wetlands technical report -...

Wetlands Technical Report Neches River Bridge Study November 2015

Jefferson and Orange Counties CSJ: 7220-01-001 Texas Department of Transportation – Rail Division

Neches River Bridge Study Wetlands i

Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1

2.0 Methods ......................................................................................................................... 3 2.1 Site Description ............................................................................................................. 4 2.2 Topography .................................................................................................................... 4 2.3 Vegetation...................................................................................................................... 5 2.4 Soil Types ....................................................................................................................... 6 2.5 Hydrology ....................................................................................................................... 7 2.6 Existing Wetland Mapping ............................................................................................ 7

3.0 Findings ......................................................................................................................... 8 3.1 Identified Wetland Types .............................................................................................. 8 3.2 Other Waters of the U.S. Identified .............................................................................. 9

4.0 Conclusion ..................................................................................................................... 9 4.1 Wetland Impacts ........................................................................................................... 9 4.2 Encroachment Alteration Impacts ............................................................................. 11

5.0 References .................................................................................................................. 12

Neches River Bridge Study Wetlands ii

List of Tables Table 1. NWI Wetland Types in the Project Area.......................................................................... 7 Table 2. Field Verified Wetlands in the Project Area ................................................................. 10 List of Figures Figure 1. Project Location .............................................................................................................. 2 Appendices Appendix A: Wetland Determination Data Forms Appendix B: Exhibits Exhibit 1 USGS Topographic Map Exhibit 2a NRCS Soils within Project Area Exhibit 2b NRCS Soils within Project Area

Exhibit 3a Wetlands within Project Area Exhibit 3b Wetlands within Project Area

Appendix C: Project Area Photographs

Neches River Bridge Study Wetlands 1

1.0 Introduction The Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) is studying a proposed project to add track capacity to the rail corridor crossing of the Neches River in the City of Beaumont, Texas (Figure 1). The proposed project consists of an additional track over the Neches River with an additional lift bridge or fixed bridge north of the existing bridge. The purpose of the proposed project is to improve rail operations through the Beaumont area by providing a second rail crossing of the Neches River. Improved rail operations would focus on maintaining existing rail mobility and continuity while providing new rail capacity to accommodate growth. Improved rail operations would increase overall freight and passenger rail capacity and efficiency and reduce rail and vehicular congestion by addressing vehicular mobility at railroad-highway grade crossings. The project would support and enhance industrial facilities utilizing rail, marine and highway services in the Beaumont region. Improving the movement and interface amongst rail, marine and vehicular modes would benefit the Beaumont region in terms of development and economic growth, which are top priorities for stakeholders and the public in the region. The proposed project is needed because existing rail operations through the Beaumont area are affected by track capacity, track switching, industrial service access, and bridge openings for marine vessel traffic. Future rail traffic across the Neches River is expected to increase with both through traffic along this national corridor as well as local rail traffic serving the region’s existing and expanding industrial facilities. Without improvements to the existing rail crossing of the Neches River at Beaumont, operations will deteriorate in the future with increased rail traffic. The full range of alternatives considered for the project are discussed in the Neches River Bridge Alternative Development and Screening Technical Report (TxDOT, 2015). Four build alternatives were developed to a 10 percent design with key stakeholder input. The alternative screening process and consideration of stakeholder comments to date has resulted in a recommended Preferred Alternative (Alternative E-1) that is the least impactive yet fiscally feasible option that addresses the purpose and need objectives for the project. As such, Alternative E-1 will be presented in detail in the environmental document as the proposed Build Alternative along with the No Build Alternative.


Figure 1. Project Location


For the purposes of this technical report, existing right-of-way (ROW) is defined as the existing railroad ROW; the proposed ROW is under other ownership. Not all existing railroad ROW would be necessary to complete this project and further research of ownership records is ongoing. Therefore, the existing and proposed ROW is subject to change. For the purpose of this technical report, the project area is defined as the existing ROW, proposed ROW, and proposed laydown area. The proposed laydown area is located east of the Neches River and adjacent to Interstate 10. The proposed laydown area would temporarily be used to provide space for construction of the main truss span that would likely need to be floated in to place spanning the Neches River. Information presented in this report was established to consider the effects of the project, regardless of ownership. This technical report was authorized by TxDOT under Contract Number 50-41DP5006 to estimate potential impacts to waters of the U.S. As directed in the contract, the level of effort was restricted to conducting a preliminary determination of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) jurisdiction without conducting a formal delineation. In addition, a Right of Entry (ROE) was requested and approved from the Port of Beaumont Navigational District. This ROE authorized access to Port of Beaumont Navigational District property but did not authorize access to the existing rail ROW. A field investigation was conducted from September 14, 2015, to September 17, 2015, by qualified environmental staff to identify potential impacts to waters of the U.S. within the existing ROW, proposed ROW, and proposed laydown area.

2.0 Methods The Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region (Version 2.0) dated November 2010, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Wetlands Delineation Manual, Technical Report Y-87-1, January 1987, Final Report (1987 Manual) state that wetlands must possess three essential characteristics. Under normal circumstances, these characteristics include the presence of:

• Hydrophytic vegetation; • Hydric soils; and • Wetland hydrology.

Prior to the field investigation, preliminary data were gathered to aid in planning and developing a proper approach. Sources reviewed include:

• U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Quadrangle Maps;


• Aerial Imagery; • National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) Maps; and • Soil Surveys.

Field staff accessed Port of Beaumont Navigational District property adjacent to the existing ROW and laydown area to determine the potential presence or absence of jurisdictional wetlands within the project area. Due to limited access to the existing ROW, existing data were used to focus field efforts in areas where jurisdictional wetlands were probable after reviewing NWI maps, soil surveys, vegetation types, USGS topography maps, and aerial photography. In addition to limited ROW access, site conditions further limited access to some of the wetland areas. Field staff made reasonable efforts to access areas as close as possible to wetlands delineated in the NWI, but in some instances were limited by high water and/or dense vegetation. In areas determined to be contiguous wetland habitat, field staff documented observations of vegetation, soils, and hydrology to determine the presence of potentially jurisdictional wetlands within the project area. Wetland determinations were made using observable vegetation, hydrology, and soils in accordance with the routine approach described in the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region (Version 2.0) dated November 2010, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Wetlands Delineation Manual, Technical Report Y-87-1, January 1987, Final Report (1987 Manual). Details of the observed wetlands and upland habitats were recorded on regional supplement data forms (Appendix A).

2.1 Site Description The project area is located within the City of Beaumont and unincorporated Orange County (Figure 1). The project area extends for approximately 1.9 miles adjacent to an existing railroad and crosses the Neches River adjacent to an existing lift bridge. The project area west of the Neches River consists mostly of civic property. The project area east of the Neches River is adjacent to industrial property to the south and wooded areas to the north. The proposed laydown area consists mostly of wooded areas south of Interstate 10. The majority of the field investigation focused on the project area east of the Neches River since initial review of existing data indicated no wetlands occur west of the Neches River.

2.2 Topography The USGS 7.5-minute Beaumont East, Texas, topographic quadrangle was reviewed to assess the surface topography within the project area. The project area east of the Neches River includes areas of open water, marsh, woodlands, and industrial areas. The USGS topographic map indicates the site is relatively flat, with the exception of constructed elevated areas. Elevated areas have been constructed in support of infrastructure including roads, rail, docks,


and dredge placement areas. The project area west of the Neches River is mostly developed with civic property. A copy of the USGS topographic quadrangle within the project area is included as Exhibit 1 (Appendix B).

2.3 Vegetation In accordance with the TxDOT/Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD) Memorandum of Understanding, the Ecological Mapping Systems of Texas was used to map vegetation types within the project area. The list of vegetation types included within the project area was revised as a result of observations recorded during the field investigation. Based on the field investigation, it was determined that vegetation types contained within the project area include Urban High Intensity; Chenier Plain: Mixed Live Oak – Deciduous Hardwood Fringe Forest; Non-Native Invasive: Chinese Tallow Forest, Woodland, or Shrubland; and Open Water. These vegetation types are described in the TPWD Texas Vegetation Classification Project: Interpretive Booklet for Phase II (TPWD, 2014). The following paragraphs describe each vegetation type identified in the project area. Urban High Intensity The Urban High Intensity type occurs mostly in the project area west of the Neches River. The majority of this vegetation type occurs within downtown Beaumont and near the Port of Beaumont. This vegetation type consists of built-up areas and wide transportation corridors that are dominated by impervious cover. Chenier Plain: Mixed Live Oak – Deciduous Hardwood Fringe Forest The Chenier Plain: Mixed Live Oak – Deciduous Hardwood Fringe Forest type occurs mostly east of the Neches River in the proposed laydown area and adjacent to existing rail. This mapped type includes coastal live oak (Quercus virginiana) or loblolly pine (Pinus taeda) mixed with deciduous species, or in some places southern magnolia (Magnolia grandiflora). According to TPWD (2014), deciduous trees may include laurel oak (Q. laurifolia), water oak (Q. nigra), willow oak (Q. phellos), cherrybark oak (Q. pagoda), sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), Hercules-club pricklyash (Zanthoxylum clava-herculis), Chinese tallow (Triadica sebifera), and post oak (Q. stellata). The understory is patchy and includes yaupon (Ilex vomitoria), American beautyberry (Callicarpa americana), dwarf palmetto (Sabal minor), and wax-myrtle (Morella cerifera). Woody vines include Mustang grape (Vitis mustangensis), trumpet creeper (Campsis radicans), and poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans). The herbaceous layer is sparse and includes little bluestem (Schizachyrium scoparium). Trees observed within this vegetation type ranged from 5 feet to 50 feet in height and 12 inches to 24 inches diameter at breast height (dbh). Percent canopy observed during the field investigation ranged from 20 percent cover to 80 percent cover. The total estimated acreage of Chenier Plain: Mixed Live Oak – Deciduous Hardwood Fringe Forest within the project area is 23.22 acres.


Non-Native Invasive: Chinese Tallow Forest, Woodland, or Shrubland The Non-Native Invasive: Chinese Tallow Forest, Woodland, or Shrubland type occurs east of the Neches River in the proposed laydown area and adjacent to existing rail. Stands of Chinese tallow characterize this type. In addition, black willow (salix nigra) was also observed during the field investigation. Other species that occur within this vegetation type include baccharis (Baccharis halimifolia), sweetgum, water oak, blackgum (Nyssa sylvatica), loblolly pine, and willow oak. Tree species within this type included Chinese tallow and black willow ranging from 5 feet to 20 feet in height. Percent canopy ranged from 20 percent to 80 percent and dbh ranged from 6 inches to 12 inches. Total estimated acreage of Non-Native Invasive: Chinese Tallow Forest, Woodland, or Shrubland within the project area is 25.11 acres. Open Water The Open Water vegetation type consists of reservoirs, bays, large ponds, canals, rivers, and the Gulf of Mexico. The Open Water type exists where the proposed/existing ROW crosses the Neches River and is approximately 1.76 acres.

2.4 Soil Types The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) (n.d.) was used to document soil types in the project area. The project area consists of three different soil types including Neel Clay (NeA), Neches Coarse Sand (NecC), and Urban Land (URLX) (Exhibits 2a and 2b, Appendix B). The Neel Clay (NeA) soil type is limited to the eastern section of the project area adjacent to the existing rail. The Neel series consists of very deep, moderately well drained, very slowly permeable clayey soils formed in clayey deposits dredged from bays and marshes. The soil type is gently sloping to moderately sloping and occurs on levees and spoil banks. According to NRCS (n.d.) this soil type is rated hydric. The Neches Coarse Sand (NecC) soil type occupies the majority of the project area east of the Neches River. The Neches Coarse Sand type consists of very deep well drained soils. The soil type is gently sloping and formed in sandy and loamy sediments derived from dredge spoil banks. The parent material consists of sandy over loamy dredge spoil material and occurs in lagoon landscapes. According to NRCS (n.d.) this soil type is not rated as hydric. However, soil pits collected indicate the presence of a depleted matrix as documented in several wetland determination forms (Appendix A).


The Urban Land (URLX) soil type occupies the majority of the project area west of the Neches River. This type consists of deep, well and somewhat poorly drained soils on uplands. The soil type is nearly level to sloping and occurs in the northern portion of the Piedmont Plateau. According to NRCS (n.d.) this soil type is not rated hydric.

2.5 Hydrology The tidal portion of the Neches River is located within the project area. This river segment extends from the confluence with Sabine Lake in Orange County to a point seven miles upstream of Interstate 10 (Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, 2004). The area surrounding this segment of the Neches River is highly industrialized and has been dredged to accommodate seagoing vessels. In addition, hydrology of the project area has been altered by the construction of roads, rail, canals, and dredge placement areas. During the field investigation, surface water was observed in several locations within the project area.

2.6 Existing Wetland Mapping The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) NWI Map was reviewed to measure potential impacts to wetlands within the project area. According to USFWS (2015), six wetland types exists within the project area (Exhibits 3a and 3b, Appendix B). Wetland types and acreage within the project area are included in Table 1.

Table 1. NWI Wetland Types in the Project Area.

Wetland Type Area Within Project Area (acres)

Palustrine / Forested / Broad – Leaved Deciduous / Temporarily Flooded (PFO1A)

5.77

Palustrine / Forested / Broad – Leaved Deciduous / Seasonally Flooded (PFO1C)

0.98

Palustrine / Scrub – Shrub / Broad – Leaved Deciduous /

Temporarily Flooded (PSS1A)

0.17

Palustrine / Emergent / Persistent / Semipermanently Flooded

(PEM1F)

3.11

Palustrine / Emergent / Persistent / Semipermanently Flooded /

Excavated (PEM1Fx)

1.12

Palustrine / Unconsolidated Bottom / Semipermanently Flooded / Excavated (PUBFx)

2.57

Total 13.72

Source: USFWS (2015)


3.0 Findings

3.1 Identified Wetland Types Wetland types observed during the field investigation included freshwater ponds, freshwater emergent wetlands, freshwater scrub/shrub wetlands, and freshwater forested wetlands (Exhibits 3a and 3b, Appendix B). Descriptions of each wetland type are described in USFWS (1979). In addition, field observations are included in each wetland type description below. Freshwater Pond The Freshwater Pond wetland type is semipermanently flooded and consists mostly of open water. The wetland type is usually bordered by emergent vegetation along the shoreline. The bottom is unconsolidated by the lack of large stable surfaces for plant and animal attachment. During the field investigation, surface water was observed in all freshwater ponds identified (Photo 1, Appendix C). Freshwater Emergent Wetland The Freshwater Emergent wetland type occurs in areas with relatively stable climatic conditions and maintains the same appearance over time. Emergent wetlands include marshes, wet meadows, fens, prairie potholes, and sloughs. Palustrine Persistent Emergent wetlands contain a vast array of grass-like plants such as cattail (Typha spp.), bulrush (Scirpus spp.), saw grass (Cladium jamaicense), sedges (Carex spp.); and true grasses such as manna grasses (Glyceria spp.), slough grass (Beckmannia syzigachne), and common river grass (Scolochloa festucacea). There is also a variety of broad-leaved persistent emergents such as purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria), Mexican dock (Rumex mexicanus), swamp loosestrife (Decodon verticillatus), and some species of smartweeds (Polygonum). During the field investigation cattail, sedges, duckweed (Spirodela polyrhiza), and smartweed were observed within the mapped type. In addition, surface water was observed in most areas consisting of this wetland type (Photo 2, Appendix C). Freshwater Scrub / Shrub Wetland The Freshwater Scrub / Shrub wetland type contains woody plants less than 20 feet tall with at least 30 percent cover. Shrubs includes tree shrubs, young specimens of tree species, and woody plants that are stunted due to adverse environmental conditions. In the Palustrine System, typical vegetation includes alder (Alnus spp.), black willow, buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis), red osier dogwood (Cornus stolonifera), honeycup (Zenobia pulverulenta), Douglas' meadowsweet (Spiraea douglasii), bog birch (Betula pumila), and young red maple (Acer rubrum). During the field investigation black willow, buttonbush, dogwood, Chinese tallow, and red maple were observed within this mapped typed. In addition, surface water was observed in


most areas consisting of this wetland type. A soil pit was collected containing a depleted matrix (Photo 3, Appendix C). Freshwater Forested Wetland The Freshwater Forested wetland type is common in areas along rivers. This type consist of an overstory of trees, an understory of young trees or shrubs, and an herbaceous layer. In the broad-leaved subclass, dominant species include red maple, American elm (Ulmus americana), ashes (Fraxinus pennsylvanica and F. nigra), black gum, tupelo gum (Nyssa aquatica), swamp white oak (Q. bicolor), overcup oak (Q. lyrata), and swamp chestnut oak (Q. michauxii). During the field investigation red maple, American elm, coastal live oak, loblolly pine, and Chinese tallow were observed within this mapped typed. In addition, surface water was observed in most areas consisting of this wetland type. A soil pit was collected containing a depleted matrix (Photo 4, Appendix C).

3.2 Other Waters of the U.S. Identified The crossing of the Neches River is the only other identified waters of the U.S. within the project area. Approximately 2.05 acres of the project area crosses the Neches River.

4.0 Conclusion

4.1 Wetland Impacts During the field investigation a total of thirteen separate wetlands were confirmed within the project area. Table 2 summarizes the potential impacts to wetlands within the project area. Wetland boundaries were estimated using the NWI and field investigation observations. An estimated total of 13.72 acres of wetlands occur within the project area. An estimated total of 6.15 acres of wetlands occur within the 10 percent construction limits. The amount of potential wetland impacts within the project area and/or construction limit would require an USACE Section 10/404 Individual Permit.


Table 2. Field Verified Wetlands in the Project Area

Wetland ID

Wetland Types

Area Within

Project Area

(acres)

Area Within

Existing ROW

(acres)

Area Within

Proposed ROW

(acres)

Area Within Proposed

Construction Limits* (acres)

Area Within Proposed

Laydown Area

(acres)

1 Freshwater Forested Wetland

0.74 0.74 0.00 0.72 0.00

2 Freshwater Pond 0.90 0.90 0.00 0.72 0.00


0.03 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00

4 Freshwater Forested

Wetland 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00


Wetland 1.47 1.47 0.00 0.40 0.00

6 Freshwater Pond 1.67 1.18 0.49 1.61 0.00

7 Freshwater Emergent

Wetland 2.52 2.29 0.23 2.52 0.00

8 Freshwater Scrub / Shrub Wetland

0.17 0.17 0.00 0.17 0.00

9 Freshwater Emergent Wetland

1.12 1.12 0.00 0.01 0.00


2.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.28


1.97 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.97


Wetland 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.22

13 Freshwater Emergent

Wetland 0.59 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.59

Total 13.72 7.94 0.72 6.15 5.06

* Estimated Based on 10 Percent Design Plans


4.2 Encroachment Alteration Impacts Encroachment alteration effects are those effects that alter the behavior and functioning of the physical environment. These effects are related to project design features, but are separated from the project by time and/or distance. Hydrology through the project study area has been altered through the years by the construction of roads, rail, canals, and dredge placement areas. The placement of the second track in close proximity to the current facility limits the physical area of potential encroachment alteration effects. Specifically, it is unlikely that construction of the second rail will substantially alter hydrology through the project area. Encroachment effects on vegetation would occur in the project area including the existing ROW, proposed ROW and proposed laydown area. The total project area consists of 61.30 acres and includes four vegetation types. Encroachment effects would only include changes to edge effect of vegetation adjacent to vegetated areas directly impacted by construction or clearing.


5.0 References Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). n.d. United States Department of

Agriculture. Official Soil Series Descriptions. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detailfull/soils/home/?cid=nrcs142p2_053587. Accessed October 2015.

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. 2004. Atlas of Texas Surface Waters. Austin,

Texas. Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT). 2015. Neches River Bridge Alternative

Development and Screening Technical Report. Austin, Texas. Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD). 2014. Texas Vegetation Classification Project:

Interpretive Booklet for Phase II. Last Revision February 26, 2014. Accessed August 2015.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of

Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Atlantic and Gulf Coast Plain Region (Version 2.0), dated November 2010. Vicksburg, Mississippi.

_____. 1987. Wetlands Delineation Manual, Technical Report Y-87-1, January 1987, Final

Report (1987 Manual). Vicksburg, Mississippi. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2015. National Wetlands Inventory. Wetlands

Mapper. http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/mapper.HTML. Last Revision October 2015. Accessed October 2015.

_____. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States.

Washington, D.C.

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detailfull/soils/home/?cid=nrcs142p2_053587

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detailfull/soils/home/?cid=nrcs142p2_053587

http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/mapper.HTML

Neches River Bridge Study Wetlands

AAppendix A

Wetland Determination Data Forms

NECHES RAIL BRIDGE ORANGE 9/16/15

TxDOT TX S-1

MW, TH NA

FLAT CONCAVE <5%

T N 30° 5' 2.542" W 94° 5' 21.737" NAD83

NECHES COARSE SAND PF01C

✔

NoNo Yes Yes ✔

No No

✔

✔

✔✔

Sample point taken adjacent to project area due to right of entry restrictions. Sample point verified NWI PFO1C adjacent toproject area. Wetland extends into project area; confirmed through visual observations, aerial imagery, and NWI mapping.

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

SURFACE

SURFACE

SURFACE ✔

Inundation visible on several years of aerial photos.

1.5

S-1

30-foot radius

Taxodium distichum 20.0 Yes OBL 4

Salix nigra 20 Yes OBL

5

80%

40

20 8

30-foot radius 2 2

2 4NA

0 0

0 0

0 0

4 6

0

0

30-foot radius

Sesbania drummondii 40 Yes FACW

✔

✔

✔

40

20 8

30-foot radius

Carex spp. 20 YesSesbania drummondii 20 Yes FACW

NA

40

20 8

30-foot radius

0✔

Due to frequent inundation, vegetation at this location was sparse.

S-1

0 toM

M

M

M

M

M

M

✔

✔

Due to extreme saturation, an accurate profile description was not recorded. Soils were too wet. Based on the apparent hydrologic regime,hydric soils are assumed. Soils appeared to follow the USDA soils description for Neches Series soils with the low chroma (depleted matrix).


TxDOT TX S-1 UP

MW, TH NA

HILLSLOPE CONVEX <5%

T N 30° 5' 2.026" W 94° 5' 24.668" NAD83

NECHES COARSE SAND NA

✔

NoNo Yes Yes ✔

No No

✔

✔

✔✔

✔

NA

NA✔

✔ NA ✔


Well drained upland area west of W-1.

3.4

S-1 UP

30-foot radius

Quercus virginiana 60.0 Yes FACU 3

5

60%

60

30 12

30-foot radius 0 0

0 0Quercus virginiana 10.0 Yes FACU

3 9

2 8

0 0

5 17

0

10

5 230-foot radius

Ilex vomitoria 40 Yes FAC✔

40

20 8

30-foot radius

NA

Campsis radicansVitis rotundifolia

0

30-foot radius10 Yes10 Yes

FAC

FAC

20✔

10 4

Low amount of understory growth.

S-1 UP

0 to 5 10YR 4/3 100

5 to 18 10YR 5/3 100M

M

M

M

M

M

M

✔

Area is well drained with upland soils that appear to be from nearby dredging operations.


TxDOT TX S-2

MW, TH NA

FLAT CONCAVE <5%

T N 30° 5' 6.158" W 94° 5' 14.336" NAD83

NECHES COARSE SAND PF01C

✔

NoNo Yes Yes ✔

No No

✔

✔

✔✔

Sample point taken adjacent to project area due to right of entry restrictions. Sample point verified NWI PFO1C adjacent toproject area. Wetland extends into project area; confirmed through visual observations, aerial imagery, and NWI mapping.

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

6

SURFACE

SURFACE ✔


1.4

S-2

30-foot radius

Salix nigra 10.0 Yes OBL 5

5

100%

10

5 2

30-foot radius 3 3

2 4Magnolia virginiana 10.0 Yes FACW

0 0

0 0

0 0

5 7

0

10

5 230-foot radius

Sesbania drummondii 20 Yes FACW

✔

✔

✔

20

10 4

30-foot radius

Typha spp. 30 YesPolygonum hydropiperoides 60 Yes OBL

NA

OBL

90

45 18

30-foot radius

0✔

S-2

0 toM

M

M

M

M

M

M

✔

✔

✔

Due to extreme saturation, an accurate profile description was not recorded. Soils were too wet. Based on the apparent hydrologic regime,hydric soils are assumed. Soils appeared to follow the USDA soils description for Neches Series soils with the low chroma (depleted matrix).


TxDOT TX S-5

MW, TH, EG, CC NA

FLAT CONCAVE <5%

T N 30° 5' 16.605" W 94° 4' 55.047" NAD83

NECHES COARSE SAND PF01A

✔

NoNo Yes Yes ✔

No No

✔

✔

✔✔

Sample point taken adjacent to project area due to right of entry restrictions. Sample point verified NWI PFO1A adjacent toproject area. Wetland extends into project area; confirmed through visual observations, aerial imagery, and NWI mapping.

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

NA

8✔

SURFACE ✔

2.8

S-5

30-foot radius

Morus rubra 30.0 Yes FACU 6

Triadica sebifera 30 Yes FAC

8

75%

60

30 12

30-foot radius 1 1

2 4Triadica sebifera 30.0 Yes FAC

5 15Morella cerifera 20 Yes FAC

2 8

0 0

10 28

0

50

25 1030-foot radius

Triadica sebifera 20 Yes FACW

Lantana camara 10 Yes FACU

✔

✔

30

15 6

30-foot radius

Taxodium distichum 40 YesToxicodendron radicans 10 No FAC

Cyperus cuspidatus 10 No FACW

Carex spp. 10 No

Campsis radicans

OBL

70

35 14

30-foot radius60 Yes FAC

60✔

30 12

S-5

0 to 1 10 YR 3/1 90 4/6 10 C

2 to 4 10 YR 3/1 85 4/6 15 C

5 to 11 10 YR 3/1 85 5/1 15 C

M

M

M

M

M

M

M

✔

✔

✔


TxDOT TX S-7

MW, TH, EG, CC NA

FLAT CONCAVE <5%

T N 30° 5' 26.690" W 94° 4' 37.790" NAD83

NECHES COARSE SAND PEM1F

✔

NoNo Yes Yes ✔

No No

✔

✔

✔✔

Sample point taken adjacent to project area due to right of entry restrictions. Sample point verified NWI PEM1F adjacent toproject area. Wetland extends into project area; confirmed through visual observations, aerial imagery, and NWI mapping.

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

36

SURFACE

SURFACE ✔


1.43

S-7

30-foot radius

Triadica sebifera 10.0 Yes FAC 7


7

100%

20

10 4

30-foot radius 5 5

1 2Triadica sebifera 10.0 Yes FACW

1 3Salix nigra 10 Yes OBL

0 0

0 0

7 10

0

20

10 430-foot radius

NA✔

✔

0

30-foot radius

Polygonum hydropiperoides 40 YesTypha spp. 20 Yes OBL

Lemna minor 20 Yes OBL

Cyperus spp. 10 NoCarex spp. 10 No

NA

OBL

100

50 20

30-foot radius

0✔

S-7

0 toM

M

M

M

M

M

M

✔

✔

Due to inundation, an accurate profile description was not recorded. Soils were too wet. Based on the apparent hydrologic regime, hydricsoils are assumed. Soils appeared to follow the USDA soils description for Neches Series soils with the low chroma (depleted matrix).


TxDOT TX S-8

MW, TH, EG, CC NA

FLAT CONCAVE <5%

T N 30° 5' 28.725" W 94° 4' 32.835" NAD83

NECHES COARSE SAND PSS1A

✔

NoNo Yes Yes ✔

No No

✔

✔

✔✔

Sample point taken adjacent to project area due to right of entry restrictions. Sample point verified NWI PSS1A adjacent toproject area. Wetland extends into project area; confirmed through visual observations, aerial imagery, and NWI mapping.

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

12

SURFACE

SURFACE ✔


1.75

S-8

30-foot radius

Triadica sebifera 60.0 Yes FAC 7


7

100%

80

40 16

30-foot radius 4 4

2 4Triadica sebifera 20.0 Yes FACW

2 6Salix nigra 20 Yes OBL

0 0

0 0

8 14

0

40

20 830-foot radius

Sambucus nigra 40 Yes FACW✔

✔

40

20 8

30-foot radius

Polygonum hydropiperoides 40 YesWoodwardia virginica 5 No OBL

Campsis radicans

OBL

45

22.5 9


10✔

5 2

S-8

0 to 6 10YR 3/1 100M

M

M

M

M

M

M

✔

✔

✔


TxDOT TX S-11

MW, TH, EG, CC NA

FLAT CONCAVE <5%

T N 30° 5' 25.578" W 94° 5' 5.851" NAD83

NECHES COARSE SAND PF01A

✔

NoNo Yes Yes ✔

No No

✔

✔

✔✔

Sample point taken adjacent to project area due to right of entry restrictions. Sample point verified NWI PF01A adjacent toproject area. Wetland extends into project area; confirmed through visual observations, aerial imagery, and NWI mapping.

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

✔

12

SURFACE

SURFACE ✔


1.80

S-11

30-foot radius

Taxodium distichum 60.0 Yes OBL 5

6

83%

60

30 12

30-foot radius 3 3

0 0Taxodium distichum 20.0 Yes OBL

2 6

0 0

0 0

5 9

0

20

10 430-foot radius

Forestiera acuminata 10 Yes OBL✔

✔

10

5 2

30-foot radius

Lemna minor 20 YesCyperus spp. 10 Yes

Smilax rotundifolia

FAC

30

15 6


10✔

5 2

S-11

M

M

M

M

M

M

M

✔

✔

Due to inundation, an accurate profile description was not recorded. Soils were too wet. Based on the apparent hydrologic regime, hydricsoils are assumed. Soils appeared to follow the USDA soils description for Neches Series soils with the low chroma (depleted matrix).


TxDOT TX S-11 UP

MW, TH, EG, CC NA

FLAT NONE <5%

T N 30° 5' 26.828" W 94° 5' 6.828" NAD83

NECHES COARSE SAND NA

✔

NoNo Yes Yes ✔

No No

✔

✔

✔✔

✔

NA

NA✔

✔ NA ✔


3.43

S-11 UP

30-foot radius

Quercus virginiana 60.0 Yes FACU 4

Magnolia grandiflora 20 Yes FAC

7

57%

80

40 16

30-foot radius 0 0

0 0Quercus virginiana 20.0 Yes FACU

4 12

3 12

0 0

7 24

0

20

10 430-foot radius

Ligustrum sinense 20 Yes FAC✔

20

10 4

30-foot radius

Eupatorium capillifolium 20 Yes

Vitis rotundifoliaSmilax rotundifolia

FACU

20

10 4

30-foot radius10 Yes10 Yes

FAC

FAC

20✔

10 4

S-11 UP

M

M

M

M

M

M

M

✔

Soils well drained upland soils; consistent with Neches Series description.


AAppendix B

Exhibits

Port

of B

eaum

ont

Nec

hes R

iver

380

90

90

10

Nec

hes

Riv

er B

ridge

Cro

ssin

g

Je

ffe

rso

nJ

eff

ers

onOra

ng

eO

ran

ge

Ha

rdin

Ha

rdin

Jeffe

rson

and

Ora

nge

Cou

ntie

s

CSJ

: 722

0-01

-001

USG

S TO

POG

RA

PHIC

MA

P

075

01,

500

375

Feet

Sou

rces

: US

GS

Bea

umon

t Eas

t Qua

dran

gle,

199

4; U

SD

OT

2015

.

Pro

pose

d R

ight

-of-W

ay

Exi

stin

g R

ight

-of-W

ay

Layd

own

Are

a

Rai

lroad

Exis

ting

Rai

l Brid

ge

Exhi

bit 1

Exis

ting

Rai

l Brid

ge

Neches

River

Main St

Forsythe S

t

Pearl S

t

N Cypress St

UR

LX

Nec

C

W

Nec

hes

Riv

er B

ridge

Cro

ssin

g

Je

ffe

rso

nJ

eff

ers

onOra

ng

eO

ran

ge

Ha

rdin

Ha

rdin

Jeffe

rson

and

Ora

nge

Cou

ntie

s

CSJ

: 722

0-01

-001

NR

CS

SOIL

S W

ITH

IN P

RO

JEC

T A

REA

025

050

012

5

Feet

Sou

rces

: NR

CS

, 201

5

Prop

osed

Rig

ht-o

f-Way

Exis

ting

Rig

ht-o

f-Way

Layd

own

Area

Rai

lroad

NR

CS

Soil

Type

NeA

Nec

C

UR

LX

W

Exhi

bit 2

a

NeA

Nec

C

W

W

Nec

hes

Riv

er B

ridge

Cro

ssin

g

Je

ffe

rso

nJ

eff

ers

onOra

ng

eO

ran

ge

Ha

rdin

Ha

rdin

Jeffe

rson

and

Ora

nge

Cou

ntie

s

CSJ

: 722

0-01

-001

NR

CS

SOIL

S W

ITH

IN P

RO

JEC

T A

REA

025

050

012

5

Feet

Sou

rces

: NR

CS

, 201

5

Prop

osed

Rig

ht-o

f-Way

Exis

ting

Rig

ht-o

f-Way

Layd

own

Area

Rai

lroad

NR

CS

Soil

Type

NeA

Nec

C

UR

LX

W

Exhi

bit 2

b

Exis

ting

Rai

l Brid

ge

Neches

River

Main St

Forsythe S

t

Pearl S

t

N Cypress St

W-2

W-3

W-1

W-4

S-1

S-2

S-1

UP

Nec

hes

Riv

er B

ridge

Cro

ssin

g

Je

ffe

rso

nJ

eff

ers

onOra

ng

eO

ran

ge

Ha

rdin

Ha

rdin

Jeffe

rson

and

Ora

nge

Cou

ntie

s

CSJ

: 722

0-01

-001

WET

LAN

DS

WIT

HIN

PR

OJE

CT

AR

EA

025

050

012

5

Feet

Sou

rces

: NW

I, 20

15

Prop

osed

Rig

ht-o

f-Way

Exis

ting

Rig

ht-o

f-Way

Layd

own

Area

Rai

lroad

Sam

ple

Poi

nts

NW

I Wet

land

s Ty

pePE

M1F

(Fre

shw

ater

Em

erge

nt W

etla

nd)

PEM

1Fx

(Fre

shw

ater

Em

erge

nt W

etla

nd)

PFO

1A (F

resh

wat

er F

ores

ted)

PFO

1C (F

resh

wat

er F

ores

ted)

PSS1

A (F

resh

wat

er S

crub

/Shr

ub)

PUB

Fx (F

resh

wat

er P

ond)

Exhi

bit 3

a

W-7

W-6

W-5

W-8

W-9

W-1

3

W-1

1

W-1

0

W-1

2

S-5

S-7

S-8

S-11

S-11

UP

Nec

hes

Riv

er B

ridge

Cro

ssin

g

Je

ffe

rso

nJ

eff

ers

onOra

ng

eO

ran

ge

Ha

rdin

Ha

rdin

Jeffe

rson

and

Ora

nge

Cou

ntie

s

CSJ

: 722

0-01

-001

WET

LAN

DS

WIT

HIN

PR

OJE

CT

AR

EA

025

050

012

5

Feet

Sou

rces

: NW

I, 20

15

Prop

osed

Rig

ht-o

f-Way

Exis

ting

Rig

ht-o

f-Way

Layd

own

Area

Rai

lroad

Sam

ple

Poi

nts

NW

I Wet

land

s Ty

pePE

M1F

(Fre

shw

ater

Em

erge

nt W

etla

nd)

PEM

1Fx

(Fre

shw

ater

Em

erge

nt W

etla

nd)

PFO

1A (F

resh

wat

er F

ores

ted)

PFO

1C (F

resh

wat

er F

ores

ted)

PSS1

A (F

resh

wat

er S

crub

/Shr

ub)

PUB

Fx (F

resh

wat

er P

ond)

Exhi

bit 3

b


Appendix C

Site Photographs


Photo 1: Typical View of Freshwater Pond Wetland Type.

Photo 2: Typical View of Freshwater Emergent Wetland Type.


Photo 3: Typical View of Freshwater Scrub / Shrub Wetland Type.

Photo 4: Typical View of Freshwater Forested Wetland Type.


Photo 5: Typical View of Sample Point 1 (S-1).

Photo 6: GPS Point Taken at Sample Point 1 (S-1).


Photo 7: Typical View of Surface Water and Vegetation at Sample Point 2 (S-2).




Photo 10: Surface Water Depth Approximately 3 Feet at Sample Point 7 (S-7).



Photo 12: Surface Water Depth Approximately 3 Feet at Sample Point 8 (S-8).



Photo 14: Typical View of Sample Point 11 Upland (S-11 UP). Upland Consists of Elevated

Path and Bridge.


Photo 15: Typical View of Sample Point 1 Upland (S-1 UP).

Photo 16: Typical View of Sample Point 1 Upland (S-1 UP).

wetlands technical report -...

Documents