA, PennDOT , the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, and PHMC. Consultation discussions with PHMC indicated that more flexibility in advanced compensatory mitigation may be possible for cultural resources in the future.

52





Public Recreational Parks or National Wildlife Refuge

Where no feasible or prudent avoidance alternative exists, projects must include “all possible planning to minimize harm” which includes the provision “that all reasonable measures identified in the Section 4(f) evaluation to minimize harm or mitigate for adverse impacts and effects must be included in the project.” These mitigation measures are developed in consultation with the official with jurisdiction and can include measures such as:

- Relocation of park facilities - Upgrade of park facilities - Purchase of replacement

park land - Expansions to nearby park

property/facilities - Design elements to minimize

harm (slight shifts or retaining walls etc.)

- Landscaping to reduce - Context Sensitive Solutions - Advanced Land Banking

Section 6(f) directs DOI to assure that replacement lands of equal fair market value, location, and usefulness are provided as conditions to such conversions of Section 6(f) properties. No lands acquired with Project 70 funds can be used for other purposes without the approval of the Commonwealth General Assembly. Replacement land is required when the Project 70 restrictions are lifted from a parcel for acquisition.

The State Game Lands Banking Agreement, adopted as a partnership with PennDOT and the Federal Highway Administration, provides advance mitigation (lands) to offset permanent acreage losses to State Game Lands resulting from bridge replacement or minor road improvement projects. State Game Land Banks for mitigation have been established in Tioga and Northumberland Counties within PennDOT District 3. These agreements expedite the mitigation process where small acreage impacts to State Game Lands can be debited from existing banks. Coordination between PennDOT and the Game Commission would be required to identify “potential areas to carry out” a banking agreement on game lands within the SPC region, currently none exist. District 12-0 has utilized the game lands mitigation bank in District 3-0 to mitigate for a 0.123 acre permanent right of way take from SGL 238 in Fayette County associated with a bridge replacement project.

53





Farmland Resources For new highways, new interchanges, and new transportation facilities the PA Agricultural Land Condemnation Board (ALCAB) must be provided the opportunity to look for a way to save productive farmland proposed for condemnation. mitigation measures for impacted agricultural land are developed in final design in consultation with the land owner/farming operator and in some rare cases the ALCAB and may include:

- Providing improved access to fields for farm machinery

- Replacement or improvement of pasture water sources

- Specialized agricultural crossing locations or underpasses

- Improved drainage - Design elements to minimize

harm (slight shifts or retaining walls etc.)

- Fencing replacement/improvement

- Moving or replacing farm buildings.

- Coordinating with farm operators on the timing of construction

- Reimbursements to farm operators for loss of income.

___ Advanced mitigation approaches to farmlands are not common, but could include:

- Programs with farm operators with the goal of TMDL reductions within a watershed.

- In-lieu fee type funds paid to a governmental or non-profit farmland preservation /conservation entity for programs that offset loss of farmland.

Mitigation associated with farmland is traditionally project-based. The “potential areas to carry out” farmland resource mitigation measures depend on the projects that have potential farmland impacts. Table 6.1 shows the projects that the preliminary environmental scan determined may have farmlands impacts. The farms/farmland that are potentially impacted indicate potential areas to carry out farmland mitigation activities. ___ Advanced mitigation approaches would require coordination potentially with USDA, Natural Resource Conservation Service, PA Dept. of Agriculture, County Conservation Districts, farm operators/owners, and farmland preservation programs.

54

The SAFETEA-LU long range transportation planning regulations require LRTP discussion on mitigation

locations that may have the greatest opportunity to maintain and restore environmental functions.

Table 7.2 presents some example spatial site evaluation factors (positive aspects for site evaluation) for

different types of natural resource conservation or restoration projects. The factors are based on GIS

environmental data available to SPC, many of which were included in the Section 4 inventory. The

factors provide a way to discuss potential mitigation areas that is not individually project based. These

factors could be used to identify “potential areas to carry out” mitigation projects within a given

watershed. Where possible these factors include data from existing natural resource plans and

conservation plans discussed in Section 5. In the future, in collaboration with resource agencies, these

example factors could be refined and utilized for identifying the location of areas to carry out mitigation

activities. This potential tool is an outgrowth of in an integrated planning approach and could assist in

making ecologically-based mitigation decisions.

TABLE 7.2 EXAMPLE EVALUATION FACTORS IN ASSESSING THE SUITABILITY FOR MITIGATION

ACTIVITIES

Mitigation Examples of Evaluation Factors in Suitability for Natural Resource Mitigation Sites

Wetland Preservation

- Wetland area that is not within in a protected area - In close proximity to existing protected lands - Exceptional Value or High Quality stream watershed - In a small watershed that contains stream segments in attainment for their designated

use - Forested Land Cover - Hydric Soils present - In or within 500 ft of a biodiversity area - Area within a conservation greenway

- Watershed identified by the PA Aquatic Community Classification as a tier one or tier two conservation priority

-

Wetland Restoration - Hydric soils areas that have been converted to nonforested land cover - Close but not within a conservation greenway - Within 500 feet of another wetland - Within 500 feet of an impaired stream (nonattainment 303-d list) - Within a 500-year or 100-year floodplain - Not forested land Cover

- Watershed identified by the PA Aquatic Community Classification as a tier one or tier two restoration priority

Wetland Banks - Publically owned land (e.g. State Gamelands) (reduce property acquisition costs) - Previously disturbed wetland soils - Areas of previously drained or degraded forested wetlands that could be restored or

enhanced (e.g. bottomland forested sites that were converted to agricultural uses) (NWI wetlands and Hydric soils that exist in Agricultural land cover)

- Hydric soils present - Water availability - Non steep slopes (by percent)

- Land Cover forested or agriculture

55

Mitigation Examples of Evaluation Factors in Suitability for Natural Resource Mitigation Sites

Stream/Riparian zone preservation

- Area is included in a watershed/ river conservation plan - Within 500 feet of a stream priority 1) Exceptional Value, 2) High Quality, 3)Other - Stream/riparian zone not already in protected area - Area within a conservation greenway - Close proximity to protected lands - Watershed identified by the PA Aquatic Community Classification as a tier one or tier two

conservation priority - stream segments in attainment for their designated use

Stream/Riparian zone restoration

- Within 500 feet of an impaired stream (nonattainment 303-d list) - Stream designated as High-Quality, but in nonattainment. (on 303-d list) - Area within a conservation greenway - Land cover not forested, but on the edge/adjacent to forest land cover - Watershed identified by the PA Aquatic Community Classification as a tier one or tier two

restoration priority

Upland Preservation / Conservation Banks

- Area is included in a watershed/ river conservation plan - Forested Land Cover - Within a conservation Greenway or Conservation Opportunity Area - Adjacent, but not inside a protected area - Within 500 feet of a biological diversity area - Exceptional Value or High Quality Stream watershed - Not a wetland - Watershed identified by the PA Aquatic Community Classification as a tier one or tier two

conservation priority

Environmental Stewardship

Over and above the regulatory related mitigation requirements are environmental stewardship practices

for the design and construction of transportation projects. Environmental stewardship involves

activities to improve environmental conditions not just to comply with environmental regulations, but to

improve the environment and the quality of life whenever practical. Collectively, these practices can

minimize environmental impacts and maintain environmental functions affected by transportation

construction projects. Environmental stewardship activities in transportation have many application

areas including: construction practices near wetlands or sensitive environmental areas, construction

practices near cultural resources, air quality controls, construction noise reduction, fuel /potentially

toxic material storage during construction, vegetation management during construction, winter

maintenance and chemical control, roadside vegetation management, maintenance facilities

management, and many more. For more detailed information on environmental stewardship in

transportation see:

http://www.environment.transportation.org/environmental_issues/construct_maint_prac/compendiu

m/manual/

http://www.environment.transportation.org/environmental_issues/construct_maint_prac/compendium/manual/

http://www.environment.transportation.org/environmental_issues/construct_maint_prac/compendium/manual/

56

PennDOT continues to advance the utilization of a range of environmental stewardship practices

through its strategic environmental management program. The PennDOT Districts are ISO 14001

certified, which is an international environmental management system (EMS) standard that provides a

systematic and disciplined process for improving the impact on the environment. Many county, city,

and municipal public works departments in the region have environmental management programs,

which include environmental stewardship practices.

Documents

“A discussion of types of potential environmental ... · The Army Corps of Engineers, Final 33 CFR ... Both the Corps Final Rule and the statewide ... watershed approach to making