Loading...
2018 - HOT SPRINGS ROAD BRIDGE HSI Montana Department of Commerce Treasure State Endowment Program Environmental Assessment HOT SPRINGS ROAD BRIDGE (HSI) JEFFERSON COUNTY, MONTANA Proposed Action: The Hot Springs Road Bridge over Big Pipestone Creek is a functionally obsolete bridge that provides access to residential, agricultural and recreational users.Jefferson County proposes to replace the structure with a new, single-span precast, prestressed concrete structure on a driven pile foundation. The new Hot Springs Road Bridge will: provide a two-lane crossing. increase safety,ensure long-term access, handle legal loading requirements,and improve waterway adequacy. A. Environmental Checklist: As the Engineer that prepared the preliminary engineering report, I Ryan Elliott. PE have reviewed the information presented in this checklist and believe that it accurately identifies the environmental resources in the area and the potential impacts that the project could have on those resources. In addition,the required state and federal agencies were provided with the required information about the project and requested to provide comments on the proposed public facility project. Their comments have been incorporated into and attached to the Preliminary Engineering Report. Engineer's Signature: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW CHECKLIST NAME OF PROJECT: Hot Springs Road Bridge over Big Pipestone Creek PROPOSED ACTION: Bridge Replacement LOCATION: Jefferson County, Montana Key Letter: N: No Impact; B: Potentially Beneficial; A: Potentially Adverse; P: Approval/Permits Required; M: Mitigation Required PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT KEY I Soil Suitability, Topographic and/or Geologic Constraints (e.g., soil slump, steep slopes, subsidence, seismic activity) Response and source of information: USDA Soil Maps indicate the parent soil material at the bridge site is classified as Cozberg sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes,which primarily consists of sandy loam and fine sandy loam. There are no identified N topographical or geological constraints. Prior to construction, a Geotechnical analysis will be undertaken in order to determine the most efficient foundation design based on the in-situ soils in the project vicinity. - Ryan Elliott, P.E. - USDA National Cooperative Soil Survey KEY 2 Hazardous Facilities (e.g., power lines, EPA hazardous waste sites, acceptable distance from explosive and flammable hazards including chemical/petrochemical storage tanks, underground fuel storage tanks, and related facilities such as natural gas storage facilities & propane storage tanks) M Response and source of information: A file search of the State Hazard Mapping (DEQ) and State Digital Atlas (NRIS) revealed no underground storage tanks, petroleum leak sites, or related facilities in the project vicinity. A site visit determined that there is an overhead power line located 10' downstream of the existing bridge. Cable conduits are attached to the existing bridge and a telephone pedestal is in the project vicinity. The phone cable will likely be placed in a conduit and attached to the new bridge structure. Typically, such relocations are completed by the utility company at no cost to the County.The proximity of the work to existing overhead power may require temporary relocations or deadening of power line(s) during critical periods of construction (setting bridge beams&pile driving). Prior to construction, a detailed inspection will be undertaken by contacting a utility location service. The Contractor will be required to coordinate all excavation, pile driving and beam setting activities with the local utilities. - Ryan Elliott, P.E. - Digital Mapping Index, Montana DEQ Key Letter: N: No Impact; B: Potentially Beneficial; A: Potentially Adverse; P: Approval/Permits Required; M: Mitigation Required KEY 3 Effects of Project on Surrounding Air Quality or Any Kind of Effects of Existing Air Quality on Project(e.g., dust, odors, emissions) N Response and source of information: The only impacts on air quality may be temporary dust during construction. Reasonable efforts will be taken during construction to minimize these temporary impacts. - Ryan Elliott, P.E. KEY 4 Groundwater Resources &Aquifers (e.g., quantity, quality, distribution, depth to groundwater, sole source aquifers) N Response and source of information: Given the nature of the construction activities, the proposed project should not have any impact on groundwater resources and aquifers. - Ryan Elliott, P.E. KEY 5 Surface Water/Water Quality, Quantity& Distribution (e.g., streams, lakes, storm runoff, irrigation systems, canals) P Response and source of information: Some temporary adverse effects to water quality are typical during bridge construction. Big Pipestone Creek has a small resident trout population. However, according to Ron Spoon, local FWP field biologist, the proposed project will have minimal effects on the stream. The preferred alternative for this structure is a single-span bridge with a driven pile foundation, which will have minimal impacts on the streambed. The new structure will be installed in the same approximate location of the existing bridge. Best Management Practices (BMP's) will be utilized during construction to minimize adverse impacts to water quality. No refueling of equipment will take place within 100 feet of the ordinary high-water mark or any wetland boundary. The Contractor will be required to have spill kits (minimum of 5-gallon capacity) on board each piece of equipment at all times when working near water. The Contractor will be required to inspect all equipment for oil, gas, diesel, antifreeze, hydraulic fluid, or other petroleum leaks prior to entering the construction site. If a leak is detected, the leak will be repaired prior to the equipment being allowed to work on the project site. No construction equipment will operate within the active channel unless it is specifically permitted to do so. A detour route located to the east of the structure will be utilized during the bridge replacement in order to convey local traffic. No adjacent work bridge for construction is anticipated due to the shorter span of the proposed replacement structure. Riprap for abutment scour protection will be placed individually without end dumping and the largest riprap material will be keyed into the toe of the bank. Any riprap not placed directly under(or adjacent to) the new structure will be vegetated. Bio-engineered bank protection will be considered for use during the design/development phases and will be employed if practicable. Key Letter: N: No Impact; B: Potentially Beneficial; A: Potentially Adverse; P: Approval/Permits Required; M: Mitigation Required Careful consideration of the surrounding habitat will be exercised during construction. Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be utilized during construction to minimize impacts to water quality. All necessary stream permits will be acquired prior to construction and the Contractor will be required to abide by the conditions set forth by these permits. Based on a consult with the USACE, the proposed project has the potential to impact Waters of the U.S. (WOUS). As such, a 404 permit will be secured prior to construction of the bridge replacement. The project is anticipated to disturb less than one acre of existing ground. As a result, a Storm Water Permit is not anticipated to be required at this time. All additional necessary stream permits will be acquired prior to construction and the contractor will be required to abide by the conditions set forth by these permits. - Ryan Elliott, P.E. -Jodi Bush, USFWS - Ron Spoon, MFWP Fisheries Biologist - Lindsey Ford, MDEQ -Tim McNew, USACE Project Manager KEY 6 Floodplains & Floodplain Management(Identify any floodplains within one mile of the boundary of the project.) P Response and source of information: The bridge is located in a mapped Zone A Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)floodplain. As the proposed bridge replacement is located within a designated floodplain, a County Floodplain Development Permit will be required and the 100-year water surface cannot be raised by more than 6- inches. Megan Bullock, County Floodplain Administrator, states "The bridge lies within the approximate Zone A Floodplain on Panel Number 525B of the FEMA FIRM and thus a flood development permit must be applied for.A complete hydraulic analysis to determine the base flood elevation will be required as part of the floodplain permitting process." - Ryan Elliott, P.E. - Megan Bullock,Jefferson County Floodplain Administrator - FEMA Community Panel 300 1 5405 25B KEY 7 Wetlands Protection (Identify any wetlands within one mile of the boundary of the project.) M Response and source of information: Based on information collected from site visits and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Survey National Wetlands Inventory,there appear to be riverine and freshwater emergent wetlands in the general bridge vicinity. If necessary, a wetland delineation will be performed to document any jurisdictional wetlands at the site vicinity during the design phase of the project. The entire footprint of the proposed construction disturbance will be evaluated for the presence of wetlands and those wetlands will be delineated and mapped in accordance with the Corps 1987 Delineation Manual (and applicable Regional Supplement). Key Letter: N: No Impact; B: Potentially Beneficial; A: Potentially Adverse; P: Approval/Permits Required; M: Mitigation Required Wetlands boundaries will be flagged in the field and numbered. Flag numbers and locations will be surveyed using a sub-meter GPS and depicted on the delineation map. The Contractor will be required, to the extent feasible, to avoid wetlands in and around the project site that may be affected by construction activities. The Contract will require the Contractor to minimize wetland disturbance wherever possible and implement BMPs to avoid impacts such as material inputs and sedimentation to wetlands or Big Pipestone Creek. At this time, and based upon the preliminary information available, it is anticipated that less than one-tenth of an acre of wetlands will be disturbed as a result of the proposed project. - Ryan Elliott, P.E. - USFWS National Wetlands Inventory - Tim McNew, USACE Project Manager KEY 8 Agricultural Lands, Production, & Farmland Protection (e.g., grazing, forestry, cropland, prime or unique agricultural lands) (Identify any prime or important farm ground or forest lands within one mile of the boundary of the project.) B Response and source of information: The Hot Springs Road Bridge over Big Pipestone Creek is located in a rural area with primarily undeveloped adjacent properties. Preliminary investigations indicate that the surrounding lands are designated as Farmland of Statewide Importance (NRCS Soils Map). As the structure replacement will likely be located within the 60-foot County easement and is not located on tillable land, no negative impact is anticipated. No forest lands exist within one mile of the project. Within a mile of the site, several agricultural operations are present. Other agricultural operations include irrigated alfalfa, dryland alfalfa and grass. A new structure will ensure access to the area for 75 years. - Ryan Elliott, P.E. - NRCS Soil Survey KEY 9 Vegetation &Wildlife Species & Habitats, Including Fish and Sage Grouse (e.g., terrestrial, avian and aquatic life and habitats) P Response and source of information: Big Pipestone Creek supports aquatic wildlife populations; therefore, careful consideration to the stream habitat and effects that the proposed bridge will have on the stream will be considered. A database search conducted using the Montana Natural Heritage Program website and by the USFWS found sixteen possible species of special concern in the area: Canada Lynx, Wolverine, Hoary Bat, Little Brown Myotis, Evening Grosbeak, Cassin's Finch, Clark's Nutcracker, Sage Thrasher, Green-Tailed Towhee, Brewer's Sparrow, Plains Spadefoot, Western Pondhawk, Ute Ladies' Tresses, Annual Indian Paintbrush, Dense-leaf Draba and Whitebark Pine. Key Letter: N: No Impact; B: Potentially Beneficial; A: Potentially Adverse; P: Approval/Permits Required; M: Mitigation Required Jodi Bush of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service does note that"there could be potential effects to migratory birds" but also that her comments were "prepared under the authority of and in accordance with, the provisions of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act(16 U.S.C. 703 et seq.), Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act(16 U.S.C. 668-668d, 54 Stat. 250), and the Endangered Species Act(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). (My] comments do not address the overall environmental acceptability of the proposed action." In regard to the provided list of Threatened and Endangered Species occurring in Jefferson County, she goes on to say that"it is unlikely all of these will occur within your project areas. Given the limited scope, location, and nature of the project as described in your letter, we do not anticipate adverse effects to threatened, endangered, or candidate species to result from project implementation." Jodi Bush notes that due to the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), should work occur during breeding season of migratory birds; removal of swallow nests shall occur as they are built, but prior to egg laying, from any bridge structures. Cutting or removing trees or shrubs for project clearing should take place between August 16th and April 30th if the proposed work will occur during the breeding season. Jodi Bush also notes, `Although grizzly bears (Ursus arctos horribilis) in this area are no longer protected under the Act, they may be present in the project vicinity. As such, we recommend the following conservation measures to manage potential bear attractants and reduce the likelihood of conflicts: I. Promptly clean up any project related spills, litter,garbage, and debris. 2. Camping allowed in designated campgrounds only. 3. Store all food, food related items, petroleum products, antifreeze,garbage, and personal hygiene items inside a closed, hard-sided vehicle or commercially manufactured bear resistant container. 4. Notify the project manager of any animal carcasses found in the area. 5. Notify the project manager of any bears observed in the vicinity of the project Local FWP Fisheries Biologist in the area, Ron Spoon, has indicated that he has no immediate concerns about the project regarding impact to fisheries. He states, "Bridge replacement would be positive for the stream providing the existing span was maintained or increased." Based on a review of the Montana Sage Grouse Habitat Conservation Program Mapper (https://sagegrouse.mt.gov/projects), the proposed project is not mapped in an Executive Order (EO) Area for Sage Grouse Habitat. As such, Sage Grouse are not anticipated to be adversely affected by this work. According to Lindsay Ford of DEQ's Director's Office, and the 2017 40I Certification General Conditions of the Nationwide Permit, riprap used on the project, that isn't directly under the bridge, will need to be vegetated and include soil infill in the riprap, and geotextile should be avoided, if possible, under riprap. To comply with this requirement, riprap outside of the bridge footprint will be revegetated and a granular filter will be evaluated for use under the riprap in lieu of geotextile. Big Pipestone Creek supports aquatic wildlife populations; therefore, careful consideration to the stream habitat and effects that the proposed bridge will have on the stream will be considered. No specific fish window for in-stream construction has been identified by permitting agencies. All necessary stream permits will be acquired prior to construction, and the Contractor will be required to adhere to all guidelines outlined in these documents Key Letter: N: No Impact; B: Potentially Beneficial; A: Potentially Adverse; P: Approval/Permits Required; M: Mitigation Required - Ryan Elliott, P.E. - Ron Spoon, MFWP Fisheries Biologist -Jodi Bush, USFWS - Montana Natural Heritage Program - Montana Sage Grouse Habitat Conservation Program - Lindsay Ford, DEQ Director's Office - 401 Certification Nationwide Permit General Conditions KEY 10 Unique, Endangered, Fragile, or Limited Environmental Resources, Including Endangered Species (e.g., plants,fish or wildlife) P Response and source of information: A database search conducted using the Montana Natural Heritage Program website and by the USFWS found sixteen possible species of special concern in the area: Canada Lynx, Wolverine, Hoary Bat, Little Brown Myotis, Evening Grosbeak, Cassin's Finch, Clark's Nutcracker, Sage Thrasher, Green-Tailed Towhee, Brewer's Sparrow, Plains Spadefoot, Western Pondhawk, Ute Ladies' Tresses, Annual Indian Paintbrush, Dense-leaf Draba and Whitebark Pine. Jodi Bush of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service does note that"there could be potential effects to migratory birds" but also that her comments were"prepared under the authority of and in accordance with, the provisions of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 703 et seq), Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act(16 U.S.C. 668-668d, 54 Stat 250), and the Endangered Species Act(16 U.S.C. 1531 et. seq). [My] comments do not address the overall environmental acceptability of the proposed action." In regard to the provided list of Threatened and Endangered Species occurring in Jefferson County, she goes on to say that"it is unlikely all of these will occur within your project areas. Given the limited scope, location, and nature of the project as described in your letter, we do not anticipate adverse effects to threatened, endangered, or candidate species to result from project implementation." Jodi Bush notes that due to the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), should work occur during breeding season of migratory birds; removal of swallow nests shall occur as they are built, but prior to egg laying, from any bridge structures. Cutting or removing trees or shrubs for project clearing should take place between August 16th and April 30th if the proposed work will occur during the breeding season. Jodi Bush also notes, `Although grizzly bears (Ursus arctos horribilis) in this area are no longer protected under the Act, they may be present in the project vicinity. As such, we recommend the following conservation measures to manage potential bear attractants and reduce the likelihood of conflicts: I. Promptly clean up any project related spills, litter,garbage, and debris. 2. Camping allowed in designated campgrounds only. 3. Store all food, food related items, petroleum products, antifreeze,garbage, and personal hygiene items inside a closed, hard-sided vehicle or commercially manufactured bear resistant container. 4. Notify the project manager of any animal carcasses found in the area. 5. Notify the project manager of any bears observed in the vicinity of the project Local FWP Fisheries Biologist in the area, Ron Spoon, has indicated that he has no immediate concerns about the project regarding impact to fisheries. He states, "Bridge replacement would be positive for the stream providing the existing span was maintained or increased." Key Letter: N: No Impact; B: Potentially Beneficial;A: Potentially Adverse; P: Approval/Permits Required; M: Mitigation Required Based on a review of the Montana Sage Grouse Habitat Conservation Program Mapper (https://sagegrouse.mt.gov/projects),the proposed project is not mapped in an Executive Order (EO) Area for Sage Grouse Habitat. As such, Sage Grouse are not anticipated to be adversely affected by this work. Big Pipestone Creek supports aquatic wildlife populations; therefore, careful consideration to the stream habitat and effects that the proposed bridge will have on the stream will be considered. No specific fish window for in-stream construction has been identified by permitting agencies. All necessary stream permits will be acquired prior to construction, and the Contractor will be required to adhere to all guidelines outlined in these documents - Ryan Elliott, P.E. - Ron Spoon, MFWP Fisheries Biologist -Jodi Bush, USFWS - Montana Natural Heritage Program - Montana Sage Grouse Habitat Conservation Program KEY II Unique Natural Features (e.g., geologic features) N Response and source of information: There is a hot spring located to the north of the project site on private property. The project will not have any impact on the hot spring. -Ryan Elliott, P.E. KEY 12 Access to, and Quality of, Recreational & Wilderness Activities, Public Lands and Waterways and Public Open Space B Response and source of information: The Hot Springs Road Bridge serves approximately 100 vehicles per day including access to private homes, agricultural properties and recreational usage. Closure of the bridge would impact access to (and quality of experience of) recreational activities, hunters, and hikers. The bridge also lies in hunting district 340, which affords hunters opportunities to pursue multiple species of game including elk, deer and antelope. The new structure would ensure access to the area for 75 years. - Ryan Elliott, P.E. Key Letter: N: No Impact; B: Potentially Beneficial; A: Potentially Adverse; P: Approval/Permits Required; M: Mitigation Required HUMAN POPULATION KEY I Visual Quality—Coherence, Diversity, Compatibility of Use and Scale,Aesthetics N Response and source of information: The project is not anticipated to adversely impact the visual quality of the area. - Ryan Elliott, P.E. KEY 2 Nuisances (e.g., glare,fumes) N Response and source of information: The proposed project may cause temporary nuisances such as noise and exhaust fumes from construction equipment, and traffic detours will be necessary while the bridge is under construction. However, no long term impacts have been identified,and efforts will be made to minimize nuisances and address specific problems as they occur. - Ryan Elliott, P.E. KEY 3 Noise - suitable separation between noise sensitive activities (such as residential areas) and major noise sources (aircraft, highways & railroads). N Response and source of information: Nearby residences may be temporarily affected by noise from the construction of this bridge. However, as the bridge is not intended to increase use of the Hot Spring Road, no additional noise sources are anticipated. - Ryan Elliott, P.E. Key Letter: N: No Impact; B: Potentially Beneficial; A: Potentially Adverse; P: Approval/Permits Required; M: Mitigation Required KEY 4 Historic Properties, Cultural, and Archaeological Resources N Response and source of information: As a general rule, all bridges that are 50 years or older are considered eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. The Hot Spring Road Bridge is a steel stringer bridge with a timber deck and concrete abutments. It was constructed in 1935 and is approximately 83 years old. The County has been doing periodic deck replacements since the structure was built. According to MDT Historian,Jon Axline, "The bridge retains none of the attributes needed for National Register of Historic Places eligibility. It displays no unusual design features and the existing guardrail is likely not historic and is not the type of guardrail steel stringer bridges usually had. It is also difficult to determine the histories of this type of structure since they were usually built by county crews under force account. Based on that, the bridge is ineligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places."As the bridge does not meet the criteria for the National Register of Historic Places, no mitigation is necessary. No other culturally significant sites are located in the bridge vicinity. - Ryan Elliott, P.E. -Jon Axline, MDT Historian - Damon Murdo, State Historical Preservation Office KEY 5 Changes in Demographic (population) Characteristics (e.g., quantity, distribution, density) N Response and source of information: The proposed project is not anticipated to affect any changes in demographics to the area. The proposed replacement will be capable of safely supporting legal loads including agricultural loads and delivery truck traffic. - Ryan Elliott, P.E. KEY 6 General Housing Conditions - Quality, Quantity,Affordability B Response and source of information: The Hot Springs Road Bridge provides primary access to numerous residences and agricultural operations. The proposed project will allow residents and agricultural operations to continue to have the most direct access to their properties. If the bridge is not improved and becomes closed, residents would be forced to detour to different roadways in order to access their homes and properties. A new structure will ensure access to the area for 75 years. - Ryan Elliott, P.E. Key Letter: N: No Impact; B: Potentially Beneficial; A: Potentially Adverse; P:Approval/Permits Required; M: Mitigation Required KEY 6 Environmental Justice—(Does the project avoid placing lower income households in areas where environmental degradation has occurred, such as adjacent to brownfield sites?) N Response and source of information: Not applicable to this project. - Ryan Elliott, P.E. KEY 7 General Housing Conditions- Quality, Quantity,Affordability B Response and source of information: The Hot Springs Road Bridge provides primary access to numerous residences and agricultural operations. The proposed project will allow residents and agricultural operations to continue to have the most direct access to their properties. If the bridge is not improved and becomes closed, residents would be forced to detour to different roadways in order to access their homes and properties. A new structure will ensure access to the area for 75 years. - Ryan Elliott, P.E. KEY 8 Displacement or Relocation of Businesses or Residents B Response and source of information: The proposed project will allow residents and agricultural property owners to continue to have the most direct access to their properties. If the bridge is not improved and closes, residents and agricultural operations would be unable to use the most convenient access to their homes and properties. Depending on the direction of a travel, the detour route would add up to seven additional miles for those accessing areas beyond the bridge. A new structure will ensure access to the area for 75 years. -Ryan Elliott, P.E. KEY 9 Public Health and Safety B Response and source of information: Based on recent bridge inspection(s), the structure is generally in fair condition,functionally obsolete and should be viewed as a threat to public safety. The superstructure, consisting of steel stringers, is incapable of supporting legal loading. The bridge substructure is in poor-to-fair condition, with cracks, poor concrete and spalling present. The bridge is posted at 8-tons due to structural capacity issues of the bridge. The narrowness of the existing bridge is another safety concern.The existing bridge provides a useable width of 19.6 feet, which is too narrow to safely handle two-way travel. The new structure should be designed with a useable width of 24-feet, meeting County Standards. Key Letter: N: No Impact; B: Potentially Beneficial; A: Potentially Adverse; P: Approval/Permits Required; M: Mitigation Required The current bridge rail configuration is a single substandard w-beam rail with steel angle iron posts and is in critical condition. In its current condition, the bridge rail likely provides minimal protection to stray vehicles that impact the rail. Bridge rail and guardrail terminal end sections should be added to the new bridge as required by the County Bridge Standards. The existing bridge should be replaced with a new structure that can adequately handle legal loads, remedy the existing structural concerns, and provide safely for two-way travel.A new bridge would eliminate all structural deficiencies and provide a useful life of 75 years. - Ryan Elliott, P.E. - MDT Bridge Inspection Report - GWE Bridge Inspection Report KEY I 0 Lead Based Paint and/or Asbestos M Response and source of information: There is no known lead based paint or asbestos at this site. However, recent requirements from Montana DEQ require an inspection for asbestos (performed by an accredited inspector) prior to any demolition taking place. This inspection may be waived depending on the type of the bridge structure and its components. - Ryan Elliott, P.E. KEY 1 I Local Employment& Income Patterns—Quantity and Distribution of Employment, Economic Impact N Response and source of information: The proposed structure replacement should not create any significant effects on local employment and income patterns. A new structure will ensure access to the area for 75 years. - Ryan Elliott, P.E. KEY 12 Local & State Tax Base& Revenues N Response and source of information: The proposed project should have no impact on local and state tax base and revenues. - Ryan Elliott, P.E. KEY 13 Educational Facilities - Schools, Colleges, Universities B Response and source of information: The bridge is not located on a designated school bus route, however parents utilize the road to transfer children to and from schools, and therefore the schools would benefit from the proposed bridge replacement project. - Ryan Elliott, P.E. Key Letter: N: No Impact; B: Potentially Beneficial; A: Potentially Adverse; P: Approval/Permits Required; M: Mitigation Required KEY 14 Commercial and Industrial Facilities - Production &Activity, Growth or Decline B Response and source of information: A new bridge will allow agricultural equipment to cross the structure providing access for local ranchers, farmers and agricultural operations. - Ryan Elliott, P.E. KEY 15 Health Care—Medical Services B Response and source of information: The Hot Springs Road Bridge provides primary access to numerous residences and agricultural operations. If the bridge is not improved and becomes closed, medical, fire, and law enforcement personnel would be forced to travel longer distances to reach residents southwest of the bridge. A new structure will ensure access to the area for 75 years. - Ryan Elliott, P.E. KEY 16 Social Services—Governmental Services (e.g., demand on) B Response and source of information: The Hot Springs Road Bridge provides primary access to numerous residences and adjacent properties. If the bridge is not improved and becomes closed, services such as the United States Postal Service would be forced to detour to different roads in order to deliver mail to homeowners. A new structure will ensure access to the area and access to government services for 75 years. No additional demand on government services is anticipated as a result of the bridge replacement. - Ryan Elliott, P.E. -Whitehall USPS Office KEY 17 Social Structures& Mores (Standards of Social Conduct/Social Conventions) N Response and source of information: The proposed project should not have any impact on social structures and mores. - Ryan Elliott, P.E. Key Letter: N: No Impact; B: Potentially Beneficial; A: Potentially Adverse; P: Approval/Permits Required; M: Mitigation Required KEY 18 Land Use Compatibility(e.g., growth, land use change, development activity, adjacent land uses and potential conflicts) B Response and source of information: The Hot Springs Road Bridge provides primary access to numerous residences and agricultural operations. The proposed project will allow residents and business owners (including ranchers and farmers) to continue to have the most direct access to their properties. If the bridge is not improved and becomes closed, residents would be forced to detour to different roads for access. A new structure will ensure access to the area for 75 years. Conversations with County Officials yield that the population of the areas southwest of the bridge is not expected to change significantly. LaDana Hintz, Planner, states `Jefferson County currently has no planning projects occurring in the immediate area of the proposed bridge replacement zone. The proposed project should have no impacts on planning." - Ryan Elliott, P.E. - LaDana Hintz,Jefferson County Planner KEY 19 Energy Resources - Consumption and Conservation B Response and source of information: The proposed project will ensure that the current, most direct routes utilized by local residents and ranching traffic will continue to be available. If the bridge were to close, travelers would be forced to utilize alternate routes. As a result, more fuel will likely be consumed by taking longer alternate routes. - Ryan Elliott, P.E. KEY 20 Solid Waste Management B Response and source of information: There are no waste management services in the area, as such, residents and businesses utilize the bridge on a regular basis to access County managed waste disposal sites. The proposed project will ensure that current routes utilized by local residents and business traffic will continue to be available. A new structure will ensure access to the area for 75 years. - Ryan Elliott, P.E. KEY 21 Wastewater Treatment- Sewage System N Response and source of information: Not applicable to this project. - Ryan Elliott, P.E. Key Letter: N: No Impact; B: Potentially Beneficial; A: Potentially Adverse; P: Approval/Permits Required; M: Mitigation Required KEY 22 Storm Water—Surface Drainage M, B Response and source of information: The proposed bridge design, including the new roadway design, will take Best Management Practices (BMP's) into account. Montana DEQ requested the proposed structure would have active curbing for the length of the bridge that would preclude sediment or road fill on the bridge from falling into the stream. Big Pipestone Creek is one of highest TMDL (Total Maximum Daily Load) streams in the state. TMDL in a stream generally indicates considerable sedimentation/turbidity. Any reduction in sediment impact from the adjacent roadway would be beneficial to the health of the stream. - Ryan Elliott, P.E. - Lindsay Ford, DEQ, Director's Office KEY 23 Community Water Supply N Response and source of information: Not applicable to this project. - Ryan Elliott, P.E. KEY 24 Public Safety— Police B Response and source of information: The Hot Springs Road Bridge provides primary access to several residences, agricultural operations and adjacent properties. If the bridge is not improved and becomes closed, medical, fire, and law enforcement personnel would be forced to travel longer distances to reach residents southwest of the bridge. A new structure will ensure access to the area for 75 years. - Ryan Elliott, P.E. KEY 25 Fire Protection —Hazards B Response and source of information: The Hot Springs Road Bridge provides primary access to several residences, agricultural operations and adjacent properties. If the bridge is not improved and becomes closed, medical, fire, and law enforcement personnel would be forced to travel longer distances to reach residents southwest of the bridge. A new structure will ensure access to the area for 75 years. - Ryan Elliott, P.E. KEY 26 Emergency Medical Services B Response and source of information: The Hot Springs Road Bridge provides primary access to several residences, agricultural operations and adjacent properties. If the bridge is not improved and becomes closed, medical, fire, and law enforcement personnel would be forced to travel longer distances to reach residents southwest of the bridge. A new structure will ensure access to the area for 75 years. - Ryan Elliott, P.E. Key Letter: N: No Impact; B: Potentially Beneficial; A: Potentially Adverse; P: Approval/Permits Required; M: Mitigation Required KEY 27 Parks, Playgrounds, &Open Space B Response and source of information: Closure of the bridge would impact access to (and quality of experience of) recreational activities, hunters, and hikers. The bridge also lies in hunting district 340, which affords hunters opportunities to pursue multiple species of game including elk, deer and antelope. The new structure would ensure access to the area for 75 years. - Ryan Elliott, P.E. KEY 28 Cultural Facilities, Cultural Uniqueness& Diversity N Response and source of information: As a general rule, all bridges that are 50 years or older are considered eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. The Hot Spring Road Bridge is a steel stringer bridge with a timber deck and concrete abutments. It was constructed in 1935 and is approximately 83 years old. The County has been doing periodic deck replacements since the structure was built. According to MDT Historian,Jon Axline, "The bridge retains none of the attributes needed for National Register of Historic Places eligibility. It displays no unusual design features and the existing guardrail is likely not historic and is not the type of guardrail steel stringer bridges usually had. It is also difficult to determine the histories of this type of structure since they were usually built by county crews under force account Based on that, the bridge is ineligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places."As the bridge does not meet the criteria for the National Register of Historic Places, no mitigation is necessary. No other culturally significant sites are located in the bridge vicinity. - Ryan Elliott, P.E. -Jon Axline, MDT Historian - Damon Murdo, State Historical Preservation Office (SHPO) KEY 29 Transportation Networks and Traffic Flow Conflicts (e.g., rail; auto including local traffic; airport runway clear zones - avoidance of incompatible land use in airport runway clear zones) B Response and source of information: The proposed project is not anticipated to adversely affect current transportation networks and traffic flow conflicts. A new structure will increase the efficiency of the local transportation network, by ensuring that the structure is kept open and continues to offer the most direct access. - Ryan Elliott, P.E. Key Letter: N: No Impact; B: Potentially Beneficial; A: Potentially Adverse; P: Approval/Permits Required; M: Mitigation Required KEY 30 Consistency with Local Ordinances, Resolutions, or Plans (e.g., conformance with local comprehensive plans, zoning, or capital improvement plans) B Response and source of information: The project is in accordance with the recommendations and priorities set forth in the Jefferson County Bridge Capital Improvements Plan. The bridge design and construction methods will also follow the County Bridge Standards. The existing bridge does not comply with the current standards. - Ryan Elliott, P.E. - 2016 Jefferson County Bridge Capital Improvements Plan KEY 31 Is there a Regulatory Action on Private Property Rights as a Result of this Project? (Consider options that reduce, minimize, or eliminate the regulation of private property rights.) N Response and source of information: There proposed project should not have any impact on private property rights. - Ryan Elliott, P.E. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FORM On a separate piece of paper, please answer the following as they apply to your proposed project: I. Alternatives: Describe reasonable alternatives to the project. Several bridge alternatives were explored including; no action, repair, rehabilitation and replacement options. As the original structure requires significant work to repair and upgrade the bridge to County Standards, it is in the best interest of the County to replace the bridge rather than conduct repairs or rehabilitation. A new structure would have a useful life of 75 years and require a substantially less amount of maintenance. Precast concrete and steel modular bridge systems were found to be the most feasible superstructure options. Spread footing and driven pile foundations were explored for the substructure. The analysis determined that a precast concrete trideck superstructure with a driven pile foundation as the most economical and technically feasible option. The selected alternative will provide a number of benefits, specifically: ease of maintenance, increased hydraulic capacity, increased scour resistance, capability for legal loads and enhanced public safety. 2. Mitigation: Identify any enforceable measures necessary to reduce any impacts to an insignificant level. Contract documents will require Contractors to follow the requirements of any stream permits issued to perform the work. Contract documents for construction will require Contractors to follow the requirements of the permits, any specified fish construction window, necessary utility location and adhere to Best Management Practices (BMP's) during construction. Curbing will be installed on the bridge to direct any runoff to the bridge ends, preventing direct discharge into Big Pipestone Creek. The Montana DEQ requires an asbestos inspection be performed by an accredited inspector prior to bridge component demolition/removal. The DEQ may exercise its right to waive the asbestos inspection requirement depending on the type of bridge structure and its components. During the design phase, a wetland delineation will be performed in order to map and mitigate (as necessary) potential wetland impacts. The bridge is located in a Zone A section of a FEMA floodplain.A County Floodplain Development Permit will be required. 3. Is an EA or Environmental Impact Statement(EIS) required? Describe whether or not an EA or EIS is required, and explain in detail why or why not. Based on our analysis, the EA is an adequate level of environmental review. An EIS is not required. 4. Public Involvement: Describe the process followed to involve the public in the proposed project and its potential environmental impacts. Identify the public meetings --where and when --the project was considered and discussed, and when the applicant approved the final environmental assessment. The County and Great West Engineering have contacted a number of regional entities, homeowners and businesses in order to solicit comments regarding the proposed replacement project. Legal notices have been published as follows: The Boulder Monitor on May 2nd & May 9th , 2018. The Whitehall Ledger on May 2nd & May 9th , 2018. A public hearing was held at the Jefferson County Extension Office in Whitehall at 6:00 p.m. on May 17th, 2018 to discuss the project and give opportunity for the public to express their comments. To date, there have been no written or verbal negative comments from the general public concerning the project. 5. Person(s) Responsible for Preparing: Identify the person(s) responsible for preparation of this checklist. Ryan Elliott, P.E.—Great West Engineering 6. Other Agencies: List any state, local, or federal agencies that have over-lapping or additional jurisdiction or environmental review responsibility for the proposed action and the permits, licenses, and other authorizations required; and list any agencies or groups that were contacted or contributed information to this Environmental Assessment (EA). Other Agencies: • Jefferson County • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service • U.S.Army Corps of Engineers • Montana Department of Environmental Quality • Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation • Montana Fish,Wildlife&Parks • Montana Sage Grouse Habitat Conservation Program Contributors to EA: • Jefferson County • State Historic Preservation Office • Montana Natural Heritage Program • Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks—Fisheries • Montana Department of Environmental Quality • Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation • Montana Department of Transportation, Bridge Historian • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service • U.S.Army Corps of Engineers f� 5/23/2018 Author ed Representative (Great West Engineering) Date on behalf of Jefferson County >,,� 29—/8 Jefferson County Commission Date Great West Engineering prepared this Environmental Assessment on behalf of Jefferson County as part of a contract to assist the County in applying for Treasure State Endowment Program grant funding for the Hot Springs Road Bridge. The Jefferson County Commission entered into a contract with Great West Engineering to prepare the Preliminary Engineering Report and assist in the grant application at a normally scheduled County Commission meeting on December 1st, 2017.