georgia department of transportationmydocs.dot.ga.gov/info/designbuild/shared documents... ·...

First Use: 9 May 2017

Page 1 of 3

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

STATE OF GEORGIA

SPECIAL PROVISION

Project Identification No. 0015436 Franklin & Jackson Counties

Section 107 – Legal Regulations and Responsibility to the Public

___________________________________________________________________ Add the following to Subsection 107.23: H. Protection of Environmentally Sensitive Species

The following conditions are intended as a minimum to protect this species and its habitat during any activities that are in close proximity to the known location(s) of this species.

1. Project personnel shall be advised about the potential presence and appearance of federally protected northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis). There are civil and criminal penalties for harassing, harming, pursuing, hunting, shooting, wounding, killing, capturing, or collecting these species in violation of the Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973. Additionally, all bats are protected under the Georgia state law (Official Code of Georgia § 27-1-28). Pictures and habitat information shall be posted in a conspicuous location in the Project field office until such time that construction has been completed and time charges have stopped.

2. For Neal Road Bridge (119-0025-0), Cedar Ridge Road Bridge (119-0035-0), Old Stage Coach Road Bridge (119-0023-0), and Brown Road Bridge (119-0017-0), one of the following two (2) options to prevent impacts to bat species protected under the ESA and Georgia state law shall be followed: Option #1: Demolition of the existing bridges shall take place entirely outside of the period of April 1st – October 15th (the active season for bats in north Georgia). OR Option #2: If demolition takes place within the period of April 1st-October 15th, then an ecologist prequalified in Area Class 1.06(h) shall be employed to conduct an inspection of the bridges prior to the start of demolition activities. a. The contract ecologist shall inspect the entirety of each bridge no more than fourteen (14) days prior to the scheduled

start of demolition activities.

b. For each bridge, if the contract ecologist observes roosting bats or signs of bat roosting on the structure, then he/she shall notify the Project Engineer immediately, who in turn will notify the State Environmental Administrator, Georgia Department of Transportation, Office of Environmental Services at (404) 631-1101. Demolition activities on that bridge shall be stopped until a site visit has been conducted by the US Fish and Wildlife Service and/or Georgia Department of Natural Resources and/or their designated representative. Pending the outcome of the site visit, the work may need to be delayed until after October 15 or, if necessary, until after consultation under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act is completed.

P.I. No. 0015436, Franklin & Jackson Counties First Use: 9 May 2017 107.23H Protection of Bats

Page 2 of 3

c. For each bridge, if the contract ecologist does not observe roosting bats or signs of bat roosting on the structure, then demolition activities on that bridge may proceed.

d. For each bridge, the contract ecologist shall document the findings of his/her inspection by completing a Georgia Bats in Bridges Datasheet inspection form. Within two (2) business days of completing each inspection, the contract ecologist shall submit a copy of the inspection form to the State Environmental Administrator via the Ecology Submittals Inbox ([email protected]). The email shall be formatted with the title “Inspection Report: PI# 0015436”. The State Environmental Administrator in turn will provide the inspection form to US Fish and Wildlife Service, Georgia Department of Natural Resources, and the lead Federal Agency within five (5) business days of receipt.

3. For Neal Road Bridge (119-0025-0), Cedar Ridge Road Bridge (119-0035-0), Old Stage Coach Road Bridge (119-0023-

0), and Brown Road Bridge (119-0017-0), in order to protect summer roosting habitat of the northern long-eared bat, the Georgia Department of Transportation would restrict tree clearing for the entire project to winter months (October 15 to March 30). A log shall be kept by the Contractor detailing the beginning and ending dates of all clearing of trees within the project. The log shall be signed by the Contractor and Project Engineer prior to the occurrence of clearing. Following project completion, the log shall be submitted to the Project Engineer and the State Environmental Administrator, Georgia Department of Transportation, Office of Environmental Services via the Ecology Submittals Inbox ([email protected]). The email shall be formatted with the title “Tree Clearing Log: PI# 0015436”. The State Environmental Administrator in turn will provide the Tree Clearing Log to US Fish and Wildlife Service, Georgia Department of Natural Resources, and the lead Federal Agency within five (5) business days of receipt.

4. For Neal Road Bridge (119-0025-0), Cedar Ridge Road Bridge (119-0035-0), Old Stage Coach Road Bridge (119-0023-0), and Brown Road Bridge (119-0017-0), if construction activities are deemed necessary during nighttime hours, temporary lighting shall be directed away from any forested areas within the project. Downward-facing, full cut-off lens lights must be used.

5. For Neal Road Bridge (119-0025-0), Cedar Ridge Road Bridge (119-0035-0), Old Stage Coach Road Bridge (119-0023-0), and Brown Road Bridge (119-0017-0), if applicable, all permanent lighting to be installed along the project must use downward-facing, full cut-off lens lights per the specifications in the project lighting plans to minimize the likelihood of habitat degradation and/or northern long-eared bat disturbance.

6. When working on bridges and culverts, sightings of roosting bat species shall be reported immediately to the Project Engineer who in turn will notify the State Environmental Administrator, Georgia Department of Transportation, Office of Environmental Services at (404) 631-1100. All construction activity, with the exception of traffic control and erosion control, shall cease pending consultation by the Department with the lead federal agency, U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service and/or the Georgia Department of Natural Resources. The Department will inform the Contractor of any changes to the project.

7. All personnel employed on this project shall be advised that in the event any incident occurs that causes harm to the northern long-eared bat along the Project corridor, the incident shall be reported immediately to the Project Engineer who in turn will notify the State Environmental Administrator, Georgia Department of Transportation, Office of Environmental Services at (404) 631-1100. All activity, with the exception of traffic control and erosion control, shall cease pending consultation by the Department with the lead Federal Agency, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and/or Georgia Department of Natural Resources.

8. A log shall be kept detailing any incidents that cause harm or injury to northern long-eared bats in or adjacent to the Project until such time that Project construction has been completed and time charges have stopped. Following Project completion, the log and a report summarizing any incidents that caused harm or injury to these species shall be submitted to the Project Engineer and the State Environmental Administrator, Georgia Department of Transportation, Office of Environmental Services via the Ecology Submittals Inbox ([email protected]). The email shall be formatted with the title “Incident Log: PI# 0015436”. The Georgia Department of Transportation in turn will provide copies of the report to the lead Federal Agency, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and/or Georgia Department of Natural Resources.

P.I. No. 0015436, Franklin & Jackson Counties First Use: 9 May 2017 107.23H Protection of Bats

Page 3 of 3

9. All costs pertaining to any requirement contained herein shall be included in the overall bid submitted unless such requirement is designated as a separate Pay Item in the Proposal.

*See ERIT and Special Provision 107.23H for station numbers and dates of restricted tree clearing. **If restricted, clearing of woody vegetation shall only occur outside of the summer activity period as specified in the ERIT and Special Provision 107.23H.

Tree Clearing Log PI No: 0015436 County: Franklin and Jackson Counties

Begin STA #

End STA #

Inside Restricted clearing

zone (Y/N)*

Begin Date

End Date

Contractor Signature and Printed Name

Project Engineer Signature and Printed Name

Protected Species On This Project

Northern Long-Eared Bat (Myotis septentrionalis) Photo Credit: Al Hicks

Description:

Adults are medium-sized with a body length of 3 to 3.7 inches and a wing span of 9

to 10 inches.

Fur color can be medium to dark brown on the back and tawny to pale-brown on the

underside.

As its name suggests, this bat is distinguished by its long ears, particularly as com-

pared to other bats in its genus, Myotis.

During spring and summer months bats emerge from roost trees or structures at dusk

and forage until dawn.

Habitat:

During spring and summer months within Georgia, northern long-eared bats will roost

singly or in colonies underneath bark, in cavities, or in crevices of both live and dead

trees. Males and non-reproductive females may also roost in cooler places, like caves

and mines. It has also been found, rarely, roosting in structures like barns and sheds.

Prime foraging habitat consists of the understory of forested hillsides and ridges. North-

ern long-eared bats also feed on insects over vegetation and water surfaces.

Harming, harassing or killing this animal can lead to fines or jail time.

See special provision 107.23 H.

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION STATE OF GEORGIA

Categorical Exclusion

I. General Information

P.I. No. 0015436 Counties Jackson & Franklin STIP/TIP No.Funded Years Right-of-Way: N/A; Construction: 2017 Funding Codes M233, Z233 Project Name Design-Build Bridge Replacement @ 5 Locs in District 1 Project Limits Plainview Road Bridge @ I-85 (Jackson); Neal Road Bridge @ I-85 (Franklin); Cedar

Ridge Road @ I-85 (Franklin); Old Stage Coach Road @ I-85 (Franklin); Brown Road @ I-85 (Franklin)

II. Need and Purpose (See Attachment 1)

III. Project Description (See Attachment 1)

Existing Facility: The bridge on Plainview Road was built in 1963 in Jackson County. The existing structure is an overpass with two 11.5-foot lanes with no sidewalk, and a sufficiency rating of 44.2. The bridge on Neal Road was built in 1962 in Franklin County. The existing structure is an overpass with two 11.5-foot lanes with no sidewalk with a two-lane unpaved road leading up to the bridge in both directions, and a sufficiency rating of 76.2. The bridge on Cedar Ridge Road was built in 1962 in Franklin County. The existing structure is a two- lane overpass with no sidewalk, and a sufficiency rating of 69.6. The bridge on Old Stage Coach Road was built in 1962 in Franklin County. The existing structure is a two-lane overpass with no sidewalk, and a sufficiency rating of 75.5. The bridge on Brown Road was built in 1961 in Franklin County. The existing structure is a two-lane overpass with no sidewalk, and a sufficiency rating of 61.4. The Cedar Ridge Road, Old Stagecoach Road, and Brown Road existing typical sections each include 2 lanes with widths ranging between 10 to 12.5-feet. The right-of-way (ROW) on the bridges is 50 feet.

Proposed Project: The project will replace five overpass bridges within the existing roadway ROW over I-85 in Jackson and Franklin counties. The proposed typical section would be two, 12-foot travel lanes with 3-foot outside shoulders on Plainview Road, Cedar Ridge Road, and Brown Road. The proposed typical section would be two, 12-foot travel lanes with 2-foot outside shoulders on Neal Road and Old Stagecoach Road. The bridge spans would be able to accommodate four future travel lanes along I-85 with 12-foot inside shoulders and 14-foot outside shoulders in each direction of travel. Bridges would be replaced on existing alignment and off-site detours would be utilized.

Categorical Exclusion PI No. 0015436, Jackson & Franklin Counties

Page 2 of 4

IV. Class of Action – Categorical Exclusion (CE)A. Actions Requiring Concurrences Prior to CE Approval

(See Correspondence, Attachment 2) Yes N/A If Yes, Date of

Concurrence Section 106/Assessment of Effects Section 106/Memorandum of Agreement Draft Individual Section 4(f) Evaluation (Final submitted with CE) De Minimis Acknowledgment/Requirements Protected Species/No Effect 4/24/17 Protected Species/Section 7 Consultation with USFWS 5/9/17 Protected Species/Section 7 Consultation with NMFS Essential Fish Habitat Coordination with NMFS FWCA/USFWS Coordination for Longitudinal Stream Encroachments, Existing Culvert Extensions (+100 feet), or New Culvert Construction USCG Navigable Water Determination

B. Public InvolvementDetours were presented at a Franklin County Commissioners Meeting on March 6, 2017. Detours were presented at a Jackson County Commissioners Meeting on February 20, 2017 (Attachment 3).

V. Effects EvaluationThe effects evaluation form categories are defined as follows:

1. Involvement: A resource is affected by the proposed project (e.g., the project impacts awetland).

2. No Involvement: A resource is within the Area of Potential Effect, but the project wouldnot affect the resource (e.g., a wetland is located in the project area but is not impactedby the project).

3. None: The resource does not exist within the Area of Potential Effect (e.g., no wetlandsare located in the project area).

A. Social Environment Involvement No Involvement None See Attachment 1. Land Use Changes2. Community Impacts 1 3. Relocation Potential4. Churches and Institutions 1 5. Parks/Recreation Areas/Wildlife

Refuges6. Title VI/E.O. 128987. Public Controversy Potential8. Public Involvement 1 & 3 9. Economic Impacts10. Other

B. Cultural Environment Involvement No Involvement None See Attachment 1. Historic Sites 2 2. Archaeological Sites 2

Categorical Exclusion PI No. 0015436, Jackson & Franklin Counties

Page 3 of 4

C. Natural Environment Involvement No Involvement None See Attachment 1. Waters of the U.S./State

Waters 1

2. Water Quality/303(d) List 1 3. Wild and Scenic Rivers 4. Essential Fish Habitat 5. Floodplains 6. Farmlands 7. Protected Species 1 & 2 8. Invasive Species 1 9. Wildlife and Habitat 1 & 2 10. Other

D. Physical Environment Involvement No Involvement None See Attachment 1. Noise 1 & 2 2. Air 1 & 2 3. Energy/Mineral Resources 4. Construction/Utilities 5. UST’s 6. Hazardous Waste Sites

E. Permits/Variances/ Commitments Required Yes No See Attachment

1. U.S. Coast Guard Permit 2. Forest Service/Corps Land 3. CWA Section 404 Permit 4. Tennessee Valley Authority

Permit

5. Buffer Variance 6. Coastal Zone Management

Coordination

7. NPDES 8. Cemetery Permit 9. Other Permits 10. Other Commitments Green Sheet

F. Section 4(f) Applicability Yes No See Attachment 1. De Minimis 2. Programmatic 3. Individual 4. Section 6(f) Applicability


STATE OF GEORGIA

Five (5) Bridges over I-85

Jackson & Franklin Counties

PI No. 0015436

CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION

ATTACHMENT 1

EFFECTS EVALUATION

Attachment 1 PI No. 0015436, Jackson & Franklin Counties

Page 1 of 23

CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION ATTACHMENT 1: EFFECTS EVALUATION

PROJECT NO. 0015436 JACKSON & FRANKLIN COUNTIES

The Interstate 85 (I-85) overpass bridge replacement project will use a Design-Build

delivery approach. Five functionally obsolete and structurally deficient bridges would be replaced.

All five bridges would be replaced within existing right-of-way (ROW), at a similar grade and

utilizing a similar typical section. No disturbances outside of existing ROW, including the 500- foot

approach of either side of each bridge, would occur. The Design-Build contractor’s design plans

will be subject to Environmental Reevaluation.

II. NEED AND PURPOSE

The purpose of the proposed project is to improve the bridge infrastructure of five bridge

locations on I-85 in Jackson and Franklin counties (See Figure 1). The construction of

replacement bridges is required to provide functionally and structurally sufficient bridges. These

bridges were selected for replacement under funding codes M233 and Z233 (FAST Act [Pub. L.

114-94]), which requires the bridges to be functional class 8 (rural minor collector), 9 (rural local),

or 19 (urban local). The proposed bridge spans would be lengthened to accommodate the future

I-85 widening, which would consist of a typical section of four, 12-foot travel lanes with 12-foot

inside shoulders and 14-foot outside shoulders in each direction of travel. The proposed bridges

would be constructed to meet current Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) guidelines

and design standards.

The need for the bridge replacements is based on the structural integrity and/or obsolete

design of the existing bridges. Sufficiency rating is a scale used by GDOT to determine the

structural and geometric condition of the bridge. This rating is determined by a federal definition

adopted from the Association of American State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO)


Page 2 of 23

standards and is based on 1) structural adequacy and safety, 2) serviceability, 3) functional

obsolescence, and 4) necessity for public use. The sufficiency rating of a bridge is based on a

scale of point values from 1 to 100. A rating of 1 is given to structures in serious need of

replacement, and a rating of 100 is given to bridges without any deficiencies. Any bridge with a

sufficiency rating of 50 points or lower are candidates for replacement in order to provide a safe,

structurally sufficient bridge for motorists and pedestrians. However, other factors such as

ensuring that the bridges meet current GDOT guidelines and design standards result in the GDOT

Bridge office determining the need to replace the bridges due to functional obsolescence. A

functionally obsolete bridge is one that was built to standards that are not used today. These

bridges are not automatically rated as structurally deficient, nor are they inherently unsafe.

Functionally obsolete bridges are those that do not have adequate lane widths, shoulder widths,

or vertical clearances to serve current traffic demand, or those that may be occasionally flooded.

The bridge on Plainview Road has a sufficiency rating of 44.2. The bridge on Neal Road

has a sufficiency rating of 76.2. The bridge on Cedar Ridge Road has a sufficiency rating of 69.6.

The bridge on Old Stage Coach Road has a sufficiency rating of 75.5. The bridge on Brown Road

has a sufficiency rating of 61.4. According to the federal sufficiency rating, the Plainview Road

Bridge is structurally deficient. A bridge is considered structurally deficient if the bridge requires

significant maintenance, rehabilitation, or replacement. Due to the structural integrity of the

Plainview Road Bridge, replacement is recommended. The remaining bridges, Neal Road Bridge,

Cedar Ridge Road Bridge, Old Stage Coach Road Bridge, and Brown Road Bridge, are

functionally obsolete because of sub-standard shoulder width, sub-standard guardrails, and

guardrail tie-ins and are therefore recommended for replacement.


Page 3 of 23

Figure 1: Project Location Map


Page 4 of 23

III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The project would replace five overpass bridges within the existing ROW and on existing

alignment overI-85 in Jackson and Franklin counties at a grade that is not anticipated to change

substantially. The bridge at Plainview Road is located in Jackson County. The existing bridge

consists of two travel lanes totaling 23.7 feet in width with 2.1-foot shoulders on 50 feet of ROW.

The existing bridge is a 261-foot long and 30-foot wide steel beam structure on concrete bents

with a sufficiency rating of 44.2. The existing bridge is a two-lane overpass with no sidewalk. The

bridges at Neal Road, Cedar Ridge Road, Old Stagecoach Road, and Brown Road are located in

Franklin County. The existing Neal Road bridge consists of two travel lanes totaling 25.9 feet in

width with 1.7-foot shoulders on 50 feet of ROW. The existing bridge is a 292- foot long and 31.3-

foot wide steel beam structure on concrete bents with a sufficiency rating of 76.2. The existing

bridge on Neal Road is a two-lane overpass with no sidewalks that has an unpaved road leading

up to the bridge in both directions. The existing Cedar Ridge Road bridge consists of two travel

lanes totaling 26 feet in width with 1.8-foot shoulders on 50 feet of ROW. The existing bridge is a

277-foot long and 31.9-foot wide steel beam structure on concrete bents with a sufficiency rating

of 69.6. The existing bridge on Cedar Ridge Road is a two-lane overpass with no sidewalk. The

existing Old Stage Coach Road bridge consists of two travel lanes totaling 26 feet in width with

2-foot shoulders on 50 feet of ROW. The existing bridge is a 281-foot long and 32-footwide steel

beam structure on concrete bents with a sufficiency rating of 75.5. The existing bridge on Old

Stage Coach Road is a two-lane overpass with no sidewalk. The existing Brown Road bridge

consists of two travel lanes totaling 24 feet in width with 2-foot shoulders on 50 feet of ROW. The

existing bridge is a 264-foot long and 30-foot wide steel beam structure on concrete bents with a

sufficiency rating of 61.4. The existing bridge on Brown Road is a two-lane overpass with no

sidewalk.


Page 5 of 23

The proposed typical section would be two, 12-foot travel lanes with 3-foot outside

shoulders on Plainview Road, Cedar Ridge Road, and Brown Road. The proposed typical section

would be two, 12-foot travel lanes with 2-foot outside shoulders on Neal Road and Old

Stagecoach Road. See Figure 2a (obtained from the I-85 Corridor Bridges Limited Concept

Report) for dimensions of bridges listed above. The proposed bridge spans would be able to

accommodate four travel lanes along I-85 with 12-foot inside shoulders and 14-foot outside

shoulders in each direction of travel on I-85 (see Figure 2b). While the bridges would be designed

for future widening, there would be no additional capacity added to I-85. All bridge replacements

would be in the same locations as the existing bridges, within existing ROW, remain at a similar

grade, and would utilize off-site detours.

Figure 2a: Typical Section

Description Existing Proposed

Plainview Rd @ I-85 261’ x 30’ 261’ x 33.25’

Neal Rd @ I-85 292’ x 31.3’ 292’ x 31.25’

Cedar Ridge Rd @ I-85 277’ x 31.9’ 277’ x 33.25’

Old Stage Coach Rd @ I-85 281’ x 32’ 281’ x 31.25’

Brown Rd @ I-85 264’ x 30’ 264’ x 33.25’


Page 6 of 23

Figure 2b: Typical Section


Page 7 of 23

A. SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT

2. Community Impacts

Off-site detours will be required for the replacement of all five overpass bridges (see

Figures 3 through 8). The detours will be in place for no more than one hundred and eighty

(180) days. The detours will be coordinated with the local community to minimize any impacts

and will be notified 30 days in advance of detour implementation per GDOT’s guidance. The

procedures in which the public is notified would be up to the Design Build Contractor's

discretion; however, it must follow GDOT’s requirements. Outreach letters were sent to local

government officials and adjacent property owners on February 16, 2017. Please refer to the

Public Involvement section for more information on the outreach that has been conducted to

date (also see Attachment 3). Additionally, the annual average daily traffic (AADT) for each of

the bridges was very low, so the proposed detours would accommodate the additional traffic

during the proposed bridge closures. Please refer to the I-85 Corridor Limited Concept Report

for traffic projections (on file at GDOT’s Office of Environmental Services) .


Page 8 of 23

Figure 3: Plainview Road Detour


Page 9 of 23

Figure 4: Neal Road Detour


Page 10 of 23

Figure 5: Cedar Ridge Rd Detour (Neal Rd Open)


Page 11 of 23

Figure 6: Cedar Ridge Rd Detour (Neal Rd Closed)


Page 12 of 23

Figure 7: Old Stage Coach Rd Detour


Page 13 of 23

Figure 8: Brown Road Detour


Page 14 of 23

4. Churches and Institutions

Off-site detours will be required for the replacement of all five overpass bridges. Per

GDOT guidance on public notification for detours, a 30-day notice prior to the closure of a bridge

will be implemented and Dry Pond United Methodist Church (east of Plainview Road bridge) will

be notified.1 Dry Pond United Methodist and both Jackson and Franklin County school

administrators were invited to two standing commissioners’ meetings in Franklin (March 6, 2017)

and Jackson (February 20, 2017) counties in discussing the proposed detours (Attachment 3).

No comments have been received.

8. Public Involvement

The project and proposed detours were presented at two standing commissioners

meetings. Invitations to the meetings along with a map and comment card were extended to

county law enforcement officials, school administrators, emergency directors, heads of county

departments, businesses, residents located directly adjacent to the bridges and one church

(Attachment 3 for a list of addresses). A standing commissioners meeting was held on February

20, 2017 in Jackson County (Attachment 3). A total of 19 people attended the meeting, and the

Department received 0 public comments in response. A standing commissioners meeting was

also held on March 6, 2017 in Franklin County (Attachment 3). A total of 22 people attended the

meeting, and again the Department received 0 public comments in response. The procedures in

which the public is notified of the detour would be up to the Design Build Contractor's discretion;

however, it must follow GDOT’s requirements.

Based on coordination with local officials and staff, the following stipulations will be added

to the Design Build Contractor:

1 http://www.dot.ga.gov/PartnerSmart/DesignManuals/Environmental/Public%20Involvement%20Plan/PublicInvolvementPlan.pdf

http://www.dot.ga.gov/PartnerSmart/DesignManuals/Environmental/Public%20Involvement%20Plan/PublicInvolvementPlan.pdf


Page 15 of 23

A) The following bridges will not be closed at the same time:

• Neal Road and Cedar Ridge Road

• Brown Bridge Road and Old Stage Coach Road

B) Old Stage Coach Road will not be closed between November 20, 2017 through

November 27, 2017 and/or November 19, 2018 through November 26, 2018 and;

C) Plainview Road shall be open to traffic prior to December 31, 2018.

C. NATURAL ENVIRONMENT

1. Waters of the U.S./State Waters

The proposed project corridor has been surveyed for Waters of the US and State Waters

under the Clean Water Act, Executive Order 11990, Georgia Erosion and Sedimentation Act, and

other federal and state regulations. There are no wetlands, open waters, intermittent streams,

canals, or ephemeral channels identified within or adjacent to the survey area. Survey efforts on

January 18 - 19, 2017 identified one perennial stream (PS 1/Crockett Creek). This resource is

located outside of the proposed project limits for the Cedar Ridge Road bridge replacement;

however, PS 1 and the associated vegetated buffer are located within the study area at this bridge.

b. Streams

One perennial stream (PS1/Crockett Creek) was identified in the study area during the

field survey. This stream exhibited a defined channel and showed evidence of water flow at times

other than major storm events. The following table describes the stream identified along with the

anticipated impact due to implementation of the proposed project.


Page 16 of 23

Table 1: Summary of Stream Impacts

Stream Site Type Stream Description On 303(d) List?

Length of Temporary

Impact (feet)

Length of Permanent

Impact (feet)

PS1/Crockett Creek

Perennial Bankfull depth 1 ft. and width 4-6 ft. Somewhat impaired due to location within abandoned pasture, impacted riparian buffer, and impervious runoff.

No 0.00 0.00

Totals 0.00 0.00

c. Avoidance and Minimization

There are no anticipated impacts to waters of the US or state waters. This project would

be expected to produce some increased siltation during the construction phase. Environmental

harm would be minimized by standard construction erosion and sedimentation control devices.

Measures to minimize harm to wetlands, water quality, wildlife, and fish and game habitat include:

1) Preservation of roadside vegetation beyond the limits of construction where possible;

2) Early revegetation of disturbed areas so as to minimize soil erosion;

3) The use of slope drains, detention/retention structures, surface, sub-surface and cross

drains, designed as appropriate or needed, so that discharge would occur in locations

and in such a manner that surface and sub-surface water quality would not be affected

(the outlets may require aprons, bank protection, silt basins and energy dissipaters);

4) Inclusion of construction features for the control of predicted erosion and water pollution

in the plans, specifications and control pay items (GDOT Standard Specification 715

identifies the pollution control measures which may be used);


Page 17 of 23

5) The dumping of chemicals, fuels, lubricants, bitumens, raw sewage, or other harmful

wastes into or alongside streams or impoundments, or into natural or manmade

channels leading thereto, would be prohibited.

2. Water Quality/303(d) List

PS1/Crocket Creek is a direct tributary to Carlan Creek, which then drains to Nails Creek,

a tributary listed within the Draft 2016 Georgia 303(d) list as not supporting its designated use of

fishing due to fecal coliform violations from Carlan Creek to the Hudson River. The beginning of

the listed reach of Nails Creek is approximately 5 miles downstream of the Cedar Ridge Road

Bridge Study Area. The majority of the watershed contributing to PS1/Crockett Creek within the

study area is maintained in open pasture, agricultural use, or silvicultural land uses. The upstream

land uses associated with PS1/Crockett Creek’s watershed are likely contributing to the fecal

coliform loads in the upper Nails Creek watershed. However, quantitative water chemistry or

biological sampling was not conducted within PS1/Crockett Creek.

Provisions in the construction contract would require the contractor to exercise every

reasonable precaution during construction to prevent the pollution of streams in the project

vicinity. Where possible, early re-vegetation of disturbed areas would be completed to hold soil

movement to a minimum. Dumping of chemicals, fuels, lubricants, bitumen, raw sewage, or other

harmful wastes into or alongside of streams or impoundments, or natural or manmade channels

leading thereto, would be prohibited.

Additional contract provisions would require the use of temporary erosion control

measures as shown on the construction plans or as deemed necessary during

construction. These temporary measures may include the use of berms, dikes, dams, sediment

basins, fiber mats, netting, gravel, mulches, grasses, slope drains, and other erosion control

devices or methods, as applicable. These provisions are coordinated with the permanent erosion

control features as practical to assure economical, effective, and continuous erosion control


Page 18 of 23

throughout the construction and post-construction periods and are in accordance with the 23 CFR,

Part 650, Subpart B.

7. Protected Species

State and federally-protected species potentially occurring within the study areas were

determined through agency consultation and online database searches. The GDOT has reviewed

the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) listing of Threatened and Endangered Species for

Jackson and Franklin counties. In addition, the Georgia Department of Natural Resources

(GADNR) lists of protected species with known occurrences within these two counties were

reviewed. The GADNR-Nongame Conservation Section (NCS) reported known occurrences of

protected species within three miles of the Old Stage Coach Road, Neal Road, and Cedar Ridge

Road bridges (see Attachment 2, Correspondence). A field survey was conducted to identify

federally and state listed protected species or potential habitat for protected species within the

project corridor. The following tables lists those species along with the project effect.

Table 2: Protected Species Known to Occur in Jackson County

Common Name

Scientific Name

Federal Status

State Status Habitat Present

Recommended Project Effect on

Species Pool sprite Amphianthus

pusillus Threatened Threatened No No effect

Black-spored quillwort

Isoetes melanospora

Endangered Endangered No No effect

Mat-forming quillwort

Isoetes tegetiformans



Page 19 of 23

Table 3: Protected Species Known to Occur in Franklin County

Common Name

Scientific Name

Federal Status

State Status

Habitat Present

Recommended Project Effect on

Species

Smooth Coneflower

Echinacea laevigate


Northern long-eared

bat

Myotis septentrionalis

Threatened Threatened Yes May affect, not likely

to adversely affect Sandbar shiner

Notropis scepticus

Not Listed Rare No No effect

Ozark bunchflower

Veratrum woodii

Not Listed Rare No No effect

Within three miles of Plainview Road Bridge in Jackson County, GADNR-NCS reported

no known occurrences of protected species.

In Franklin County, Brown Road Bridge did not have any known occurrences of protected

species within three miles. Within three miles of Old State Coach Road Bridge, GADNR-NCS

reported known occurrences of sandbar shiner (Notropis scepticus, rare). Within three miles of

the Neal Road Bridge and Cedar Ridge Road Bridge, GADNR-NCS reported known occurrences

of Ozark bunchflower (Veratrum woodii, rare). Due to lack of suitable habitat for the sandbar

shiner and Ozark bunchflower, the recommended biological determination is “no effect” for the

proposed project.

There are no critical habitat designations within Franklin County. Federally protected

species potentially occurring within the counties of the proposed project were determined through

agency consultation and online database searches. Through an early coordination letter dated

February 22, 2017, the USFWS indicated that Franklin County is within the predicted range of the


Page 20 of 23

northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis, threatened). According to the USFWS

Information for Planning and Conservation (IPaC) website, there are known occurrences within

Franklin County for the smooth coneflower (Echinacea laevigata, endangered). Through an early

coordination letter dated January 5, 2017, the GADNR NCS identified no federally protected

species within three miles of any of the bridge sites in Franklin County. According to the Rare

Natural Element Data Portal for Jackson County, there are known occurrences of pool sprite

(Amphianthus pusillus, threatened), black-spored quillwort and mat-forming quillwort (Isoetes

tegetiformans, endangered). The findings of effects on protected species have been coordinated

with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) for the recommended No Effect determinations,

and both the FHWA and the USFWS through informal Section 7 consultation for the “May Affect,

Not Likely to Adversely Affect” recommended determination. The FHWA agreed with these

biological determinations on April 24, 2017 and initiated informal Section 7 consultation under the

Endangered Species Act with the USFWS for the May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Effect

determination for the northern long-eared bat on May 26, 2017. The USFWS concurred with this

determination on May 9, 2017 (see Attachment 2, Report Coordination and Correspondence).

Relevant protective measures are included in Special Provisions (SP) 107.23H, dated May 9,

2017 for the proposed project.

8. Invasive Species

In accordance with Executive Order 13112, a survey for populations of invasive species

that may be spread during construction was conducted for this project. The invasive species for

which the survey was conducted are those which have been identified by the Department as

having the highest priority due to environmental and economic impacts. Both the selected species

and the management practices will be re-evaluated and revised as more information is obtained.


Page 21 of 23

The Category 1 invasive plant species mimosa (Albizia julibrissin), Chinese privet

(Ligustrum sinense), Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), kudzu (Pueraria montana),

multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora), chinaberry tree (Melia azedarach), and tree of heaven (Ailanthus

altissima) were identified within the study area.

During the construction process, GDOT will take measures to prevent or minimize the

spread of these species as appropriate for the time of the year. These measures will include

removal and disposal of vegetative parts in the soil that may reproduce by root raking, burning on

site any such parts and aboveground parts that bear fruit, controlling or eradicating infestations

prior to construction, and cleaning of vehicles and other equipment prior to leaving the infested

site. The measures used will be appropriate for the particular species and conditions that exist

on the project, as described in Georgia Standard Specifications Section 201, Clearing and

Grubbing of Right of Way.

9. Wildlife and Habitat

Migratory bird habitat is present within the study areas. All project study areas contained

suitable habitat for federally protected, neo-tropical, and migratory birds. In addition, potential

nesting and foraging habitat for migratory birds is present in fragmented forested areas located

throughout the study areas. Clearing of fragmented forested areas adjacent to the existing roads

would occur upon implementation of the proposed project. Specific measures to protect migratory

bird species utilizing structures would be implemented during construction through Standard

Specification 107.23G.

Unavoidable and necessary impacts will occur to potential habitat for the northern long-

eared bat. These impacts will be reduced to the maximum extent possible with a commitment to

ensure that tree clearing is minimized to impact the smallest amount of potential habitat. To


Page 22 of 23

ensure this, orange barrier fence (OBF) will be placed to avoid clearing of forested habitat that is

not necessary for construction of the proposed project.

Special Provision 107.23H will be implemented during the construction of the four bridge

locations in Franklin County to protect summer roosting habitat of the northern long-eared bat.

The GDOT would restrict tree clearing for these four bridges to winter months (October 15 to

March 30) in order to protect roosting bats during construction. There were no signs of bat roosting

on the bridges. Please refer to Special Provision 107.23H for demolition restrictions.

D. PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT

1. Noise

Since none of the conditions for a Type I project were met, the subject project meets the

criteria for a Type III project established in 23 CFR 772. Therefore, the project requires no analysis

for highway traffic noise impacts. If changes to the proposed project result in reclassification to a

Type I project, a noise analysis will be required.

2. Air

This project was evaluated for its consistency with state and federal air quality goals,

including carbon monoxide (CO), Ozone, and mobile source air toxics (MSATs) as part of this

assessment. Results indicated that the project is consistent with the State Implementation Plan

(SIP) for the attainment of clean air quality in Georgia and is in compliance with both state and

federal air quality standards.

Ozone

This project is in an attainment area.


Page 23 of 23

Carbon Monoxide (CO)

The project was evaluated for the potential to result in increased CO concentrations in the

project area. Based on project type it has been determined that this project would not increase

traffic congestion or increase idle emissions and CO concentrations.

Mobile Source Air Toxics (MSATs)

The proposed project is classified as a project with no meaningful MSAT effects.

Construction

All phases of construction operations would temporarily contribute to air pollution.

Particulates would increase slightly in the corridor as dust from construction collects in the air

surrounding the project. The construction equipment would also produce slight amounts of

exhaust emissions. The rules and regulations for air quality control outlined in chapter 391-3-1,

rules of Georgia Department of Natural Resources' Environmental Protection Division, would be

followed during the construction of the project. These include covering earth-moving trucks to

keep dust levels down, watering haul roads, and refraining from open burning, except as may be

permitted by local regulations.

The EPA has listed a number of approved diesel retrofit technologies; many of these can

be deployed as emissions mitigation measures for equipment used in construction. This listing

can be found at www.epa.gov/otaq/retrofit/retroverifiedlist.htm.

http://www.epa.gov/otaq/retrofit/retroverifiedlist.htm


STATE OF GEORGIA

Five (5) Bridges over I-85

Jackson & Franklin Counties

PI No. 0015436

CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION

ATTACHMENT 2

CORRESPONDENCE & REPORT COORDINATION

GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

One Georgia Center, 600 West Peachtree Street, NW Atlanta, Georgia 30308 Telephone: (404) 631-1000

Russell R. McMurry, P.E., Commissioner

NOTIFICATION

Initiation of Section 106 Process for

GDOT Project I-85 Bridge Replacements, Jackson and Franklin Counties

P.I. # 0015436

February 16, 2017

The Georgia Department of Transportation (Department) is in the beginning stages of project

development for this proposed transportation project. In compliance with Section 106 of the

National Historic Preservation Act, the Department has determined that because of the nature

and the scope of this undertaking, the proposed project has the potential to cause effects to

historic properties if any such properties exist in the project area. The Department is attempting

to identify historic properties already listed in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP)

and any properties not already listed that would be considered eligible for listing that are located

within the geographic area of potential effects (APE) of the proposed project.

The proposed project, P.I. # 0015436, would replace five overpass bridges on I-85 in Jackson

and Franklin counties (see attached Project Location Map). The bridge spans would be able to

accommodate four future travel lanes with 12 foot inside shoulders and 14 foot outside shoulders

in each direction of travel on I-85. All bridge replacements would be within existing right-of-

way (ROW) and would utilize an off-site detour.

• The Plainview Road bridge over I-85 in Jackson County (Structure ID 157-0022-0) was built in 1963. The existing structure is a two-lane overpass with no sidewalk. The

existing bridge is structurally deficient and functionally obsolete, with a sufficiency

rating of 44.2. Due to the structural integrity of the bridge, replacement is recommended.

• The Neal Road bridge over I-85 in Franklin County (Structure ID 119-0025-0) was built in 1962. The existing structure is a two-lane overpass with an unpaved road leading up to

the bridge in both directions. Although the existing bridge has a sufficiency rating of

76.2, its design is functionally obsolete. Replacement is recommended.

• The Cedar Ridge Road bridge over I-85 in Franklin County (Structure ID 119-0035-0) was built in 1962. The existing structure is a two-lane overpass with no sidewalk. The

existing bridge has a sufficiency rating of 69.6. Due to the structural integrity of the

bridge, replacement is recommended.

• The Old Stage Coach Road bridge over I-85 in Franklin County (Structure ID 119-0023-0) was built in 1962. The existing structure is a two-lane overpass with no sidewalk.

Although the existing bridge has a sufficiency rating of 75.5, its design is functionally

obsolete. Replacement is recommended.

2

• The Brown Road bridge over I-85 in Franklin County (Structure ID 119-0017-0) was built in 1961. The existing structure is a two-lane overpass with no sidewalk. Although

the existing bridge has a sufficiency rating of 61.4, its design is functionally obsolete.

Replacement is recommended.

Because of the nature and scope of the undertaking, the APE is limited to the existing ROW and

viewshed of the proposed project, within which all construction and ground disturbing activity

would be confined. No potential for indirect effects outside of the corridor is anticipated as a

result of implementation of the proposed project.

Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act requires the Federal Highway

Administration (FHWA) and the Department, in consultation with the Georgia State Historic

Preservation Officer (SHPO), to identify potential consulting parties and to invite them to

participate in the Section 106 process. This Notification letter is one of several methods the

Department uses to encourage public participation in this process and it serves as your invitation

to participate as a consulting party in the Section 106 process for this project.

A written request to become a consulting party for cultural resources for this project should be

directed to:

Charlotte Weber

HNTB Corporation

191 Peachtree Street, NE

Suite 3300

Atlanta, GA 30303

Responses would be appreciated within thirty (30) days of receipt of this Notification letter.

Please refer to the project identification number (P.I. 0015436) in your response. The potential

consulting parties identified and invited to participate in the Section 106 process for this project

are the Northeast Georgia Regional Commission, Georgia Mountains Regional Commission,

Georgia SHPO, Jackson County Commission, and the Franklin County Commission. If you are

aware of other organizations or individuals interested in cultural resources in the project area not

already identified, please forward their names to the Department.

Also, on behalf of the Federal Highway Administration Georgia Division (FHWA), in keeping

with a government-to-government relationship and in compliance with 36CFR800, the following

tribal governments are invited to participate in the Section 106 process for this project:

Muscogee (Creek) Nation, Muscogee (Creek) National Council, Poarch Band of Creek Indians,

Alabama-Quassarte Tribal Town, Seminole Nation of Oklahoma, United Keetoowah Band,

Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians, Muscogee (Creek) Nation, and the Thlopthlocco Tribal

Town. Responses to this Notification regarding tribal concerns should be addressed to the

attention of Heather Mustonen, the Department’s American Indian liaison.

Existing information on previously identified historic properties has been checked to determine if

any are located within the APE of this undertaking. This review of existing information revealed

that no properties listed in or nominated for listing in the NRHP, no National Historic Landmarks

3

(NHLs) and no bridges determined eligible for inclusion in the NRHP in the updated Georgia

Historic Bridge Survey (GHBS) are located within the proposed project’s APE. No properties

50 years or older were identified within the APE in the 2002 Jackson County DNR survey or

2010 Franklin County DNR survey or in the Georgia Natural Archaeological Historic Resources

GIS (GNAHRGIS) database for Jackson or Franklin Counties.

The proposed project will be field surveyed for both historic properties and archaeological sites

and the NRHP Criteria of Eligibility will be applied to any identified properties, in consultation

with the Georgia SHPO and other consulting parties, to determine if any of those properties are

eligible for inclusion in the NRHP.

Consulting parties are also invited to provide information concerning any historic or

archaeological properties already listed in the NRHP or that could be eligible for listing in the

NRHP. In accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, the

Department will assess project effects to any identified historic properties as preliminary project

plans become available, endeavor to minimize harm to all identified historic properties and

produce an Assessment of Effects (AOE) report. This document will be provided to all

consulting parties for comment when completed. The Department also wishes to know of any

past, present or future local developments or zoning plans which may result in indirect or

cumulative impacts to archaeological sites and historic structures as they relate to the proposed

project.

Individuals and organizations that do not wish to become a consulting party, but would still like

to comment on the proposed project will also have that opportunity throughout the plan

development process. Historic resource concerns can be addressed to Charlotte Weber

(404-946-5712 or [email protected]); archaeological resource concerns, including cemetery

and other human burials, can be addressed to Heather Mustonen (404-631-1166 or

[email protected]). Questions concerning general design or location issues may be

addressed to Tim Matthews, Project Manager (404-631-1713 or [email protected]) of the

Department's Office of Innovative Delivery.

4

Project Location Map

P.I. 0015436

1

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), and Federal Transit Administration (FTA)

Range-wide Programmatic Consultation for Indiana Bat and Northern Long-eared Bat

Project Submittal Form Updated December 2016

If not using the Assisted Determination Key in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) Information for Planning and Conservation (IPaC) System, transportation agencies must provide this submittal form (or a comparable Service approved form) with provide project-level information for use of the range-wide programmatic consultation covering actions that may affect the Indiana bat and/or northern long-eared bat (NLEB). The completed form should be submitted to the appropriate Service Field Office prior to project commencement. For more information, see the Standard Operating Procedure for Site Specific Project(s) Submission in the User’s Guide.

By submitting this form, the transportation agency ensures that the proposed project(s) adhere to the criteria and conditions of the range-wide programmatic consultation, as outlined in the biological assessment (BA) and biological opinion (BO). Upon submittal of this form, the appropriate Service Field Office may review the project-specific information provided and request additional information. For projects that may affect, but are not likely to adversely affect (NLAA) the Indiana bat and/or NLEB, if the applying transportation agency is not contacted by the Service with any questions or concerns within 14 calendar days of form submittal, it may proceed under the range-wide programmatic consultation and assume concurrence of the NLAA determination made by the Service in the BO. For projects that may affect, and are likely to adversely affect (LAA) the Indiana bat and/or the NLEB, the appropriate Service Field Office will respond (see recommended response letter template) within 30 calendar days of receiving a complete project-level submission, which includes, but may not be limited to this completed form.

Further instructions on completing the submittal form can be found by hovering your cursor over each text box.

1. Date:

2. Lead agency:This refers to the Federal governmental lead action agency initiating consultation; select FHWA, FRA or FTAas appropriate.

3. Requesting agency:This refers to the transportation agency completing the form (it may or may not be the same as the Lead Agency.

Name:

Title:

2

Phone:

Email:

4. Consultation code1:

5. Project name(s):

6. Project description:Please attach additional documentation or explanatory text if necessary

7. Project location (county, state):If not delineated in IPaC, attach shape files

8. For species other than Indiana bat and NLEB (from IPaC official species list):

No effect – project(s) are inside the range, but no suitable habitat (see additional information attached).

May affect – see additional information provided for those species (see attached or forthcoming).

Please confirm and identify how the proposed project(s) adhere to the criteria of the BO by completing the following (see User Guide Section 2.0):

1 Available through IPaC System Official Species List: https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/

https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/

3

NO EFFECT

9. For Indiana bat/NLEB, if applicable, select your no effect determination:

No effect – project(s) are outside the species’ range. submittal form complete

No effect – project(s) are inside the species range with no suitable summer habitat; project(s) must also be greater than 0.5 miles from any hibernaculum unless meeting exceptions listed below. submittal form complete

No effect – project(s) do not involve any construction activities (e.g., bridge/abandoned structure assessments, property inspections, planning and technical studies, property sales, property easements, and equipment purchases). submittal form complete

No effect – project(s) are completely within existing road/rail surface and do not involve percussive or other activities that increase noise above existing traffic/ background levels (e.g., road line painting). submittal form complete

No effect - project(s) are outside suitable summer bat habitat and limited to the maintenance of existing facilities (e.g., rest areas, stormwater detention basins) with no new ground disturbance.

No effect – project(s) includes maintenance, alteration, or removal of bridge(s)/ structure(s) and indicate(s) no signs of bats from results of a bridge/abandoned structure assessment. submittal form complete Otherwise, please continue below.

MAY AFFECT, NOT LIKELY TO ADVERSELY EFFECT – W/O AMMS

10. For Indiana bat/NLEB, if applicable, select your may affect, NLAA determination(without implementation of AMMs):

NLAA – project(s) are inside the species range and within suitable bat habitat, but negative bat presence/absence (P/A) surveys; must also be greater than 0.5 miles from any hibernaculum. submittal form complete

NLAA – project(s) are within 300 feet of the existing road/rail surface and in area that contain suitable habitat (but no documented habitat) that do not involve tree removal, but include percussives or other activities that increase noise above existing traffic/background levels (must also be greater than 0.5 miles of a hibernaculum). submittal form complete

NLAA – project(s) are limited to slash pile burning (must also be greater than 0.5 miles from any hibernaculum). submittal form complete

NLAA – project(s) are limited to wetland or stream protection activities associated

4

with compensatory wetland mitigation that do not clear suitable habitat (must also be greater than 0.5 miles from any hibernaculum). submittal form complete

NLAA – project(s) anywhere, including within 0.5 mile of hibernacula, with suitable summer bat habitat present that are limited to the maintenance of existing facilities (e.g., rest areas, stormwater detention basins) with no new ground disturbance or tree removal/trimming. submittal form complete

Otherwise, please continue below.

MAY EFFECT, NOT LIKELY TO ADVERSELY AFFECT – WITH AMMs

11. For Indiana bat/NLEB, if applicable, document your may affect, NLAA determination bycompleting the following section (with implementation of AMMs; use #13 to documentAMMs).

Affected Resource/Habitat Type:

a. Trees

Verify that all tree removal occurs greater than 0.5 mile from any hibernaculum

Verify that the project is within 100 feet of existing road/rail surfaces

Verify that no documented Indiana bat and/or NLEB roosts and/or surrounding summer habitat within 0.25 mile of documented roosts will be impacted

Verify that all tree removal will occur outside the active season (i.e., will occur in winter)2:

Acres of trees proposed for removal:

b. Bridge/Structure Work Projects

Proposed work:

Timing of work:

Evidence of bat activity on/in bridge/structure? Yes:

Verify that work will be conducted outside the active season, or if during the active season, verify that no roosting bats will be harmed or disturbed in any way

Verify that work will not alter roosting potential in any way

2 Coordinate with the local Service Field Office for appropriate dates

No:

5

Verify that all applicable lighting minimization measures will be implemented

MAY AFFECT, LIKELY TO ADVERSELY AFFECT

12. For Indiana bat/NLEB, if applicable, document your may affect, LAA determination bycompleting the following section (use #13 to document AMMs).


a. Trees


Project Location: 0-100 feet from edge of existing road/rail surface100-300 feet from edge of existing road/rail surface

Verify that no documented Indiana bat roosts or surrounding summer habitat within 0.25 mile of documented roosts will be impacted between May 1 and July 31

Verify that no documented NLEB roosts or surrounding summer habitat within 150 feet of documented roosts will be impacted between June 1 and July 31

Timing of tree removal:



13. For Indiana bat/NLEB, if applicable to the action type, the following AMMs willbe implemented3 unless P/A surveys and/or bridge/abandoned structureassessments4 have occurred to document that the species are not likely to bepresent:

General AMM 1 (required for all projects):

3See AMMs Fact Sheet (Appendix C) for more information on AMMs

4 Structure assessment for occupied buildings means a cursory inspection for bat use. For abandoned buildings a more

thorough evaluation is required (See User Guide Appendix D for bridge/abandoned structure assessment guidance).

Proposed work:

Timing of work:

Verify no signs of a colony


6

Tree Removal AMM 1 Tree Removal AMM 2 (required for NLAA) Tree Removal AMM 3 (required for all projects) Tree Removal AMM 4 (required for NLAA) Tree Removal AMM 5 (required for LAA) Tree Removal AMM 6 (required for LAA) Tree Removal AMM 7 (required for LAA)

Bridge AMM 1 Bridge AMM 2 (required for all projects during active season) Bridge AMM 3 (required for NLAA during active season) Bridge AMM 4 (required for NLAA during active season) Bridge AMM 5 (required for all projects)

Structure AMMs are required for all Indiana bat projects, required for NLAA NLEB projects.

Structure AMM 1 Structure AMM 2 Structure AMM 3 Structure AMM 4

Lighting AMM 1 (required for all projects during the active season) Lighting AMM 2 (required for all projects)

Hibernacula AMM 1 (required for all projects)

14. For Indiana bat, if applicable, compensatory mitigation measures will also be required tooffset adverse effects on the species (see Section 2.10 of the BA). Please verify themechanism in which compensatory mitigation will be implemented and that sufficientinformation is provided to the Service.

Range-wide In-Lieu Fee Program, The Conservation Fund

State, Regional, Recovery Unit-Specific In-Lieu Fee ProgramName:

Conservation Bank Name: Location:

Local Conservation Site(s) Name: Location:Description:

From: Straight, CarrieTo: Allen, Katy (FHWA)Cc: Conley, Adrienne L; Hernandez, Aaron (FHWA); Pruett, Hannah LSubject: Re: GDOT PI 0015436 Franklin & Jackson - Design-Build Bridge Replacement at 5 locations along I-85 - Request

for informal consultationDate: Tuesday, May 09, 2017 2:21:53 PM

Katy and Aaron,

We have received and logged the Project Submittal Form under the Informal Programmatic Agreement as

MANLAA for Indiana and Northern Long-eared Bats. Logging of the programmatic form and this email

represents our concurrence for those species.

Thank you,

Carrie

On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 2:44 PM, Allen, Katy (FHWA) wrote:

You should have received GDOT’s April 18, 2017 transmittal of the ERS AOE for thesubject project. We are requesting to consult informally pursuant to the ProgrammaticBiological Opinion dated May 20, 2016 regarding the potential for the proposed action toaffect the northern long-eared bat, which has a range encompassing Franklin County. Wehave determined, and request concurrence, that the proposed action may affect, but is notlikely to adversely affect, the northern long-eared bat, a federally listed species. Attachedplease find the Project Submittal Form (December 2016 update) for the project.

Please note that GDOT is not proposing full compliance with Tree Removal AMM#3, whichrequires flagging of areas subject to tree clearing. However, it requires that a Clearing Logbe maintained by the Contractor and signed by the Project Manager that is completed priorto the occurrence of clearing. Upon project completion, pursuant to item 3 of SpecialProvision 107.23H Protection of Bats, this log would be submitted to the Project Engineerand OES Ecology. I have requested that GDOT modify this Special Provision to alsorequire submittal of the Clearing Log to USFWS and FHWA and attach it to the SpecialProvision. They have agreed to this modification. We believe that this action will meet theintent of precluding clearing of areas with clearing restrictions, which is the intent ofAMM3.

Feel free to contact me if you have questions.

Katy Allen, PE

FHWA Georgia Division

404-562-3657

mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]

From: Allen, Katy (FHWA)To: Carrie Straight ([email protected])Cc: Conley, Adrienne L; Hernandez, Aaron (FHWA); Pruett, Hannah LSubject: GDOT PI 0015436 Franklin & Jackson - Design-Build Bridge Replacement at 5 locations along I-85 - Request for

informal consultationDate: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 2:44:22 PMAttachments: PI 0015436 Franklin Jackson.pdf

You should have received GDOT’s April 18, 2017 transmittal of the ERS AOE for the subject project. We are requesting to consult informally pursuant to the Programmatic Biological Opinion datedMay 20, 2016 regarding the potential for the proposed action to affect the northern long-eared bat,which has a range encompassing Franklin County. We have determined, and request concurrence,that the proposed action may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect, the northern long-eared bat,a federally listed species. Attached please find the Project Submittal Form (December 2016 update)for the project. Please note that GDOT is not proposing full compliance with Tree Removal AMM#3, which requiresflagging of areas subject to tree clearing. However, it requires that a Clearing Log be maintained bythe Contractor and signed by the Project Manager that is completed prior to the occurrence ofclearing. Upon project completion, pursuant to item 3 of Special Provision 107.23H Protection ofBats, this log would be submitted to the Project Engineer and OES Ecology. I have requested thatGDOT modify this Special Provision to also require submittal of the Clearing Log to USFWS and FHWAand attach it to the Special Provision. They have agreed to this modification. We believe that thisaction will meet the intent of precluding clearing of areas with clearing restrictions, which is theintent of AMM3. Feel free to contact me if you have questions. Katy Allen, PEFHWA Georgia [email protected]
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]

1

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), and Federal Transit Administration (FTA)

Range-wide Programmatic Consultation for Indiana Bat and Northern Long-eared Bat

Project Submittal Form Updated December 2016

If not using the Assisted Determination Key in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) Information for Planning and Conservation (IPaC) System, transportation agencies must provide this submittal form (or a comparable Service approved form) with provide project-level information for use of the range-wide programmatic consultation covering actions that may affect the Indiana bat and/or northern long-eared bat (NLEB). The completed form should be submitted to the appropriate Service Field Office prior to project commencement. For more information, see the Standard Operating Procedure for Site Specific Project(s) Submission in the User’s Guide.

By submitting this form, the transportation agency ensures that the proposed project(s) adhere to the criteria and conditions of the range-wide programmatic consultation, as outlined in the biological assessment (BA) and biological opinion (BO). Upon submittal of this form, the appropriate Service Field Office may review the project-specific information provided and request additional information. For projects that may affect, but are not likely to adversely affect (NLAA) the Indiana bat and/or NLEB, if the applying transportation agency is not contacted by the Service with any questions or concerns within 14 calendar days of form submittal, it may proceed under the range-wide programmatic consultation and assume concurrence of the NLAA determination made by the Service in the BO. For projects that may affect, and are likely to adversely affect (LAA) the Indiana bat and/or the NLEB, the appropriate Service Field Office will respond (see recommended response letter template) within 30 calendar days of receiving a complete project-level submission, which includes, but may not be limited to this completed form.

Further instructions on completing the submittal form can be found by hovering your cursor over each text box.

1. Date:

2. Lead agency:This refers to the Federal governmental lead action agency initiating consultation; select FHWA, FRA or FTAas appropriate.

3. Requesting agency:This refers to the transportation agency completing the form (it may or may not be the same as the Lead Agency.

Name:

Title:

2

Phone:

Email:

4. Consultation code1:

5. Project name(s):

6. Project description:Please attach additional documentation or explanatory text if necessary

7. Project location (county, state):If not delineated in IPaC, attach shape files

8. For species other than Indiana bat and NLEB (from IPaC official species list):

No effect – project(s) are inside the range, but no suitable habitat (see additional information attached).

May affect – see additional information provided for those species (see attached or forthcoming).

Please confirm and identify how the proposed project(s) adhere to the criteria of the BO by completing the following (see User Guide Section 2.0):

1 Available through IPaC System Official Species List: https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/

https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/

3

NO EFFECT

9. For Indiana bat/NLEB, if applicable, select your no effect determination:

No effect – project(s) are outside the species’ range. submittal form complete

No effect – project(s) are inside the species range with no suitable summer habitat; project(s) must also be greater than 0.5 miles from any hibernaculum unless meeting exceptions listed below. submittal form complete

No effect – project(s) do not involve any construction activities (e.g., bridge/abandoned structure assessments, property inspections, planning and technical studies, property sales, property easements, and equipment purchases). submittal form complete

No effect – project(s) are completely within existing road/rail surface and do not involve percussive or other activities that increase noise above existing traffic/ background levels (e.g., road line painting). submittal form complete

No effect - project(s) are outside suitable summer bat habitat and limited to the maintenance of existing facilities (e.g., rest areas, stormwater detention basins) with no new ground disturbance.

No effect – project(s) includes maintenance, alteration, or removal of bridge(s)/ structure(s) and indicate(s) no signs of bats from results of a bridge/abandoned structure assessment. submittal form complete Otherwise, please continue below.

MAY AFFECT, NOT LIKELY TO ADVERSELY EFFECT – W/O AMMS

10. For Indiana bat/NLEB, if applicable, select your may affect, NLAA determination(without implementation of AMMs):

NLAA – project(s) are inside the species range and within suitable bat habitat, but negative bat presence/absence (P/A) surveys; must also be greater than 0.5 miles from any hibernaculum. submittal form complete

NLAA – project(s) are within 300 feet of the existing road/rail surface and in area that contain suitable habitat (but no documented habitat) that do not involve tree removal, but include percussives or other activities that increase noise above existing traffic/background levels (must also be greater than 0.5 miles of a hibernaculum). submittal form complete

NLAA – project(s) are limited to slash pile burning (must also be greater than 0.5 miles from any hibernaculum). submittal form complete

NLAA – project(s) are limited to wetland or stream protection activities associated

4

with compensatory wetland mitigation that do not clear suitable habitat (must also be greater than 0.5 miles from any hibernaculum). submittal form complete

NLAA – project(s) anywhere, including within 0.5 mile of hibernacula, with suitable summer bat habitat present that are limited to the maintenance of existing facilities (e.g., rest areas, stormwater detention basins) with no new ground disturbance or tree removal/trimming. submittal form complete

Otherwise, please continue below.

MAY EFFECT, NOT LIKELY TO ADVERSELY AFFECT – WITH AMMs

11. For Indiana bat/NLEB, if applicable, document your may affect, NLAA determination bycompleting the following section (with implementation of AMMs; use #13 to documentAMMs).


a. Trees


Verify that the project is within 100 feet of existing road/rail surfaces

Verify that no documented Indiana bat and/or NLEB roosts and/or surrounding summer habitat within 0.25 mile of documented roosts will be impacted

Verify that all tree removal will occur outside the active season (i.e., will occur in winter)2:



Proposed work:

Timing of work:

Evidence of bat activity on/in bridge/structure? Yes:

Verify that work will be conducted outside the active season, or if during the active season, verify that no roosting bats will be harmed or disturbed in any way


2 Coordinate with the local Service Field Office for appropriate dates

No:

5

Verify that all applicable lighting minimization measures will be implemented

MAY AFFECT, LIKELY TO ADVERSELY AFFECT

12. For Indiana bat/NLEB, if applicable, document your may affect, LAA determination bycompleting the following section (use #13 to document AMMs).


a. Trees


Project Location: 0-100 feet from edge of existing road/rail surface100-300 feet from edge of existing road/rail surface

Verify that no documented Indiana bat roosts or surrounding summer habitat within 0.25 mile of documented roosts will be impacted between May 1 and July 31

Verify that no documented NLEB roosts or surrounding summer habitat within 150 feet of documented roosts will be impacted between June 1 and July 31

Timing of tree removal:



13. For Indiana bat/NLEB, if applicable to the action type, the following AMMs willbe implemented3 unless P/A surveys and/or bridge/abandoned structureassessments4 have occurred to document that the species are not likely to bepresent:

General AMM 1 (required for all projects):

3See AMMs Fact Sheet (Appendix C) for more information on AMMs

4 Structure assessment for occupied buildings means a cursory inspection for bat use. For abandoned buildings a more

thorough evaluation is required (See User Guide Appendix D for bridge/abandoned structure assessment guidance).

Proposed work:

Timing of work:

Verify no signs of a colony


6

Tree Removal AMM 1 Tree Removal AMM 2 (required for NLAA) Tree Removal AMM 3 (required for all projects) Tree Removal AMM 4 (required for NLAA) Tree Removal AMM 5 (required for LAA) Tree Removal AMM 6 (required for LAA) Tree Removal AMM 7 (required for LAA)

Bridge AMM 1 Bridge AMM 2 (required for all projects during active season) Bridge AMM 3 (required for NLAA during active season) Bridge AMM 4 (required for NLAA during active season) Bridge AMM 5 (required for all projects)

Structure AMMs are required for all Indiana bat projects, required for NLAA NLEB projects.

Structure AMM 1 Structure AMM 2 Structure AMM 3 Structure AMM 4

Lighting AMM 1 (required for all projects during the active season) Lighting AMM 2 (required for all projects)

Hibernacula AMM 1 (required for all projects)

14. For Indiana bat, if applicable, compensatory mitigation measures will also be required tooffset adverse effects on the species (see Section 2.10 of the BA). Please verify themechanism in which compensatory mitigation will be implemented and that sufficientinformation is provided to the Service.

Range-wide In-Lieu Fee Program, The Conservation Fund

State, Regional, Recovery Unit-Specific In-Lieu Fee ProgramName:

Conservation Bank Name: Location:

Local Conservation Site(s) Name: Location:Description:

Date: 4/27/201

Lead Agency: FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION - GA DIVISION

Requesting Agency: GEORGIA DEPT TRANSPORTATION

Name: Adrienne Conley

Title: Ecologist

Phone: 404-631-1845

Email: [email protected]

Consultation Code: 09E00000-2016-F-001

Project Name(s): INTERSTATE I-85 BRIDGE REPLACEMENTS

Project Description: The proposed action would replace five structurally deficient and functionally obsolete overpass bridges on I-85 in Franklin and Jackson Counties, Georgia. All bridge replacements would occur within the existing right-of-way and utilize off-site detours during construction. The southernmost bridge is Plainview Rd/CR 250 (Structure ID 157-002-0) in Jackson County (outside the range of the northern long-eared bat (NLEB). The remaining four locations are in Franklin County, within the range of the NLEB:

1. Neal Rd/CR 258 (Structure ID 119-0025-0)2. Cedar Ridge Rd/CR 387 (Structure ID 119-0035-0)3. Old Stage Coach Rd/CR 187 (Structure ID 119-0023-0) and4. Brown Rd/CR 97 (Structure ID 119-0017-0)

Project Location: Franklin and Jackson Counties, GA

Check Box12: Yes

Check Box13: Off

Check Box14: Off

Check Box15: Off

Check Box16: Off

Check Box17: Off

Check Box18: Off

Check Box19: Off

Check Box20: Off

Check Box21: Off

Check Box22: Off

Check Box23: Off

Check Box24: Off

Check Box25: Yes

Check Box26: Yes

Check Box27: Yes

Acres: 21.3 acres of forested area in Franklin County

Proposed Bridge Work: Demolition

Dates: October 15 - March 31

Group32: No

Check Box33: Yes

Check Box34: Yes

Check Box1: Yes

Check Box2: Off

Check Box3: Off

Check Box4: Off

Check Box6: Yes

Check Box7: Yes

Check Box5: Yes

Check Box8: Yes

Check Box9: Off

Check Box35: Off

Check Box36: Off

Check Box37: Off

Check Box38: Off

Check Box39: Yes

Check Box40: Yes

Check Box41: Off

Check Box42: Yes

Check Box43: Off

Check Box44: Off

Check Box45: Off

Check Box46: Off

Check Box47: Yes

Check Box48: Yes

Check Box49: Yes

Dates Bridge: Unrestricted if negative 14-day before construction start PA survey.

Name of In-Lieu Fee Program:

Location of Conservation Bank:

Name of Conservation Bank:

Name of Conservation Site:

Location of Conservation Site:

Description of Conservation Site:

Check Box28: Off

Check Box29: Off

Check Box30: Off

Check Box31: Off

General AMM 1:

Timing of Tree Removal:

Acres Removed:

Timing of Bridge/Structure Work:

Proposed Bridge/Structure Work:

From: Allen, Katy (FHWA)To: Carrie Straight ([email protected])Cc: Hernandez, Aaron (FHWA); Allen, Katy (FHWA); Conley, Adrienne L; Pruett, Hannah LSubject: GDOT PI 0015436 I-85 bridge replacements - Franklin and Jackson Counties, GA NO EFFECT DETERMINATIONSDate: Monday, April 24, 2017 1:29:39 PM

The subject project consists of the replacement of five overpass bridges along I-85 fromapproximately 5.6 miles north of Jefferson, GA to approximately 3.2 miles northeast of Carnesville,GA. You should have received a copy of GDOT’s 4/18/2017 transmittal of the ERS AOE Report forthis project. Based upon the information contained in that report, we have determined that theproposed action will have no effect to the following federally protected species:Black Spored Quillwort (Jackson County)Mat forming quillwort (Jackson County)Pool Sprite (Jackson County)Smooth coneflower (Franklin County)No habitat suitable for these species were identified.Feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Katy Allen, PEFHWA Georgia [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]

MEMORANDUM

TO: Eric Duff

State Environmental Administrator

Office of Environmental Services

Georgia Department of Transportation

Attn: Terri Lotti

FROM: Barbara L. Fisher

Environmental Review Historian - Transportation

Historic Preservation Division

RE: Receipt of Early Coordination Information

Project Title: PI 0015436: Replace Five Overpass Bridges

on I-85

Project Number: HP-170221-007

County: Franklin and Jackson

DATE: March 14, 2017

The Historic Preservation Division has received the early coordination

information required by Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of

1966, as amended (NHPA). Thank you for submitting this information. We look

forward to working with you as this project progresses.

cc: Heather Mustonen, GDOT

Dennis Cheek, GDOT

Aaron Hernandez, FHWA

Joe Rothwell, Georgia Mountains Regional Commission

Burke Walker, Northeast Georgia Regional Commission

Charlotte Weber, HNTB Corporation

GDOT ARCHAEOLOGICAL SHORT FORM FOR NEGATIVE FINDINGS

Report Title:___________________________________________________________________________________ Prime Consultant:_______________________________________________________________________________ Sub Consultant:_________________________________________________________________________________ GDOT Project No.:_________________________________ P.I. No.:______________________________________ GA SHPO HP#:____________________________________ Draft Report Submitted on:________/________/________ PROJECT LOCATION AND AREA OF POTENTIAL EFFECT County(ies): USGS Quadrangle(s): Project Description: Area of Potential Effect (APE):

Phase 1 Archaeological Survey of Five I-85 Off-System Bridges in Jackson and Franklin Counties,

Georgia.

HNTB Corporation

Edwards-Pitman Environmental, Inc.

N/A 0015436

170221-007

3 27 17

Jackson and Franklin

Apple Valley, Homer, Ashland, and Martin, GA; UTM Zone 17

See attached sheet.

The APE falls completely within the existing right-of-way of each road that crosses I-85 (Plainview Road, Neal Road,

Cedar Ridge Road, Old Stage Coach Road, and Brown Road). The APE is 500 feet extending from each end of the

bridge span over Interstate (I-) 85, and ranges in width from 30 feet to 100 feet. Per a personal e-mail

communication with Heather Mustonen an ESC was waived on January 12, 2017.

SURVEY CONDITIONS Soil Descriptions: Topography: Land Use/Vegetation/Ground Cover: Survey Limitations and Disturbance(s): Survey Methods: No. of STs:_________ No. of Transects:_________

This archaeological survey included all areas of the APE and an additional 100 foot expanded survey corridor. This archaeology survey covers the APE only and does not require the survey of the additional 100 foot

expanded corridor. ARCHAEOLOGICAL BACKGROUND RESEARCH Previously Recorded Sites: Previous Surveys: Ref: ATTACHMENT CHECKLIST

1. Project Location Map 2. USGS Topographic Map

3. References Cited

georgia department of transportationmydocs.dot.ga.gov/info/designbuild/shared documents... ·...

Documents