building on a foundation of excellence -...

Building on A Foundation of Excellence

Pennsylvania Environmental Council

East Coast Greenway Bridge Street Obstruc�on Gilmore & Associates, Inc.

Engineering & Consulting Services

PENNSYLVANIA ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL

EAST COAST GREENWAY BRIDGE STREET OBSTRUCTION

TABLE of CONTENTS

SECTION 1 FEASIBILITY MEMO

SECTION 2 CONCEPT SKETCH

SECTION 3 OPINION OF PROBABLE COST

SECTION 4 PERSPECTIVE SKETCHES

SECTION 5 SECONDARY TRAIL ACCESS DIAGRAM

APPENDIX A SITE SURVEY

APPENDIX B PRELIMINARY SITE INVENTORY, OPPORTUNITES AND CONTRAINTS (OCTOBER 9, 2013)

APPENDIX C DCNR LEGAL ASPECTS OF CANAL OWNERSHIP

APPENDIX D PDNI ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW RECEIPT



East Coast Greenway Bridge Street Obstruc�on Gilmore & Associates, Inc. Engineering & Consulting Services

SECTION 1 FEASIBILITY MEMO

Goal: The goal of this study is to determine the feasibility op�ons for elimina�ng the Bridge Street Obstruc�on of

the East Coast Greenway trail. This obstruc�on consists of naviga�ng steep side slopes adjacent to Bridge Street along

with providing safe passage across Bridge Street.

Informa�on Gathered:

• Steering Commi!ee: The Steering Commi!ee for this project is comprised of representa�ves from the

Borough of Morrisville, Department of Conserva�on and Natural Resources (DCNR), Delaware Valley

Regional Planning Commission (DVRPC), East Coast Greenway Alliance, Friends of the Delaware Canal,

Delaware & Lehigh Na�onal Heritage Corridor

• Field Observa�on: The project area was walked and photographed with the Steering Commi!ee at the kick

-off mee�ng held on August 29, 2013

• Aerial Photography/GIS: DVRPC 2010 aerial photography along with parcel lines and topography from

Bucks County’s GIS database was u�lized to provide a general overview of exis�ng opportuni�es and

constraints along with a comprehensive view of poten�al surrounding connector trails

• PennDOT Bridge Condi�on Ra�ngs Inventory: Bridge Sufficiency/Condi�ons Ra�ng report dated October

10, 2013 iden�fies the Bridge Street structure in fair condi�on with minor cracks and signs of deteriora�on

for both the decking and the suppor�ng steel members under the decking. The substructure (suppor�ng

members/piers/abutments) are in poor condi�on. The bridge considered structurally deficient and is

eligible for federal funds to rehabilitate or refurbish. The bridge is currently not on PennDOT’s

Transporta�on Improvement Program (TIP) list.

• DVRPC Traffic Count Data: 12,562 Average Daily Trips on Bridge Street as iden�fied in DVRPC’s 2011 Study

• Field Survey: Upon collec�on of desktop informa�on, field observa�on and feedback from the steering

commi!ee on the poten�al route alterna�ves, it was determined that more detailed field survey of the

towpath area, bridge and surrounding proximity would provide a be!er level of detail to further develop

the feasibility of the trail rou�ng in this most desirable loca�on. Gilmore & Associates conducted an

exis�ng features and topographic survey in this area in November of 2013.

• PennDOT Staff:

• A phone conversa�on was held with PennDOT Representa�ve Sco! Burton on 11/13/13 to discuss

the proposed mid-block crossing and the fact that exis�ng informa�on indicates that the average

daily trips (ADT) on Bridge Street (12,625) exceed the maximum allowable per Pub. 46 (10,000)

• We also discussed the fact that this crossing would likely not meet the required number of

pedestrians currently crossing within 150 feet of the proposed crossing. Pub. 46 requires 80 or

more during any 1 hour, or 40 or more during each of any 4 hours

• Mr. Burton discussed these points with several others within his office (N.B. Patel, Fran Hanney

and John O!en). He indicated that due to the regional importance of this crossing to the overall

East Coast Greenway trail, that these requirements would not pertain to this crossing.

• Proposed facili�es within the PennDOT legal right of way would need to be compliant with ADA

and PennDOT requirements including curb ramps and detectable warnings

• Clear sight distance would need to be documented and maintained, with no on-street parking

within the clear sight zone

• A Highway Occupancy Permit would be needed for proposed improvements

• PennDOT would not require a new Traffic Count or Pedestrian Study




Op�ons Explored:

• Delmorr Avenue Route: U�lize exis�ng sidewalk network for pedestrians and Shared Road route for

experienced cyclists. This route was dismissed by the steering commi!ee due to safety concerns and the

desire for the trail to con�nue along the canal towpath.

• Shared Accessway: U�lize shared accessway/alley adjacent to parcel 24-9-131 to avoid sloped

embankment on the north side of Bridge Street. This route presents several obstacles. The accessway is

only twenty feet in width and accommodates both ingress and egress for vehicles (two way traffic). This

does not leave adequate space to provide a ten foot wide trail route and accommodate two-way vehicular

traffic. In addi�on, exis�ng structures on both east and west sides of the accessway have garage bays

which create addi�onal conflict points for pedestrians. There is also an eleva�on change to the north of

the exis�ng depressed curb that would require ramping on private property. Easements would need to be

established with three separate property owners who rely on the alley for access to their proper�es. In

addi�on the accessway is located directly across from the exis�ng convenience store which would en�ce

pedestrians to cross Bridge Street at a hazardous loca�on where vehicles are making mul�ple turning

movements. Mid-Block Crossing improvements on Bridge Street as well as ramped access on the south

side of the street would also be necessary to complete the connec�on.

• Route Beneath Bridge Structure: Provide a route below the bridge structure to avoid conflict with

vehicular traffic traveling on Bridge Street. This route is infeasible at this �me. Field survey revealed that

there is approximately five feet six inches between the exis�ng towpath eleva�on and the bo!om of the

bridge structure. There is approximately eight feet six inches of eleva�on difference between the exis�ng

water surface eleva�on and the bo!om of the bridge structure. This exceeds the minimum clearance of

eight feet that is required by AASHTO, however there is a six inch gas pipeline that hangs beneath the

bridge structure, reducing the necessary clearance. Rou�ng beneath the bridge was also considered for

future poten�al bridge rehabilita�on or replacement, however such an improvement is not likely to be

implemented in the foreseeable future since it is not currently listed on PennDOT’s TIP priority list.

• Ramping with Mid-Block Crossing: Exis�ng Bridge Street eleva�on is approximately seven feet six inches

above the towpath eleva�on on both the north and south sides of Bridge Street. Provide an accessible

ramp system to transi�on to from Bridge Street to towpath. Implement a pedestrian/mo�on ac�vated

rectangular rapid flash beacon (RRFB) signal along with required signage and pavement markings to

provide a mid-block pedestrian crossing across Bridge Street.




Recommenda�ons:

We believe that the most feasible route to pursue is the ramping with mid-block crossing op�on. The conceptual

sketch plan that has been prepared includes the following components:

• Two ramped structures (one on north side of Bridge Street and one on the south side). Ramps will be one

hundred feet in length to accommodate the grade change between Bridge Street and the towpath. The

ramp structure on the north side is angled so that it avoids the exis�ng u�lity pole and bridge parapet.

The ramp structure on the south side is angled so that it avoids the exis�ng u�lity pole and provides views

of the exis�ng pond.

• Mid-Block Pedestrian Road Crossing. Crossing of Bridge Street (State Route 0032) will require the approval

of PennDOT for improvements within the legal right of way. An�cipated improvements include

construc�on of curb ramps with detectable warnings, crosswalk and advanced warning markings,

rectangular rapid flash beacon signal. No on street parking will be allowable within the clear sight

distances that are required at the crossing.

Advantages of this op�on include:

• Favorable to Steering Commi!ee

• Limited number and size of required Easements

• Poten�al economic benefit for Morrisville Borough due to bringing the trail up to street level

• Simplified Construc�on & Small Disturbance Envelope/limited impact to adjacent property owners with

use of Pre-fabricated Metal Ramp Structure.

• Layout to avoid switchback ramping configura�on – bicycle friendly

• Ability to complete construc�on (pending funding) within the �meframe of other improvements to the

East Coast Greenway.

• Avoid conflicts with exis�ng u�li�es.

• Avoid conflicts with exis�ng bridge abutment and bridge parapet.

Addi�onal Opportuni�es:

In addi�on to the recommended rou�ng op�on described above, we believe there are addi�onal opportuni�es to

connect to the East Coast Greenway/D&L Trail through various connector trails. Opportuni�es include:

• Create/Strengthen pedestrian and bike routes from the Bridge Street crossing heading east across the

bridge into New Jersey. Bridge Street transi�ons into Warren Street in New Jersey and contains bike lanes.

Warren Street connects to the Capitol Complex, which is a hub of pedestrian ac�vity. Connec�vity to the

D&R trail is also an important pedestrian link in New Jersey.

• Improve connec�vity and accessibility from the Williamson Park parking lot to the D&L towpath trail via

Hillside Avenue and East Palmer Street. The parking lot is designated as a Trail Head on D&L’s website.

NO

PARKIN

G / PO

TENTIA

L BIKE LAN

E OR BU

MP O

UT

OPPORTUNITY FOR

LANDSCAPE ENHANCEMENT

100’ ADA RAMP

CROSSWALK

100’ ADA RAMP

20’

UTILITY POLE AVOIDED

UTILITY POLE AVOIDED

BRIDGE PARAPET AVOIDED HANDRAIL/

GUARDRAIL

HANDRAIL/

GUARDRAIL

RECTANGULAR

RAPID FLASH

BEACONS (RRFB)

TYPICAL BOTH SIDES

TOWPATH TRAIL

/

10’ WIDE GRAVEL

TOWPATH TRAIL

EASEMENT NEEDED

EASEMENT

NEEDED

EASEMENT

NEEDED

DEPRESSED

CURB

UTILITY POLE & SLOPED

EMBANKMENT

CREATES DANGEROUS DESIRE

LINE TO CONVENIENCE STORE

TTOOWWPPAATTHH TTRRAAIILLTO

EGRESS DOOR?

ADA RAMPS WITH

DETECTABLE WARNINGS

ADVANCED WARNING

PAVEMENT MARKINGS

RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASH

BEACON (RRFB), ADA CURB

RAMP WITH DETECTABLE WARN-

ING SURFACE (DWS), PAVEMENT

MARKINGS

PRE-FABRICATED STEEL RAMP

SYSTEM WITH CONCRETE DECKING

DESIGN COMPONENTS

20 0 20

GRAPHIC SCALE

4010

GARAGE

BAY

GARAGE

BAY



East Coast Greenway Bridge Street Obstruc�on Gilmore & Associates, Inc.

Engineering & Consulting Services

SECTION 3 OPINION OF PROBABLE COSTS

PRELIMINARY COST OPINION WORKSHEET

(BASED ON RESTRICTIVE GRANT FUNDING)

PROJECT: East Coast Greenway - Bridge Street Obstruc�on 20-Jan-14

LOCATION: BOROUGH OF MORRISVILLE, BUCKS COUNTY, PA

DESCRIPTION: RAMPED APPROACH AND MID-BLOCK CROSSING

ITEM TOTAL

NO. DESCRIPTION NO. UNIT $/UNIT COST

SITE PREPARATION

1 MOBILIZATION 1 L.S. $50,000.00 $50,000.00

2 MAINTENANCE & PROTECTION OF TRAFFIC 1 L.S. $15,000.00 $15,000.00

3 EROSION & SEDIMENTATION CONTROL 1 L.S. $1,000.00 $1,000.00

4 TREE REMOVAL 1 L.S. $2,000.00 $2,000.00

TOTAL - SITE PREPARATION $68,000

RAMP CONSTRUCTION

1 CONCRETE BRIDGE ABUTMENTS/FOUNDATIONS 2 L.S. $35,000.00 $70,000.00

2 PREFABRICATED STEEL TRUSS RAMP 2 L.S. $200,000.00 $400,000.00

3 CONCRETE WALKING SURFACE (6" THICK) 225 SY $65.00 $14,625.00

4 CONCRETE TRANSITION 15 SY $65.00 $975

TOTAL - RAMP CONSTRUCTION $485,600

MID-BLOCK CROSSING

1 HANDICAP RAMP W/ DETECTABLE WARNING 2 EA. $6,000.00 $12,000

2 PAVEMENT MARKINGS (CONTINENTAL X-WALK) 1 LS $750 $750

3 PAVEMENT MARKINGS (ADVANCED WARNING) 2 EA. $250 $500

4 SOLAR RRFB SIGN/POLE 2 EA. $25,000 $50,000

5 BIKE/PED X-ING SIGNAGE (W11-15) 2 EA. $200 $400

TOTAL - MID-BLOCK CROSSING $63,650

AMENITIES

1 LANDSCAPE MATERIAL 1 L.S. $1,500 $1,500

2 WAY-FINDING SIGNAGE 2 EA. $200.00 $400

TOTAL - AMENITIES $1,900

SUB-TOTAL $619,150

CONTINGENCY (15%) $92,873

ENGINEERING/DESIGN (20%) $123,830

CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION (15%)* $92,873

TOTAL COST $835,853




PRELIMINARY COST OPINION WORKSHEET

(BASED ON PRIVATE FUNDING SOURCES)

PROJECT: East Coast Greenway - Bridge Street Obstruc�on 20-Jan-14

LOCATION: BOROUGH OF MORRISVILLE, BUCKS COUNTY, PA

DESCRIPTION: RAMPED APPROACH AND MID-BLOCK CROSSING

ITEM TOTAL

NO. DESCRIPTION NO. UNIT $/UNIT COST

SITE PREPARATION

1 MOBILIZATION 1 L.S. $5,000.00 $5,000.00

2 MAINTENANCE & PROTECTION OF TRAFFIC 1 L.S. $10,000.00 $10,000.00

3 EROSION & SEDIMENTATION CONTROL 1 L.S. $1,000.00 $1,000.00

4 TREE REMOVAL 1 L.S. $2,000.00 $2,000.00

TOTAL - SITE PREPARATION $18,000

RAMP CONSTRUCTION

1 CONCRETE BRIDGE ABUTMENTS/FOUNDATIONS 2 L.S. $20,000.00 $40,000.00

2 PREFABRICATED STEEL TRUSS RAMP 2 L.S. $200,000.00 $400,000.00

3 CONCRETE WALKING SURFACE (6" THICK) 225 SY $65.00 $14,625.00

4 CONCRETE TRANSITION 15 SY $65.00 $975

TOTAL - RAMP CONSTRUCTION $455,600

MID-BLOCK CROSSING

1 HANDICAP RAMP W/ DETECTABLE WARNING 2 EA. $6,000.00 $12,000

2 PAVEMENT MARKINGS (CONTINENTAL X-WALK) 1 LS $750 $750

3 PAVEMENT MARKINGS (ADVANCED WARNING) 2 EA. $250 $500

4 SOLAR RRFB SIGN/POLE 2 EA. $25,000 $50,000

5 BIKE/PED X-ING SIGNAGE (W11-15) 2 EA. $200 $400

TOTAL - MID-BLOCK CROSSING $63,650

AMENITIES

1 LANDSCAPE MATERIAL 1 L.S. $1,500 $1,500

2 WAY-FINDING SIGNAGE 2 EA. $200.00 $400

TOTAL - AMENITIES $1,900

SUB-TOTAL $539,150

CONTINGENCY (10%) $53,915

ENGINEERING/DESIGN (10%)* $53,915

CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION (5%)* $26,958

TOTAL COST $646,980

W. BRIDGE STREET

DEL

MO

RR A

VEN

UE

EXIS

TIN

G G

RAVE

L LE

VEE

TRAI

L

CEN

TER

STRE

ET

UNION STREET

PEN

NSY

LVAN

IA A

VEN

UE

WAS

HIN

GTO

N S

TREE

T

CEN

TRAL

AVE

NU

E

PARK

AVE

NU

E

D&L CANAL

D&L CANAL

WILLIAMSON PARK

D&L DESIGNATED TRAILHEAD

POTENTIAL IMPROVEMENTS:MMPRPROVOVEMEMENENTSTS::IM

- ADA PARKING SPACES-IMPROVED MID-BLOCK CROSSING-SIGNAGE

GOOGLE STREET VIEW IMAGE

TO NEW JERSEY(CONNECTION TO WARREN STREET

BIKE LANES)

250 125 0 250

NORTH

LEGEND

OFF ROAD TRAIL

DESIGNATED BIKE LANESPEDESTRIANS USE SIDEWALK

BIKES SHARE THE ROADPEDESTRIANS USE SIDEWALK

GOGOOGOG OGOGOGOGLELELELE SSSSTRTRTRTREEEEEEEETTTT VIVIVIVIEWEWEWEW IIIIMAMAMAMAGEGEGEGE

1

East Coast GreenwayBridge Street ObstructionFeasibility Study

Steering Committee MeetingPreliminary Site Inventory/Opportunities/ConstraintsOctober 9, 2013

Overall Trail Routing Potential

OPPORTUNITIES

• DIRECT ROUTE• INCORPORATE MID-BLOCK

CROSSING WITH RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASH BEACON

• COMPLETELY OFF-ROAD• POTENTIAL TO BE

INCORPORATED WITH FUTURE BRIDGE REPAIRS/RECONSTRUCTION

Bridge Street Bridge Improvements

CHALLENGES/CONSTRAINTS

• TIMING OF BRIDGE REPAIR (PENNDOT TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (T.I.P.))

• COST OF RAMPING STRUCTURES/BARRIERS

• COORDINATION/COOPERATION WITH ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS

Bridge Street Bridge Improvements

2

OPPORTUNITIES

• ACCESS TO EXISTING LEVEE TRAIL (6’ GRAVEL)

• ACCESS TO WILLIAMSON PARK

• CONNECTION TO BRIDGE STREET/CROSSING INTO NEW JERSEY

• EXISTING RESTROOM FACILITIES AT TRENTON AVE. (CALHOUN STREET BRIDGE)

• NO ON-STREET PARKING• EXISTING SIDEWALK ALONG

WEST SIDE OF STREET

Delmorr Avenue Connector


• STREET WIDTH (20’) – 14’ LANE WIDTHS ARE RECOMMENDED (AASHTO)

• DISTANCE FROM CANAL TRAIL

Delmorr Avenue Connector

OPPORTUNITIES

• DIRECT ACCESS TO DOWNTOWN/BUSINESSES

• ELIMINATE NEED FOR ENGINEERED RAMP STRUCTURES

Pennsylvania Ave. Connector


• BIKES ENTERING STREET MID-BLOCK

• EASEMENT ACQUISITION FROM PROPERTY OWNERS

• CONDITION OF EXISTING SIDEWALKS

• VEHICULAR/BICYCLE SHARED USE

Pennsylvania Ave. Connector

3

CHALLENGES/CONSTRAINTS• VEHICULAR/BICYCLE SHARED

ROAD USE• CARTWAY WIDTH

Bridge Street Connector

OPPORTUNITIES• CONNECTION TO DOWNTOWN• EXISTING CURB RAMP

IMPROVEMENTS• CONNECTION TO BRIDGE

CHALLENGES/CONSTRAINTS• ADJACENT DRIVE ACCESS• COORDINATION WITH

PROPERTY OWNER

Rail Corridor Connector

OPPORTUNITIES• UTILIZE EXISTING CORRIDOR• VISIBILITY FROM MAJOR

ROADWAY

Questions/Comments

PNDI Project Environmental Review Receipt Project Search ID: 20140108433369

Page 1 of 5

1. PROJECT INFORMATIONProject Name: Bridge Street ObstructionDate of review: 1/8/2014 12:13:36 PMProject Category: Recreation,Trails & Trailheads (parking, etc.)Project Area: 0.4 acresCounty: Bucks Township/Municipality: MorrisvilleQuadrangle Name: TRENTON WEST ~ ZIP Code: 19067Decimal Degrees: 40.207403 N, -74.776992 WDegrees Minutes Seconds: 40° 12' 26.7" N, -74° 46' 37.2" W

2. SEARCH RESULTSAgency Results ResponsePA Game Commission No Known Impact No Further Review Required

PA Department of Conservationand Natural Resources

Potential Impact FURTHER REVIEW IS REQUIRED,See Agency Response

PA Fish and Boat Commission Potential Impact FURTHER REVIEW IS REQUIRED,See Agency Response

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service No Known Impact No Further Review Required

As summarized above, Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Inventory (PNDI) records indicate there may be potentialimpacts to threatened and endangered and/or special concern species and resources within the project area. Ifthe response above indicates "No Further Review Required" no additional communication with the respectiveagency is required. If the response is "Further Review Required" or "See Agency Response," refer to theappropriate agency comments below. Please see the DEP Information Section of this receipt if a PA Departmentof Environmental Protection Permit is required.


Page 2 of 5

Note that regardless of PNDI search results, projects requiring a Chapter 105 DEP individual permit or GP 5, 6,7, 8, 9 or 11 in certain counties (Adams, Berks, Bucks, Carbon, Chester, Cumberland, Delaware, Lancaster,Lebanon, Lehigh, Monroe, Montgomery, Northampton, Schuylkill and York) must comply with the bog turtlehabitat screening requirements of the PASPGP.

RESPONSE TO QUESTION(S) ASKEDQ1: "Accurately describe what is known about wetland presence in the project area or on the land parcel byselecting ONE of the following. ""Project"" includes all features of the project (including buildings, roads, utilitylines, outfall and intake structures, wells, stormwater retention/detention basins, parking lots, driveways, lawns,etc.), as well as all associated impacts (e.g., temporary staging areas, work areas, temporary road crossings,areas subject to grading or clearing, etc.). Include all areas that will be permanently or temporarily affected --either directly or indirectly -- by any type of disturbance (e.g., land clearing, grading, tree removal, flooding, etc.).Land parcel = the lot(s) on which some type of project(s) or activity(s) are proposed to occur ."Your answer is: "2. The project area (or land parcel) has not been investigated by someone qualified toidentify and delineate wetlands, or it is currently unknown if the project or project activities will affectwetlands."

Q2: Aquatic habitat (stream, river, lake, pond, etc.) is located on or adjacent to the subject property and projectactivities (including discharge) may occur within 300 feet of these habitatsYour answer is: 1. Yes

Q3: Accurately describe what is known about wetland presence in the project area or on the land parcel."Project" includes all features of the project (including buildings, roads, utility lines, outfall and intake structures,wells, stormwater retention/detention basins, parking lots, driveways, lawns, etc.), as well as all associatedimpacts (e.g., temporary staging areas, work areas, temporary road crossings, areas subject to grading orclearing, etc.). Include all areas that will be permanently or temporarily affected -- either directly or indirectly -- byany type of disturbance (e.g., land clearing, grading, tree removal, flooding, etc.). Land parcel = the lot(s) onwhich some type of project(s) or activity(s) are proposed to occur .Your answer is: 1. The entire project will occur in or on an existing building, parking lot, driveway, road,road shoulder, street, runway, paved area, or railroad bed.

3. AGENCY COMMENTSRegardless of whether a DEP permit is necessary for this proposed project, any potential impacts to threatenedand endangered species and/or special concern species and resources must be resolved with the appropriatejurisdictional agency. In some cases, a permit or authorization from the jurisdictional agency may be needed ifadverse impacts to these species and habitats cannot be avoided.

These agency determinations and responses are valid for two years (from the date of the review), and arebased on the project information that was provided, including the exact project location; the project type,description, and features; and any responses to questions that were generated during this search. If any of thefollowing change: 1) project location, 2) project size or configuration, 3) project type, or 4) responses to thequestions that were asked during the online review, the results of this review are not valid, and the review mustbe searched again via the PNDI Environmental Review Tool and resubmitted to the jurisdictional agencies. ThePNDI tool is a primary screening tool, and a desktop review may reveal more or fewer impacts than what is listedon this PNDI receipt. The jursidictional agencies strongly advise against conducting surveys for the specieslisted on the receipt prior to consultation with the agencies.


Page 3 of 5

PA Game CommissionRESPONSE: No Impact is anticipated to threatened and endangered species and/or special concernspecies and resources.

PA Department of Conservation and Natural ResourcesRESPONSE: Further review of this project is necessary to resolve the potential impacts(s). Please sendproject information to this agency for review (see WHAT TO SEND).

DCNR Species: (Note: The PNDI tool is a primary screening tool, and a desktop review mayreveal more or fewer species than what is listed below. After desktop review, if a botanicalsurvey is required by DCNR, we recommend the DCNR Botanical Survey Protocols, availablehere: http://www.gis.dcnr.state.pa.us/hgis-er/PNDI_DCNR.aspx.)Scientific Name: Amaranthus cannabinusCommon Name: Waterhemp RagweedCurrent Status: Special Concern Species*Proposed Status: Special Concern Species*

Scientific Name: Bidens bidentoidesCommon Name: Swamp Beggar-ticksCurrent Status: ThreatenedProposed Status: Endangered

PA Fish and Boat CommissionRESPONSE: Further review of this project is necessary to resolve the potential impacts(s). Please sendproject information to this agency for review (see WHAT TO SEND).

PFBC Species: (Note: The PNDI tool is a primary screening tool, and a desktop review mayreveal more or fewer species than what is listed below.)Scientific Name: Sensitive Species**Common Name: Current Status: EndangeredProposed Status: Endangered

Scientific Name: Sensitive Species**Common Name: Current Status: ThreatenedProposed Status: Special Concern Species*


Page 4 of 5

U.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceRESPONSE: No impacts to federally listed or proposed species are anticipated. Therefore, no furtherconsultation/coordination under the Endangered Species Act (87 Stat. 884, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.is required. Because no take of federally listed species is anticipated, none is authorized. This response does notreflect potential Fish and Wildlife Service concerns under the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act or otherauthorities.

* Special Concern Species or Resource - Plant or animal species classified as rare, tentatively undetermined orcandidate as well as other taxa of conservation concern, significant natural communities, special concernpopulations (plants or animals) and unique geologic features.** Sensitive Species - Species identified by the jurisdictinal agency as collectible, having economic value, orbeing susceptible to decline as a result of visitation.

WHAT TO SEND TO JURISDICTIONAL AGENCIES

If project information was requested by one or more of the agencies above, send the following informationto the agency(s) seeking this information (see AGENCY CONTACT INFORMATION).

Check-list of Minimum Materials to be submitted:

____SIGNED copy of this Project Environmental Review Receipt____Project narrative with a description of the overall project, the work to be performed, current physicalcharacteristics of the site and acreage to be impacted.____Project location information (name of USGS Quadrangle, Township/Mu?icipality, and County)____USGS 7.5-minute Quadrangle with project boundary clearly indicated, and quad name on the map

The inclusion of the following information may expedite the review process.____A basic site plan(particularly showing the relationship of the project to the physical features such aswetlands, streams, ponds, rock outcrops, etc.)____Color photos keyed to the basic site plan (i.e. showing on the site plan where and in what direction eachphoto was taken and the date of the photos)____Information about the presence and location of wetlands in the project area, and how this was determined(e.g., by a qualified wetlands biologist), if wetlands are present in the project area, provide project plans showingthe location of all project features, as well as wetlands and streams

4. DEP INFORMATIONThe Pa Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) requires that a signed copy of this receipt, along with anyrequired documentation from jurisdictional agencies concerning resolution of potential impacts, be submitted withapplications for permits requiring PNDI review. For cases where a "Potential Impact" to threatened andendangered species has been identified before the application has been submitted to DEP, the applicationshould not be submitted until the impact has been resolved. For cases where "Potential Impact" to specialconcern species and resources has been identified before the application has been submitted, the applicationshould be submitted to DEP along with the PNDI receipt. The PNDI Receipt should also be submitted to theappropriate agency according to directions on the PNDI Receipt. DEP and the jurisdictional agency will worktogether to resolve the potential impact(s). See the DEP PNDI policy at http://www.naturalheritage.state.pa.us.


Page 5 of 5

5. ADDITIONAL INFORMATIONThe PNDI environmental review website is a preliminary screening tool. There are often delays in updatingspecies status classifications. Because the proposed status represents the best available information regardingthe conservation status of the species, state jurisdictional agency staff give the proposed statuses at least thesame consideration as the current legal status. If surveys or further information reveal that a threatened andendangered and/or special concern species and resources exist in your project area, contact the appropriatejurisdictional agency/agencies immediately to identify and resolve any impacts.

For a list of species known to occur in the county where your project is located, please see the species lists bycounty found on the PA Natural Heritage Program (PNHP) home page (www.naturalheritage.state.pa.us). Alsonote that the PNDI Environmental Review Tool only contains information about species occurrences that haveactually been reported to the PNHP.

6. AGENCY CONTACT INFORMATIONPA Department of Conservation andNatural ResourcesBureau of Forestry, Ecological Services Section400 Market Street, PO Box 8552, Harrisburg, PA.17105-8552Fax:(717) 772-0271

PA Fish and Boat CommissionDivision of Environmental Services450 Robinson Lane, Bellefonte, PA. 16823-7437NO Faxes Please

U.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceEndangered Species Section315 South Allen Street, Suite 322, State College, PA.16801-4851NO Faxes Please.

PA Game CommissionBureau of Wildlife Habitat ManagementDivision of Environmental Planning and Habitat Protection2001 Elmerton Avenue, Harrisburg, PA. 17110-9797Fax:(717) 787-6957

7. PROJECT CONTACT INFORMATION

Name:______________________________________________________________Company/Business Name:______________________________________________Address:____________________________________________________________City, State, Zip:_______________________________________________________Phone:(_____)_________________________Fax:(______)___________________Email:_____________________________________________________________

8. CERTIFICATIONI certify that ALL of the project information contained in this receipt (including project location, projectsize/configuration, project type, answers to questions) is true, accurate and complete. In addition, if the projecttype, location, size or configuration changes, or if the answers to any questions that were asked during thisonline review change, I agree to re-do the online environmental review.

__________________________________________ _______________________ applicant/project proponent signature date

building on a foundation of excellence -...

Documents