Major Investment Study / Draft Environmental Impact Statement   5. Affected Environment and Consequences     5.6 Natural Resources And Ecosystems

5.6 NATURAL RESOURCES AND ECOSYSTEMS

5.6.1 REGULATORY SETTING AND METHODOLOGY

Wetlands 

Section 404(b)(1) of the Clean Water Act of 1977 (33 USC 1344), Executive Order 11990 - Protection of Wetlands, and Title 25 Chapter 105.17 of the Pennsylvania State Code regulate development in wetland areas.

Wetland investigations along the project alignment and station/parking areas were conducted in two stages. The first was review of secondary sources of information. These sources include: 1) National Wetland Inventory (NWI) maps for the project area developed by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) as overlays on United States Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5' topographic quadrangle maps, and 2) soil maps available in the Philadelphia, Montgomery, Chester, and Berks County Soil Surveys and the list of Pennsylvania Hydric Soils published by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. NWI wetland areas and hydric soils within 200 feet of the alignment were added to the GIS database. The NWI mapped wetland areas boundaries are not field verified and are used as an approximate guide to wetland locations. The presence of a hydric soil is only a potential indicator of the presence of a wetland.

The second investigation stage was field identification. Coordination was conducted with Agency Coordination Meeting (ACM) members to develop a project protocol for field identification of wetlands for the DEIS in general accordance with the United States Army Corps of Engineers (COE) 1987 manual procedures and for the qualitative assessment of wetland function and value. The entire length of the alignment west of Norristown and those areas east of Norristown with footprint changes, as well as all station areas were field viewed for the presence of wetlands in accordance with the methodology for which concurrence was received from the agencies. This methodology included limiting boundary identification to the area within 150 feet of the edge of the current railbed. Survey boundaries were plotted using Global Positioning System (GPS) data from a Trimble Pro-XRS unit with a post-processing accuracy of +/- one meter. GPS-mapped boundaries were added to the project GIS database.

The wetlands identification and impact analysis described in the DEIS, while performed in general accordance with the COE 1987 methods, was not designed to fully satisfy the requirements of Section 404 and Chapter 105. Construction of SVM will require a COE Section 404 permit and a PADEP Chapter 105 permit. Delineation in full conformance with permit requirements was not performed as part of this DEIS for the following reasons: 1.) The project is not yet at the Preliminary Engineering stage. Consequently, detailed topographic maps necessary to perform detailed design of the trackbed, grading plan, and bridge work are not available; 2.) The project is in the MIS Stage and has not yet been approved by the FTA to enter Preliminary Engineering.

Each identified wetland's function and value was qualitatively characterized. A project-specific, qualitative approach, based on the new criteria established in Effectiveness and Opportunity Interpretation of the Wetland Evaluation Technique, Volume II (WET2.0) - groundwater recharge, groundwater discharge, flood flow alteration, sediment stabilization, sediment/toxicant reduction, nutrient removal/transformation, production export, aquatic diversity/abundance and wildlife diversity/abundance - was used for this characterization. Functions and assigned values of each wetland were based on a nine criteria, field observations and discussions with project team personnel. Concurrence with the methodology used to identify and characterize wetlands was obtained from the COE, PADEP, United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), USFWS, Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission (PAFBC), and the Pennsylvania Game Commission (PGC). Direct impacts were determined using GIS software to overlay the conceptual project footprint over the field-identified wetlands boundary data.

Vegetation, Wildlife and Threatened and Endangered Species 

Information on the extent of forested areas was obtained from aerial photographs for a 400-foot wide bandwidth centered on the existing rail alignment. Anderson Land Use Classification System Level II was used to characterize forested areas along the alignment west of Norristown. Direct impacts to forested land were identified by using the GIS database with an overlay of the project footprint over the forested land layer. Federal and state resource agencies were contacted in writing to request information on wildlife species and threatened and endangered species in the project area. Additional agency concerns regarding species were identified during ACM meetings. Field screening for possible habitat for threatened and endangered species was conducted.

Water Quality and Natural Fisheries 

Water quality/protected use information for all streams identified on USGS topographic maps as blue lines was obtained. Streams listed as having verified trout reproduction were investigated with the cooperation of the Pennsylvania Fish & Boat Commission, Division of Fisheries Management. Streams that are able to support the natural reproduction of trout require special consideration during the design phase of encroachments, and in the review of permit applications.

5.6.2 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

Forty-nine palustrine wetlands Exhibit 5.6-1 Wetlands [PDF] were identified by field survey within 150 feet of the edge of the existing alignment (also see Table 5.6-1). Of the 49 palustrine wetlands, 59 percent were forested, 37 percent were shrub/scrub, and four percent were emergent. The majority of the palustrine wetlands were situated in slightly depressional areas within the Schuylkill River floodplain, and generally had an elongated shape parallel to the river (and the railroad alignment). Hydrology sources for the floodplain palustrine wetlands were identified as from surface water runoff, periodic flooding and seasonally high water tables associated with high river states and flooding. Each stream channel crossed by the alignment (including the Schuylkill River) is a riverine wetland. sixty stream channel crossings and nearby water bodies, each of which is a riverine wetland, are listed in Exhibit 5.7-2 Waterbodies Crossing or Adjacent to Alignment [PDF]. A riverine wetland is defined as the stream channel from top of one bank to top of the opposite bank. Function and value ratings ranged from high to very low. The majority of ratings were in the low category.

Vegetation, Wildlife and Threatened and Endangered Species 

Vegetation adjacent to the alignment west of Norristown is largely a function of the alignment's topographic position at the border between the Schuylkill River floodplain and the valley-side upland area. Floodplain vegetation in the non-urbanized areas west of Norristown is predominantly deciduous forest (Anderson Land use Classification 41), with long stretches of continuous forest paralleling the alignment and the river. The upland side of the alignment is a mixture that includes deciduous forest, agricultural land, herbaceous rangeland, suburban and urban residential land, and industrial land. Vegetation along the alignment east of Norristown in the non-urbanized areas is largely deciduous forest. The project conceptual footprint would directly impact narrow strips of forested land.

Wildlife species, which may occur within the project area, were obtained from Pennsylvania Game Commission's database. This list includes bird species, fish species, mammal species, amphibian species, and reptile species. Several species were casually observed during the wetland survey. The long stretches of intact floodplain forest provides a corridor for terrestrial and avian species. Coordination with the USFWS, PAFBC and The Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Index (PNDI) was conducted to ascertain the presence of threatened and endangered species within the project area. The PAFBC identified four aquatic invertebrates, one reptile, and one fish species in the vicinity of the project area. The four aquatic invertebrates - dwarf wedgemussel, green floater, Pizzini's cave amphipod, and Price's cave amphipod, were all indicated as not known (currently) to be present in the project vicinity. The one fish species, ironcolor shiner, similarly indicated as not known (currently) to be present in the project vicinity. Only one species, the red-bellied turtle (Pseudemys rubriventris) is known to be present in the project vicinity. USFWS identified the bog turtle (Clemmys muhlenbergii) as a federally threatened species of concern. The PNDI search revealed one endangered plant, the Missouri rock-cress (Arabis missouriensis), identified in the project area. Red-bellied turtles and bog turtles are wetlands species. 

During the wetland survey, all identified wetlands were observed and characterized for habitat associated with these two turtle species. Red-bellied turtles prefer large, deep creeks, rivers, ponds, lakes, and marshes with ample basking sites. Bog turtles prefer open canopy bogs, swamps, or marshy meadows with slow moving, spring-fed streams and soft, mucky bottoms. No red-bellied turtle habitat was observed. (Note: A representative of the PAFBC, Nongame and Endangered Species Unit, recommended that a presence/absence survey be conducted for the red-bellied turtle at wetlands # 19, 21, 24, 27, 30, and 31, and two additional locations at Stations 1730+00 and 1745+00. He also stated that project wetlands would not be suitable for bog turtles.)

Coordination with the PAFBC will be established during the project's Preliminary Engineering phase to perform the recommended survey. Based on the project team's observations and experience, no wetlands identified in the immediate project area contain the suite of conditions necessary for red-bellied turtle habitat. Two wetlands were identified along the alignment as potential bog turtle habitat. The project footprint would not directly impact either wetland. 

The Missouri rock-cress is a herbaceous biennial, usually growing on dry slopes in unusual drought-resistant plant communities. The species was identified on steep slopes and crests of some steep, southwest facing rocky bluffs, in the same general area as the original site reported by PNDI. In an effort to protect the species, potential bog turtle habitat and the Missouri rock-cress location will not be disclosed in this document.

Water Quality and Natural Fisheries 

The alignment crosses 55 mapped stream channels on existing bridges or culverts. Stream channel habitat conditions at each of these crossings were not inventoried or characterized. However, it was observed that the channel bottoms and banks at many of these structures have been encased in pipes, are concrete-lined, or confined within stone blocks. Channel bottoms immediately downstream and upstream of these structures have adjusted to grade changes imposed by the structures. In some multiple arched culverts or multi-spanned bridges, one or more of the openings have silted in. There are no observed locations where any of the streams crossed by the alignment have significant stretches of channel flowing parallel to and physically adjacent to the existing alignment.

Stream classifications are tabulated in Section 5.7, Water Resources, Exhibit 5.7-2 Waterbodies Crossing or Adjacent to Alignment [PDF] and streams crossed are depicted in Exhibit 5.7-3 Stream Crossings and Floodplains [PDF]. Valley Creek in Chester County is listed as a Class A Wild Trout Stream, and places it and its tributaries under special protection as Exceptional Value Waters (EV). Any wetlands identified in or along the floodplain of Valley Creek within the project area will therefore be classified as Exceptional Value. Classification for the Schuylkill River and other tributary streams within the project area are provided in Section 5.7.

The other streams that are crossed are designated high quality, trout stocked fishery (9 crossings), cold water fishery (2 crossings), and warm water fishery (37 crossings). There are several crossings that are ponds and have no classification.

5.6.3 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES (IMPACTS)

No-Build and TSM Alternatives - The No-Build Alternative will not impact any wetlands. The TSM Alternative would include an extension of SEPTA's R6 commuter rail line to Port Kennedy from Norristown and construction of several park and ride facilities to facilitate express bus service between Reading and Philadelphia. The footprint associated with extending the rail service will directly impact a total of 1.32 acres in portions of five palustrine wetlands (SVM 2 - SVM 8) in Table 5-6.1. All five wetlands (four forested, one shrub/scrub) received low function and value ratings. Two of the potential park and ride areas - Birdsboro and Royersford - have palustrine wetlands. Wetland boundaries at these locations were not measured due to access limitations.

Build Alternatives - The build alternatives alignment footprint within the boundaries of all new grading and related construction would directly impact 19 palustrine wetlands with a total impacted area of 5.6 acres. Information on these wetlands is provided in Table 5.6-2. One wetland, SVM 23, represents 57 percent of the area impacted. This emergent wetland with shrub/scrub characteristics is located across the entire width of the unused railroad bed immediately south of the Phoenixville tunnel. This wetland received low ratings for function and value. The low value ratings were assessed for all factors except groundwater recharge, for which a moderate value was assigned. This wetland is not in the floodplain, does not serve to stabilize sediment or remove nutrients and has low aquatic and wildlife diversity/abundance. The footprint overlies the entire wetland, which is bounded on two sides by excavated bedrock walls. The other 18 wetlands would be partially impacted. The impacts to individual wetlands range from 0.35 to 0.01 acre and average 0.14 acre (6100 square feet.) Two of these wetlands received moderate ratings for function and value. The remaining 16 wetlands received low or very low ratings. The low value ratings are generally associated with the minor role in flood flow alteration and sediment/toxicant reduction and very low value in aquatic diversity/abundance and wildlife diversity/abundance. Impacts to palustrine wetlands are summarized in Table 5.6-2.

All bridges and many culverts carrying the alignment over defined streams, if widened to accommodate additional track, will impact riverine wetlands beneath the new portion of the structure. Because of the conceptual level of mapping and engineering available for use with this DEIS, riverine wetlands were not mapped. For purposes of recognition, riverine wetlands are defined as the stream channel from top of bank to top of the opposite bank. There are no wetlands in any station parking areas.

Vegetation, Wildlife and Threatened and Endangered Species

No-Build and TSM Alternatives - There would be no impacts to forested areas for the No-Build Alternative. The TSM Alternative would result in the loss of thin strips of forested land along the alignment footprint from Port Kennedy to Norristown. The integrity of the floodplain forest corridor would not be significantly impacted, as there will be no new embankments, cuts, or bridge opening reductions that would impact upon the movements of animal populations through the corridor. Virtually all footprint widening would be on the upland side of the alignment; the project would not directly result in any new discontinuity in the floodplain forest corridors. Neither the No-Build Alternative nor the TSM would have direct impact on threatened and endangered animal species.

Build Alternatives - Impact to forested land was computed by placing the project footprint over the Anderson Land Use 41 layer on the project GIS database. Construction of the build alternatives footprint and associated stations would result in the loss of narrow (generally 30 feet or less in width) strips of deciduous forest. There would be no loss of forested areas east of Norristown. The wetland identification fieldwork and the associated evaluation of the wetlands as potential habitat for bog turtles and red-bellied turtles resulted in the finding that there were two wetlands possibly (but not probably) suitable for bog turtle habitat within 150 feet of the existing railroad. (Note: Neither wetland has a soft, mucky bottom typically necessary for bog turtle habitat.) Neither of these wetlands would be directly impacted by the project footprint.

No suitable habitat for the red-bellied turtle was identified. The project will not include creation of new embankments or cuts along the existing alignment in these areas. Consequently, even if either of these turtle species should currently, or at sometime in the future, occupy nearby areas, construction of the project footprint would not impact these species ability to function within their ecological community.

The only potential concern would be secondary impacts associated with sediment-laden runoff from construction activities impacting either of the two wetlands considered as possible suitable bog turtle habitat. Due to the position of the alignment near the mouth of the stream crossed, there is no potential bog turtle habitat areas downstream from the project footprint area. Any such habitats present in areas upstream from the project area would not be indirectly impacted because of the lack of impact to turtle movement pathways. The build alternative alignment footprint widening (to the extent of the conceptual project footprint) would include excavation of the steep slopes where the Missouri rock-cress has been identified.

Water Quality and Natural Fisheries

No-Build and TSM Alternatives - There will be no direct impacts to water quality and natural fisheries for the No-Build Alternative. TSM impacts would be limited to construction-related generation of sediment pollution and water quality impacts between Port Kennedy and Norristown, Ivy Ridge and Cynwyd, and at the bus park-and-ride facilities. If these impacts occur, they should be temporary in nature.

Build Alternatives - The build alternatives will not require construction of bridges or culverts on rivers or streams in any locations where they are not already present. Alternatives 5E, 5ET, and 6 and possibly 1D, 1E, and 2D will require construction of a new bridge, paralleling the existing Schuylkill River Bridge at Norristown. All build alternatives will require widening of bridges or construction of a second, parallel span at two locations associated with improvements to the freight line on the west side of Reading - Schuylkill River bridge west of Titus and the Tulpehocken Creek bridge. Construction of bridge piers will cause short term impacts to river habitat. Bridge and culvert widening associated with the build alternatives footprint would directly impact aquatic habitat where the stream channel is encased in pipes, lined with concrete, or otherwise permanently altered. Widening at many bridges and culverts may be necessary to carry the build footprint over stream crossings west of Norristown. No bridge widening will be required between Philadelphia and Norristown. Determination of the number of feet of widening at each crossing was not performed as part of MIS conceptual engineering. However, individual bridge and culvert widening would be anticipated to be less than 20 feet. Permanent impacts would be limited to short extensions to pipes and concrete bottomed culverts where these extensions are necessary for consistency with the existing structures. All bridge and culvert modifications would result in structures that would be as long or longer than the present structure, resulting in no additional permanent impairment of riverine or floodplain habitat. Natural channel bottoms and stream banks are projected to be maintained in places where the existing structure includes natural streambeds and banks. Construction in the vicinity of rivers, streams, and drainage channels may potentially result in temporary generation of sediment pollution and water quality and habitat impairment. If these impacts occur, they should be temporary in duration. Bridge and alignment widening will not be required at Valley Creek, the sole Class A trout stream crossed by the alignment. Short lengths of fish habitat would be disturbed during construction at stream crossing locations. In all cases, except the Schuylkill River, the disturbance would be at or near the stream's mouth.

5.6.4 MITIGATION

Mitigation for wetland impacts is conducted in three distinct phases referred to as Mitigation Sequencing. The mitigation sequence includes, in order of consideration: 1) avoidance of wetland impacts; 2) minimization of wetland impacts; and 3) compensation for unavoidable wetland impacts (per Executive Order 11990). Some of the wetland impacts listed in Section 5.6.3 may be avoidable and/or able to be minimized.

During Preliminary Engineering, the track configuration will be finalized, geotechnical testing will be performed, and the plan and profile will be finalized to narrow the one used for the analysis of wetland impacts in this DEIS. The narrowing may result from: fewer tracks, design of steeper embankments and cuts, and use of retaining walls. Coincident with preliminary engineering, all palustrine wetlands identified in this DEIS as well as riverine wetland areas will be fully delineated in accordance with PADEP Chapter 105 and COE Section 404 requirements. Construction of this project will require a joint PADEP 105 and COE 404 permit. A conceptual mitigation plan to compensate for unavoidable impacts will be prepared following completion of preliminary engineering. A final mitigation plan would be completed during final design. The design of the wetland replacement site(s) will be performed to replace the lost principal functions exhibited by the impacted wetlands. The project team will consult and coordinate with PADEP, COE, PF&BC, PGC, USFWS, and USEPA during the development of the mitigation plan through final design. Proposed wetland replacement ratios for the proposed project would be anticipated to be as follows:

• 1 to 1 for impacted emergent wetlands 
• 1.5 to 1 for impacted scrub/shrub wetlands, and 
• 2 to 1 for impacted forested wetlands

• Continue efforts through final design to avoid and/or minimize wetland impacts. 
• Mitigate for unavoidable wetland impacts through the construction of replacement wetlands. Generally, replacement as close as possible to each area of impact is considered most desirable. 
• Evaluate and select wetland replacement sites in accordance with PADEP Title 25, Section 105.20a, using the following criteria:

• Availability of replacement hydrology (including potential sources and reliability) 
• Existing land cover/land use and impacts of replacement area development on natural, cultural, and social resources 
• Ecological compatibility of the replacement area with adjacent land cover 
• Disturbance level of the site and adjacent area (disturbed areas are preferred over undisturbed sites due to their low wildlife habitat values) 
• Select site contiguous to impacted wetland 
• Availability of replacement acreage at each potential replacement site 
• Topography and stratigraphy 
• Sources of sediment from adjacent areas 
• Construction feasibility and practicality of developing replacement site 
• Consideration of future property management 

Vegetation, Wildlife and Threatened and Endangered Species 

Impacts to forest land and wildlife resources could be minimized by Preliminary Engineering design measures such as: steepening slopes where possible to minimize width of area to be cleared; design of a vegetative clear zone along the edge of the railroad bed to discourage wildlife entry onto the railway; and the preservation of existing wildlife habitat within the proposed footprint where possible.

Modifications to existing bridge and culvert structures would be designed to minimize and avoid wetland and stream impacts. For any structures that must be completely rebuilt, consideration should be given in the design to allow for the passage of wildlife underneath the railbed, where such passage is not already available.

Impacts to vegetation and wildlife habitat will be mitigated through the combination of habitat enhancement and replacement. This may include seeding and replanting of disturbed areas in a timely manner, planting vegetative screens in areas where the adjacent land includes eyesores, and the areas adjacent to wetland mitigation site(s). Plantings will include native vegetation where possible and invasive species will be discouraged.

A more substantial survey of the Missouri rock-cress habitat should take place coincident with the project's Preliminary Engineering stage. The survey should take place during the spring as the species' flowers are very distinctive and can be more easily inventoried without climbing steep rock slopes. The Missouri rock-cress habitat is in an area where it is probably impossible to widen the alignment on the side opposite the rocky bluff. Efforts should be made during Preliminary Engineering to determine whether the track system can be designed and constructed without impacting the Missouri rock-cress habitat. If the footprint cannot be narrowed in this area during Preliminary Engineering and if construction will result in the destruction of all or a portion of the plant's habitat, a detailed assessment of means of habitat restoration will be performed. Avoidance efforts, potential mitigation, and need for a Wild Plant Management Permit will be performed in consultation with a representative of the PADCNR's PA Native Plant Program.

Preliminary Engineering will establish the maximum degree of slope that can be utilized in rock cut areas so as to minimize the extent of the area disturbed and the quantity of material removed for off-site use or disposal. Minimizing the extent of area disturbed will also reduce the acreage of impacted forested and agricultural land, wetland impacts and the number and extent of property impacts. The program will also identify specific areas where precautions will be necessary so as to avoid rock falls and sinkhole impacts. As part of Preliminary Engineering, an excavated material management program will be developed.

Water Quality and Natural Fisheries

Erosion and sediment pollution control practices, such as sediment traps, silt fences, sedimentation basins, interception channels, grassed swales, and seeding and mulching will be used to minimize the impacts of soil erosion on wetland areas, streams, and the Schuylkill River. Detailed Erosion and Sediment Control Plans (E&S Plans) will be prepared during final design in accordance with the guidelines provided by the PADEP and the PennDOT Design Manual. The E&S Plans will be included in the NPDES Permit application. The permit application will meet the requirements of Chapter 102, Chapter 105, and Chapter 106 of PADEP's Rules and Regulations.

For bridges and culverts requiring widening, all openings will be as long or longer than those for the existing alignment. Natural stream bottoms and banks should be maintained where widening occurs for structures where natural conditions are present. Where bridges or culverts need to be completely rebuilt, consideration should be given to designs that restore or enhance the natural stream channel and channel bank configurations and provide or improve conditions for fish passage.

Coordination will be conducted with PADEP, PADNR, PAFBC, PGC, and USFWS during preliminary and final engineering to solicit and review ideas for enhancement of the riverine and terrestrial systems.

SVMetro.com Copyright © 2006 Lucius Kwok