NH.gov - Swanzey 23737 Wetland Application · 2017. 8. 23. · Permit Application - Valid until...

Cr

Sta

resson

ndard

Cover

Dredg

red Bri

ge and Swanz

New

idge ovScour Fill Wezey 23

w Hampshire

ver Ash Mitigaetland 3737 X

e Departme

Normand

ww

huelot tion Pr ApplicX-A002

Prepent of Tran

7 HaConcord,

SubmSeptemb

Predeau Assoc

25 NaBedford,

ww.norman

River roject cation 2(758)

pared For: sportation azen Drive NH 03302

mitted On: ber x, 2015

epared By: ciates, Inc. ashua Road NH 03110

ndeau.com

Swanzey 23737 i Normandeau Associates, Inc.

Table of Contents

Page

STANDARD DREDGE AND FILL APPLICATION FORM ................................... 1

ATTACHMENT A ..................................................................................... 5

PROJECT DESCRIPTION .......................................................................... 5 Existing Bridge ........................................................................... 5 Purpose and Need ....................................................................... 5 Proposed Action ......................................................................... 6

ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS SECONDARY IMPACTS CHECKLIST .................11

ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS SECONDARY IMPACTS CHECKLIST

SUPPLEMENTAL NARRATIVE ...........................................................13

ENV‐WT 404.04 RIP‐RAP. ...........................................................................15

MITIGATION .........................................................................................17

EXHIBITS

Exhibit A – Locus

Exhibit B – NHB Response

Exhibit C – USFWS NLEB Consultation

Exhibit D – 2010 WAP

Exhibit E – Floodplain

Exhibit F – Cultural Resource Effect Memo

Exhibit G – Scour Countermeasure Design Calculations

Exhibit H – Photographs

PLANS

Wetland Impact Plans

[email protected] or (603) 271-2147 NHDES Wetlands Bureau, Concord, NH 03303-0095

www.des.nh.gov Permit Application - Valid until 12/31/15 Page 1 of 4

NHDES-W-06-012

WETLANDS PERMIT APPLICATION Water Division/ Wetlands Bureau

Land Resources Management Check the status of your application: http://des.nh.gov/onestop

RSA/Rule: Env-Wq 100-900

1. REVIEW TIME: Indicate your Review Time below. Refer to Guidance Document A for instructions.

Standard Review (Minimum, Minor or Major Impact) Expedited Review (Minimum Impact only)

2. PROJECT LOCATION: Separate applications must be filed with each municipality that jurisdictional impacts will occur in.

ADDRESS: Sawyers Crossing Road TOWN/CITY: Swanzey

TAX MAP: NA BLOCK: NA LOT: NA UNIT: NA

USGS TOPO MAP WATERBODY NAME: Ashuelot River NA STREAM WATERSHED SIZE: 311 sq. mi. NA

LOCATION COORDINATES (If known): 72°17'11" 42°53'10" Latitude/Longitude UTM State Plane

3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Provide a brief description of the project outlining the scope of work. Attach additional sheets as needed to provide a detailed explanation of your project. DO NOT reply “See Attached" in the space provided below.

The NH Department of Transportation (NHDOT) proposes to repair and improve the riprap and scour protection of the Cresson Covered Bridge (State Bridge No. 136/143) that carries Sawyer’s Crossing Road over the Ashuelot River in Swanzey, New Hampshire (also known as Sawyer’s Crossing Covered Bridge). The project involves constructing scour countermeasures around the bridge abutments and center pier to prevent scour damage at the historic covered bridge site.

4. RELATED PERMITS, ENFORCEMENT, EMERGENCY AUTHORIZATION, SHORELAND, ALTERATION OF TERRAIN, ETC…

Shoreland Notification

5. NATURAL HERITAGE BUREAU & DESIGNATED RIVERS: See the Instructions & Required Attachments document for instructions to complete a & b below.

a. Natural Heritage Bureau File ID: NHB 15 - 1052 .

b. Designated River the project is in ¼ miles of: Ashuelot River ; and date a copy of the application was sent to Local River Advisory Committee: Month: Day: Year:

NA

Administrative

Use Only

Administrative

Use Only

Administrative

Use Only

File No.:

Check No.:

Amount:

Initials:



6. APPLICANT INFORMATION (Desired permit holder)

LAST NAME, FIRST NAME, M.I.: Robert Landry

TRUST / COMPANY NAME:NHDOT MAILING ADDRESS: 7 Hazen Drive

TOWN/CITY: Concord STATE: NH ZIP CODE: 03302

EMAIL or FAX: [email protected] PHONE: 603 271-2731

ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATION: By initialing here: LRL , I hereby authorize DES to communicate all matters relative to this application electronically

7. PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION (If different than applicant)

LAST NAME, FIRST NAME, M.I.:

TRUST / COMPANY NAME: MAILING ADDRESS:

TOWN/CITY: STATE: ZIP CODE:

EMAIL or FAX: PHONE:

ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATION: By initialing here , I hereby authorize DES to communicate all matters relative to this application electronically

8. AUTHORIZED AGENT INFORMATION

LAST NAME, FIRST NAME, M.I.: Chase, Vicki COMPANY NAME:Normandeau Assoc.

MAILING ADDRESS: 25 Nashua Road

TOWN/CITY: Bedford STATE: NH ZIP CODE: 03110

EMAIL or FAX: [email protected] PHONE: 603 637-1111

ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATION: By initialing here vpc , I hereby authorize DES to communicate all matters relative to this application electronically

9. PROPERTY OWNER SIGNATURE: See the Instructions & Required Attachments document for clarification of the below statements

By signing the application, I am certifying that:

1. I authorize the applicant and/or agent indicated on this form to act in my behalf in the processing of this application, and to furnish upon request, supplemental information in support of this permit application.

2. I have reviewed and submitted information & attachments outlined in the Instructions and Required Attachment document. 3. All abutters have been identified in accordance with RSA 482-A:3, I and Env-Wt 100-900. 4. I have read and provided the required information outlined in Env-Wt 302.04 for the applicable project type. 5. I have read and understand Env-Wt 302.03 and have chosen the least impacting alternative. 6. Any structure that I am proposing to repair/replace was either previously permitted by the Wetlands Bureau or would be considered

grandfathered per Env-Wt 101.47. 7. I have submitted a Request for Project Review (RPR) Form (www.nh.gov/nhdhr/review) to the NH State Historic Preservation Officer

(SHPO) at the NH Division of Historical Resources to be reviewed for the presence of historical/ archeological resources. 8. I authorize DES and the municipal conservation commission to inspect the site of the proposed project. 9. I have reviewed the information being submitted and that to the best of my knowledge the information is true and accurate. 10. I understand that the willful submission of falsified or misrepresented information to the New Hampshire Department of

Environmental Services is a criminal act, which may result in legal action. 11. I am aware that the work I am proposing may require additional state, local or federal permits which I am responsible for obtaining. 12. The mailing addresses I have provided are up to date and appropriate for receipt of DES correspondence. DES will not forward

returned mail.

Property Owner Signature

Print name legibly

/ / Date



MUNICIPAL SIGNATURES

10. CONSERVATION COMMISSION SIGNATURE

The signature below certifies that the municipal conservation commission has reviewed this application, and: 1. Waives its right to intervene per RSA 482-A:11; 2. Believes that the application and submitted plans accurately represent the proposed project; and 3. Has no objection to permitting the proposed work.

Print name legibly Date

DIRECTIONS FOR CONSERVATION COMMISSION

1. Expedited review ONLY requires that the conservation commission’s signature is obtained in the space above.

2. Expedited review requires the Conservation Commission signature be obtained prior to the submittal of the original application to the Town/City Clerk for signature.

3. The Conservation Commission may refuse to sign. If the Conservation Commission does not sign this statement for any reason, the application is not eligible for expedited review and the application will reviewed in the standard review time frame.

11. TOWN / CITY CLERK SIGNATURE

As required by Chapter 482-A:3 (amended 2014), I hereby certify that the applicant has filed four application forms, four detailed plans, and four USGS location maps with the town/city indicated below.

Town/City Clerk Signature Print name legibly Town/City Date

DIRECTIONS FOR TOWN/CITY CLERK:

Per RSA 482-A:3,I

1. For applications where "Expedited Review" is checked on page 1, if the Conservation Commission signature is not present, NHDES will accept the permit application, but it will NOT receive the expedited review time.

2. IMMEDIATELY sign the original application form and four copies in the signature space provided above;

3. Return the signed original application form and attachments to the applicant so that the applicant may submit the application form and attachments to NHDES by mail or hand delivery.

4. IMMEDIATELY distribute a copy of the application with one complete set of attachments to each of the following bodies: the municipal Conservation Commission, the local governing body (Board of Selectmen or Town/City Council), and the Planning Board; and

5. Retain one copy of the application form and one complete set of attachments and make them reasonably accessible for public review.

DIRECTIONS FOR APPLICANT:

1. Submit the original permit application form bearing the signature of the Town/ City Clerk, additional materials, and the application fee to NHDES by mail or hand delivery.



12. IMPACT AREA: For each jurisdictional area that will be/has been impacted, provide square feet and, if applicable, linear feet of impact Permanent: impacts that will remain after the project is complete. Temporary: impacts not intended to remain (and will be restored to pre-construction conditions) after the project is complete.

JURISDICTIONAL AREA PERMANENT

Sq. Ft. / Lin. Ft. TEMPORARY

Sq. Ft. / Lin. Ft.

Forested wetland ATF ATF

Scrub-shrub wetland ATF ATF

Emergent wetland ATF ATF

Wet meadow ATF ATF

Intermittent stream ATF ATF

Perennial Stream / River 2,301 / 185 ATF 10,019 / 60 ATF

Lake / Pond / ATF / ATF

Bank - Intermittent stream / ATF / ATF

Bank - Perennial stream / River 897 / 72 ATF 495 / 60 ATF

Bank - Lake / Pond / ATF / ATF

Tidal water / ATF / ATF

Salt marsh ATF ATF

Sand dune ATF ATF

Prime wetland ATF ATF

Prime wetland buffer ATF ATF

Undeveloped Tidal Buffer Zone (TBZ) ATF ATF

Previously-developed upland in TBZ ATF ATF

Docking - Lake / Pond ATF ATF

Docking - River ATF ATF

Docking - Tidal Water ATF ATF

TOTAL 3,198 / 257 10,514 / 120

13. APPLICATION FEE: See the Instructions & Required Attachments document for further instruction

Minimum Impact Fee: Flat fee of $ 200

Minor or Major Impact Fee: Calculate using the below table below

Permanent and Temporary (non-docking) 13,712 sq. ft. X $0.20 = $ 2,742.40

Temporary (seasonal) docking structure: sq. ft. X $1.00 = $

Permanent docking structure: sq. ft. X $2.00 = $

Projects proposing shoreline structures (including docks) add $200 = $

Total = $

The Application Fee is the above calculated Total or $200, whichever is greater = $ 2,742.40

STANDARD DREDGE AND FILL WETLAND APPLICATION

Swanzey 23737 5 Normandeau Associates, Inc.

Attachment A

Env-Wt 302.04 Requirements for Application Evaluation - For any major or minor project, the applicant shall demonstrate by plan and example that the following factors have been considered in the project’s design in assessing the impact of the proposed project to areas and environments under the department’s jurisdiction. Respond with statements demonstrating:

1. The need for the proposed impact.

Project Description

The NH Department of Transportation (NHDOT) proposes to repair and improve the

riprap and scour protection of the Cresson Covered Bridge (State Bridge No. 136/143) that

carries Sawyers Crossing Road over the Ashuelot River in Swanzey, New Hampshire

(also known as Sawyers Crossing Covered Bridge). The State of NH received funds from

the National Historic Covered Bridge Preservation Program for this municipally‐owned

historic covered bridge. The project involves constructing scour countermeasures around

the bridge abutments and center pier to prevent scour damage at the historic covered

bridge site.

Existing Bridge

Cresson Covered Bridge carries Sawyers Crossing Road over the Ashuelot River in

Swanzey, NH (Exhibit A – Locus). The bridge was originally constructed in 1859 and

rehabilitated in 1983 and again in 1996. It is an unsymmetrical town lattice truss structure

and spans 159 feet over the river. The bridge consists of two spans 61’‐6” and 77’‐3” from

center‐to‐center of bearings and has a vertical clearance of 12’‐9”. The existing bridge has

a one lane roadway and has a weight posting of 3 tons ‐ passenger cars only. The piers

are constructed of stone masonry on timber matting and footing stones. A previous

bridge rehabilitation project included installing stone fill at the west abutment and pier.

The stone fill is still in place at the abutment, but is not entirely intact at the pier. No

stone fill was installed at the east abutment.

Purpose and Need

A scour Critical Bridge Plan of Action (POA) was prepared in June of 2010 for Cresson

Covered Bridge. As part of the POA, a scour analysis was performed in order to

investigate contraction and pier scour components of total scour. It was determined that

Cresson Covered Bridge is scour critical. The embedment depth is unknown and the

riverbed is highly susceptible to erosion and scour from fast flowing waters during flood

events. Sediment buildup has been noted on pier footings and scour protection is needed

on pier noses. It was the recommendation of this investigation that partially grouted

riprap be installed at Cresson Covered Bridge. Subsequently, it was determined that



other scour protection methods would be more appropriate, as described below.

Proposed Action

The POA report determined that the bridge’s scour critical rating was “critical during

floods”; meaning the bridge and abutments are susceptible to undermining from erosive

forces during high flows. The POA recommended scour countermeasures at only the

west abutment and pier. Due to evidence of undercutting along the river bank, NHDOT

proposes to place riprap at the east abutment as well. Standard riprap, rather than

partially grouted riprap, will be suitable at each abutment location. Additional scour

countermeasures in the form of prefabricated concrete “A‐Jacks” ® are proposed at the

pier location. A‐Jacks are concrete interlocking six‐pronged units that are prefabricated

by ConTech Engineered Solutions LLC and installed as depicted in Photo 8 (Exhibit H ‐

Photographs).

2. That the alternative proposed by the applicant is the one with the least impact to wetlands

or surface waters on site.

Impacts to wetlands have been minimized to the extent possible. The No‐Build alternative

would affect no wetlands but would not meet the need to improve to safety of the bridge.

The project proposes to use a causeway for access to the work area. While a trestle would

have a smaller temporary impact footprint on the riverbed, it would be prohibitively

expensive, costing an estimated $460,000 compared with $81,000 for a temporary causeway. 3. The type and classification of the wetlands involved.

Wetlands proposed to be impacted include Riverine, Lower Perennial, Unconsolidated

Bottom, Sand Substrate, Permanently Flooded (R2UB2H); and jurisdictional Riverbank. 4. The relationship of the proposed wetlands to be impacted relative to nearby wetlands and

surface waters.

The jurisdictional resources proposed to be affected all are part of the Ashuelot River. 5. The rarity of the wetland, surface water, sand dunes, or tidal buffer zone area.

The Ashuelot River is typical of perennial rivers in New Hampshire. 6. The surface area of the wetlands that will be impacted.

The project as proposed will involve 10,514 square feet of temporary impact and 3,198

square feet of permanent impact to wetland resources.



7. The impact on plants, fish and wildlife including, but not limited to:

a. Rare, special concern species; b. State and federally listed threatened and endangered species; c. Species at the extremities of their ranges; d. Migratory fish and wildlife; e. Exemplary natural communities identified by the DRED-NHB; and f. Vernal pools.

A data request to the New Hampshire Natural Heritage Bureau was made and the response

indicated that there are known occurrences of state and federally listed dwarf

wedgemussels within the project area. (Exhibit B ‐ NHB Response) FHWA has initiated

consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as required under Section 7 of the

Endangered Species Act. Results of the consultation will be forwarded to NHDES when

available.

An environmental review was conducted through the US Fish and Wildlife Service’s

(USFWS) online Information for Planning and Conservation website (IPaC). The response

indicated that in addition to the dwarf wedgemussel, the federally threatened northern

long‐eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis) has the potential to occur within the project area.

Informal consultation performed for the northern long‐eared bat under the “Federal Highway

Administration (FHWA) and Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) Range‐wide Programmatic

Informal Consultation for Indiana Bat and Northern Long‐eared Bat” indicated that there will be

no effect to this species from the proposed project. (Exhibit C – USFWS NLEB Consultation)

8. The impact of the proposed project on public commerce, navigation and recreation.

The project will improve public commerce, navigation, and recreation by protecting the

existing pier and bridge abutments for the Cresson Covered Bridge. 9. The extent to which a project interferes with the aesthetic interests of the general public.

For example, where an applicant proposes the construction of a retaining wall on the bank

of a lake, the applicant shall be required to indicate the type of material to be used and the

effect of the construction of the wall on the view of other users of the lake.

The project will not interfere with the aesthetic interests of the general public. The purpose

of the project is to preserve this historic structure. 10. The extent to which a project interferes with or obstructs public rights of passage or

access. For example, where the applicant proposes to construct a dock in a narrow

channel, the applicant shall be required to document the extent to which the dock would

block or interfere with the passage through this area.



The project will not interfere with public rights of passage or access. Traffic will be

maintained over the bridge throughout construction. 11. The impact upon abutting owners pursuant to RSA 482-A:11, II. For example, if an

applicant is proposing to rip-rap a stream, the applicant shall be required to document the

effect of such work on upstream and downstream abutting properties.

The impact to abutting property owners will be positive, as it will improve safety at the

bridge. 12. The benefit of a project to the health, safety, and well being of the general public.

The project will improve health, safety, and well‐being of the general public. 13. The impact of a proposed project on quantity or quality of surface and ground water. For

example, where an applicant proposes to fill wetlands the applicant shall be required to

document the impact of the proposed fill on the amount of drainage entering the site

versus the amount of drainage exiting the site and the difference in the quality of water

entering and exiting the site.

There will be no impact to the quantity or quality of surface and ground water. 14. The potential of a proposed project to cause or increase flooding, erosion, or

sedimentation.

The project will not cause flooding, erosion, or sedimentation. All appropriate erosion and

sedimentation controls will be used during construction to prevent sedimentation or

turbidity in the Ashuelot River.

15. The extent to which a project that is located in surface waters reflects or redirects current

or wave energy which might cause damage or hazards.

The purpose of the scour countermeasures is to redirect river currents that are causing

ongoing erosion at the bridge piers. 16. The cumulative impact that would result if all parties owning or abutting a portion of the

affected wetland or wetland complex were also permitted alterations to the wetland

proportional to the extent of their property rights. For example, an applicant who owns



only a portion of a wetland shall document the applicant’s percentage of ownership of that

wetland and the percentage of that ownership that would be impacted.

If all abutters to the project also installed scour countermeasures in the Ashuelot River there

would be additional cumulative impacts, however, this is unlikely to occur. 17. The impact of the proposed project on the values and functions of the total wetland or

wetland complex.

The project will have no impact to the values and functions of the Ashuelot River. 18. The impact upon the value of the sites included in the latest published edition of the

National Register of Natural Landmarks, or sites eligible for such publication.

NA

19. The impact upon the value of areas named in acts of congress or presidential

proclamations as national rivers, national wilderness areas, national lakeshores, and such

areas as may be established under federal, state, or municipal laws for similar and related

purposes such as estuarine and marine sanctuaries.

The Ashuelot River is a Designated River under NH RSA 483, the New Hampshire Rivers

Management and Protection Program. Coordination has taken place with the Local Rivers

Advisory Committee and a copy of this application will be sent to them for their review.

20. The degree to which a project redirects water from one watershed to another.

NA Additional Comments

None.

NH PGP – Appendix B August 20121

New Hampshire Programmatic General Permit (PGP)Appendix B - Corps Secondary Impacts Checklist

(for inland wetland/waterway fill projects in New Hampshire)

1. Attach any explanations to this checklist. Lack of information could delay a Corps permit determination.2. All references to “work” include all work associated with the project construction and operation. Work includes filling, clearing, flooding, draining, excavation, dozing, stumping, etc.3. See PGP, GC 5, regarding single and complete projects. 4. Contact the Corps at (978) 318-8832 with any questions.1. Impaired Waters Yes No1.1 Will any work occur within 1 mile upstream in the watershed of an impaired water? See http://des.nh.gov/organization/divisions/water/wmb/section401/impaired_waters.htmto determine if there is an impaired water in the vicinity of your work area.* 2. Wetlands Yes No2.1 Are there are streams, brooks, rivers, ponds, or lakes within 200 feet of any proposed work?2.2 Are there proposed impacts to SAS, shellfish beds, special wetlands and vernal pools (see PGP, GC 26 and Appendix A)? Applicants may obtain information from the NH Department of Resources and Economic Development Natural Heritage Bureau (NHB) website, www.nhnaturalheritage.org, specifically the book Natural Community Systems of New Hampshire.2.3 If wetland crossings are proposed, are they adequately designed to maintain hydrology, sediment transport & wildlife passage?2.4 Would the project remove part or all of a riparian buffer? (Riparian buffers are lands adjacent to streams where vegetation is strongly influenced by the presence of water. They are often thin lines of vegetation containing native grasses, flowers, shrubs and/or trees that line the stream banks. They are also called vegetated buffer zones.)2.5 The overall project site is more than 40 acres.2.6 What is the size of the existing impervious surface area?2.7 What is the size of the proposed impervious surface area?2.8 What is the % of the impervious area (new and existing) to the overall project site?3. Wildlife Yes No3.1 Has the NHB determined that there are known occurrences of rare species, exemplary natural communities, Federal and State threatened and endangered species and habitat, in the vicinity of the proposed project? (All projects require a NHB determination.)3.2 Would work occur in any area identified as either “Highest Ranked Habitat in N.H.” or “Highest Ranked Habitat in Ecological Region”? (These areas are colored magenta and green, respectively, on NH Fish and Game’s map, “2010 Highest Ranked Wildlife Habitat by Ecological Condition.”) Map information can be found at: ��PDF: www.wildlife.state.nh.us/Wildlife/Wildlife_Plan/highest_ranking_habitat.htm.��Data Mapper: www.granit.unh.edu.��GIS: www.granit.unh.edu/data/downloadfreedata/category/databycategory.html.

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

NA

no changeno change

vchase

Typewritten Text

11

NH PGP – Appendix B August 20121

3.3 Would the project impact more than 20 acres of an undeveloped land block (upland, wetland/waterway) on the entire project site and/or on an adjoining property(s)?3.4 Does the project propose more than a 10-lot residential subdivision, or a commercial or industrial development?3.5 Are stream crossings designed in accordance with the PGP, GC 21?4. Flooding/Floodplain Values Yes No4.1 Is the proposed project within the 100-year floodplain of an adjacent river or stream?4.2 If 4.1 is yes, will compensatory flood storage be provided if the project results in a loss of flood storage?5. Historic/Archaeological ResourcesFor a minor or major impact project - a copy of the Request for Project Review (RPR) Form (www.nh.gov/nhdhr/review) shall be sent to the NH Division of Historical Resources as required on Page 5 of the PGP***Although this checklist utilizes state information, its submittal to the Corps is a Federal requirement.** If project is not within Federal jurisdiction, coordination with NH DHR is not required under Federal law..`

x

x

x

x

x

x

vchase

Typewritten Text

12



Army Corps of Engineers Secondary Impacts Checklist Supplemental Narrative

1. Impaired Waters

1.1 Will any work occur within 1 mile upstream in the watershed of an impaired water?

Yes. Aquatic life in the Ashuelot River is impaired by Aluminum, Benthic‐

Macroinvertebrate Bioassessments, Habitat Assessments, Lead, and pH. Primary contact

recreation is impaired by E. coli. The proposed project is not anticipated to have any effect

on these impairments as it involves only the installation of scour protection measures.

2. Wetlands

2.1 Are there are streams, brooks, rivers, ponds, or lakes within 200 feet of any proposed

work?

Yes. The proposed project is in the Ashuelot River.

2.4 Would the project remove part or all of a riparian buffer? (Riparian buffers are lands

adjacent to streams where vegetation is strongly influenced by the presence of water.

They are often thin lines of vegetation containing native grasses, flowers, shrubs and/or

trees that line the stream banks. They are also called vegetated buffer zones.)

Yes. A small amount of shrub vegetation, and two small trees, will be removed to provide

access for machinery to the work area.

3. Wildlife

3.1 Has the NHB determined that there are known occurrences of rare species, exemplary

natural communities, Federal and State threatened and endangered species and habitat,

in the vicinity of the proposed project? (All projects require a NHB determination.)

Yes. A data request to the New Hampshire Natural Heritage Bureau was made and the

response indicated that there are known occurrences of state and federally listed dwarf

wedgemussels within the project area (Exhibit B ‐ NHB Response). FHWA has initiated

consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as required under Section 7 of the

Endangered Species Act. Results of the consultation will be forwarded to NHDES when

available.

An environmental review was conducted through the US Fish and Wildlife Service’s

(USFWS) online Information for Planning and Conservation website (IPaC). The response

indicated that in addition to the dwarf wedgemussel, the federally threatened northern

long‐eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis) has the potential to occur within the project area.

Informal consultation performed for the northern long‐eared bat under the “Federal Highway

Administration (FHWA) and Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) Range‐wide Programmatic

vchase

Typewritten Text



Informal Consultation for Indiana Bat and Northern Long‐eared Bat” indicated that there will be

no effect to this species from the proposed project. (Exhibit C – USFWS NLEB Consultation)

3.2 Would work occur in any area identified as either “Highest Ranked Habitat in N.H.”

or “Highest Ranked Habitat in Ecological Region”?

Yes. This portion of the river is identified as Tier 1 Habitat in the 2010 NH Wildlife Action

Plan (Exhibit D – 2010 WAP).

4. Flooding/Floodplain Values

4.1 Is the proposed project within the 100‐year floodplain of an adjacent river or stream?

Yes. The project lies within the FEMA mapped floodplain of the Ashuelot River (Exhibit E –

Floodplain). However, there will be no alterations to floodplain storage.

5. Historic/Archaeological Resources

For a minor or major impact project ‐ a copy of the Request for Project Review (RPR)

Form (www.nh.gov/nhdhr/review) shall be sent to the NH Division of Historical

Resources as required on Page 5 of the PGP.

A Phase lA‐1B archaeological survey undertaken for the site concluded that that the

proposed construction activities within the APE are unlikely to adversely affect intact

archaeological resources associated with Pre‐Contact cultures or the Euroamerican

occupation of Swanzey. The study recommended no further archaeological survey, so long

as the project parameters remain within the limits of the APE and do not include subsurface

impacts. NHDHR concurred with this conclusion on 8/19/14. (Exhibit F – Cultural Resource

Effect Memo)



Env-Wt 404.04 Rip-rap.

(a) Rip-rap applications shall be considered only where the applicant demonstrates that anticipated turbulence, flows, restricted space, or similar factors render vegetative and diversion methods physically impractical.

A Scour Critical Bridge Plan of Action (POA) was prepared in June of 2010 for Cresson

Covered Bridge. As part of the POA, a scour analysis was performed in order to investigate

contraction and pier scour components of total scour. It was determined that Cresson

Covered Bridge is scour critical. The embedment depth is unknown and the riverbed is

highly susceptible to erosion and scour from fast flowing waters during flood events.

Sediment buildup has been noted on pier footings and scour protection is needed on pier

noses. It was the recommendation of this investigation that partially grouted riprap be

installed at Cresson Covered Bridge. Subsequently, it was determined that other scour

protection methods would be more appropriate.

(b) Applications for rip-rap shall include:

(1) Designation of a minimum and maximum stone size;

Class III riprap will be used at the bridge abutments. Riprap design calculations are

attached to this application (Exhibit G – Scour Countermeasure Design Calculations.)

Additional scour countermeasures in the form of prefabricated concrete “A‐Jacks” ® are

proposed at the pier location. A‐Jacks are concrete interlocking six‐pronged units that are

prefabricated by ConTech Engineered Solutions LLC.

(2) Gradation;

As above.

(3) Minimum rip-rap thickness;

Riprap at the bridge abutments will be placed in a 2’ thick layer.

(4) Type of bedding for stone;

Riprap at the abutments will be placed on a 6” layer of very coarse crushed stone. A‐Jacks

will be placed on a 6” layer of fine gradation crushed stone, as depicted on Sheet 6 of

Wetland Impact Plans, “Scour Mitigation Details”.

(5) Cross-section and plan views of the proposed installation;

See Sheet 6 of Wetland Impact Plans, “Scour Mitigation Details”.

(6) Sufficient plans to clearly indicate the relationship of the project to fixed points of reference, abutting properties, and features of the natural shoreline; and

See Sheet 6 of Wetland Impact Plans, “Scour Mitigation Details”.

vchase

Typewritten Text



(7) A description of anticipated turbulence, flows, restricted space, or similar factors that would render vegetative and diversion methods physically impractical.

The POA used information from the Cheshire Countywide FEMA Flood Insurance Study

and a field soil classification to calculate a pier scour estimate. Based on these

computations, it was estimated that there is the potential for eleven feet of scour at the

bridge pier during the 100‐year storm event. Vegetative stabilization and diversion

methods to prevent scour are physically impractical at this location.



Mitigation

This project involves only the installation of scour countermeasures for infrastructure

protection. As such, it is exempt from the requirement to mitigate under Env‐Wt 302.03 (c)

(2) c.

Project Location

Service Layer Credits: Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed

Pro

ject No

: 86

753.0

9

Dra

wn

By: vch

ase

Date

: 9/8/20

15

NHDOT 23737

CRESSON COVERED BRIDGE

25 Nashua Road Bedford, NH 03110(603) 472-5191 www.normandeau.com

SWANZEY, NH

SCALE:1:24,000

0 2,000 4,0001,000Feet

SEPTEMBER, 2015

EXHIBIT A - LOCUS

Mem

o��

��

Dep

artm

ent o

f Res

ourc

es a

nd E

cono

mic

Dev

elop

men

t D

RED

/NH

B

Div

isio

n of

For

ests

and

Lan

ds

PO

Box

185

6 (6

03) 2

71-2

214

fa

x: 2

71-6

488

C

onco

rd N

H

0330

2-18

56

To:

Vic

ki C

hase

, Nor

man

deau

Ass

ocia

tes

25

Nas

hua

Road

Bedf

ord,

NH

033

01-5

022

From

: M

elis

sa C

oppo

la, N

H N

atur

al H

erita

ge B

urea

u D

ate:

4/

3/20

15 (v

alid

for o

ne y

ear f

rom

this

dat

e)

Re:

Re

view

by

NH

Nat

ural

Her

itage

Bur

eau

N

HB

File

ID:

NH

B15-

1052

To

wn:

Sw

anze

y Lo

catio

n:

Saw

yer's

Cro

ssin

g R

oad

D

escr

iptio

n:

NH

DO

T pr

opos

es to

repl

ace

scou

r pro

tect

ion

ston

e ar

ound

the

pier

and

abu

tmen

ts o

f the

Cre

sson

Cov

ered

Brid

ge.

cc:

Kim

Tut

tle

As r

eque

sted

, I h

ave

sear

ched

our

dat

abas

e fo

r rec

ords

of r

are

spec

ies a

nd e

xem

plar

y na

tura

l com

mun

ities

, with

the

follo

win

g re

sults

.

Com

men

ts:

Thi

s site

is w

ithin

an

area

flag

ged

for

poss

ible

impa

cts o

n th

e fe

dera

lly-li

sted

Ala

smid

onta

het

erod

on (d

war

f wed

gem

usse

l) in

the

Ash

uelo

t R

iver

.

Inve

rteb

rate

Spe

cies

St

ate1

Fede

ral

Not

es

Dw

arf W

edge

Mus

sel (

Ala

smid

onta

hete

rodo

n)

E E

Cont

act t

he N

H F

ish

& G

ame

Dep

t and

the

US

Fish

& W

ildlif

e Se

rvic

e (s

ee b

elow

). 1 C

odes

: "E

" = E

ndan

gere

d, "T

" =

Thre

aten

ed, “

SC”

= Sp

ecia

l Con

cern

, "-

-" =

an

exem

plar

y na

tura

l com

mun

ity, o

r a ra

re sp

ecie

s tra

cked

by

NH

Nat

ural

Her

itage

that

has

not

yet

be

en a

dded

to th

e of

ficia

l sta

te li

st. A

n as

teris

k (*

) ind

icat

es th

at th

e m

ost r

ecen

t rep

ort f

or th

at o

ccur

renc

e w

as m

ore

than

20

year

s ago

.

Con

tact

for

all a

nim

al r

evie

ws:

Kim

Tut

tle,

NH

F&

G, (

603)

271

-654

4.

A n

egat

ive

resu

lt (n

o re

cord

in o

ur d

atab

ase)

doe

s not

mea

n th

at a

sens

itive

spec

ies i

s not

pre

sent

. O

ur d

ata

can

only

tell

you

of k

now

n oc

curr

ence

s, ba

sed

on

info

rmat

ion

gath

ered

by

qual

ified

bio

logi

sts a

nd re

porte

d to

our

offi

ce.

How

ever

, man

y ar

eas h

ave

neve

r bee

n su

rvey

ed, o

r hav

e on

ly b

een

surv

eyed

for c

erta

in

spec

ies.

An

on-s

ite su

rvey

wou

ld p

rovi

de b

ette

r inf

orm

atio

n on

wha

t spe

cies

and

com

mun

ities

are

inde

ed p

rese

nt.

Exh

ibit

B

NHB15-1052 EOCODE: IMBIV02030*021*NH

New Hampshire Natural Heritage Bureau - Animal Record Dwarf Wedge Mussel (Alasmidonta heterodon)

Legal Status Conservation Status Federal: Listed Endangered Global: Critically imperiled due to rarity or vulnerability State: Listed Endangered State: Critically imperiled due to rarity or vulnerability

Description at this LocationConservation Rank: Fair quality, condition and/or landscape context ('C' on a scale of A-D). Comments on Rank: Detailed Description: 2010: Ashuelot River - Cresson Bridge to Homestead Dam: Critical habitat throughout this

stretch of river. 496 mussels collected and relocated. Relocation site 1: 17 animals relocated from vicinity of Thompson covered bridge. Relocation site 2: 166 animals relocated from pre-drawdown survey. Relocation site 3: 313 animals relocated from surveys conducted during drawdown.2003: Obs_id 2421: 1 adult male observed. Obs_id 2459: 14 seen, age and sex unknown. 2001: A total of 13 shells at six sites along a two-mile stretch of river. Upstream of this stretch, four sites in a 1.25-mile stretch downstream of the confluence of the Ashuelot and The Branch each had no A. heterodon found. Sites 5 - 8: one shell observed. Site 10: 5 shells and some juveniles observed. Site 11: four shells observed.

General Area: 2010: Ashuelot River - Cresson Bridge to Homestead Dam: High quality habitat throughout stretch of river. Mussels occurred on stable banks, often in less than 6 inches of water.2003: Freshwater - Stream or river (Obs_id 2421). 2001: Up- and down-stream of an effluent pipe for a wastewater treatment plant. Site 5: Very slow flow (less than 0.05 m/s), substrate of large boulders and sand. Canopy fairly dense, and the river is well shaded. Site 6: Flow fairly quick (0.2-0.4 m/s). River is 10-15 yards wide, 1-4 feet deep, with a substrate of large boulders, gravel, and sand. Heavy riparian canopy. Site 7: Slow flow (less than 0.10 m/s). River is 1-6 feet wide, with a substrate a mix of sand, gravel, and boulders. Receives a lot of sunlight, since riparian canopy minimal. Site 8: Very slow flow (less than 0.10 m/s). River is 20-25 yards wide and less than 3 feet deep except for deeper spots along the banks. Substrate is almost entirely sand with silt and clay on the margins and much woody debris (almost no stable substrate). Little riparian canopy. Site 10: Flow rate very slow (less than 0.10 m/s). River is 2-6 feet (up to 11 feet) deep. Substrate mostly sand and silt but becoming very rocky where the mussels were found. Woody debris common throughout. Site 11: Very slow flow (less than 0.10 m/s). River generally 2-6 feet deep, reaching 8-10 feet. Substrate rocky (boulders, cobble, sand) in mussel area.

General Comments: 2010: Mussel survey was coordinated with the removal of the Homestead Dam on the Ashuelot River, as well as repairs to the Thompson covered bridge. Prior to bridge repairs, all mussels found near the footprint of the construction work were relocated to Relocation site 1. Prior to dam removal, all mussels found upstream to Cresson Bridge were collected and relocated to Relocation site 2. During the impoundment drawdown following the dam removal, all mussels observed were collected and relocated to Relocation site 3.2003: Scuba search of 500 yard site (2.5 hrs. x 2 people)found one large (>40mm) male DWM. Tesselated darters abundant throughout. Also A. undulata (>50 live) and S. undulatus (20-50 live). Lat./long. by Terrain Navigator near mid-point of site (Obs_id 2421). Information taken from "Freshwater Mussels of the Ashuelot River -- Keene to Hinsdale, August 2003," written by Ethan Nadeau of Biodrawversity consulting firm. Report submitted to NHFG and USFWS (Obs_id 2459).

Management Comments:

2001: Diverse mussel communities at sites 10 and 11, 700 and 1500 yards downstream of the effluent pipe, respectively, suggest no lasting negative consequences from the wastewater effluent.

Location Survey Site Name: Keene Managed By: Dickinson Memorial Forest

NHB15-1052 EOCODE: IMBIV02030*021*NH

County: Cheshire Town(s): Swanzey Size: 61.8 acres Elevation: Precision: Within (but not necessarily restricted to) the area indicated on the map. Directions: 2010: Relocation sites 1 & Upstream of Cresson Bridge. Relocation site 3: Downstream of Cresson

Bridge.2003: Obs_id 2421: 30-60 meters upstream of the covered bridge at Swanzey Dam. (Swanzey Dam Site #16, Freshwater Mussels of the Ashuelot River -Keene to Hinsdale, August 2003) (Obs_id 2421). From NH Rte 10 in Swanzey, take Sawyers Crossing Road ca. 2 miles east to the covered bridge over the Ashuelot River. 2001: Site 5: canoe upstream ca. 1.6 miles to where powerlines border the river upstream of a bend. Site 6: ca. 900 yards downstream of site 5 and 1000 yards upstream from the wastewater treatment plant effluent pipe. Site 7: ca. 600 yards upstream of the effluent pipe, just downstream of a bend in the river. Site 8: ca. 100 yards upstream of the effluent pipe, along the western shore. Site 10: ca. 200-300 yards upstream of the covered bridge, on the western side of the river. Site 11: canoe downstream of the covered bridge ca. 700 yards to an area on the eastern side of the river downstream of a sharp bend with a steep, rocky bank.

Dates documented First reported: 2001-08-08 Last reported: 2010-08-12

The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service has jurisdiction over Federally listed species. Please contact them at 70 Commercial Street, Suite 300, Concord NH 03301 or at (603) 223-2541.

1

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) Range-wide Programmatic Informal Consultation for

Indiana Bat and Northern Long-eared Bat�

�� Updated May 29, 2015

�� !�� "��#�� $��%��$��#��$��&'(��)�� *++��#��&��#��)�� +�� ,��&�)�� *��-��.��+�� $��&�)��"/�� 0�+�*�� #�� $��#��/��"�� #��!�� +��$��$��/��12��$�� #�� $��"/�� +�� $��#��$��#��3��3+��

1+ 4��5��

6+ (��$5�This refers to the Federal governmental lead action agency initiating consultation; select FHWA or FRA as appropriate �7+ ��!��$5�

��+ '� �5��

�+ ��5��

�+ ��5��

�+ ��5��

2+ 8��8��15��

9+ ��'� �&�)5��

:+ ��4��5�

�

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

9/8/15

FHWA

NHDOT

Ron Crickard

Chief, Project Management

(603) 271-7966

[email protected]

05E1NE00-2015-SLI-1947

Swanzey 23737 Scour Protection

Scour protection Repair of the Cresson Covered Bridge (Bridge No. 136/143)

vchase

Text Box

Exhibit C

2

;+ ,�� ,��(��5��

'��<��&�)��<�� =�$��<�� #��&�� )�

>+ ��?'( 0�� 3��@��'�� 4��

'��<��&�)��-��&form complete)�

'��<��&�)�� &form complete)��'�� &�)?��&�)�<��#�$��+�&form complete)��Otherwise, please continue below.

A+ ��?��$��

��

0��

,��'��"��&�+�+��)�

,��&��3��)5��

1B+ �� #��5��

�+ ��#��$�� /�� /��1BB��3��5��

�+ ��#��$�� #��/��#��65��

�+ �� 5��

�+ � ��5��

2 Coordinate with local Service field office for appropriate dates.

✔

3

11. For Bridge/Structure Work Projects:

a. Proposed work:

b. Timing of work:

c. Evidence of bat activity on bridge/structure:

d. If applicable, verify that superstructure work will not bother roosting bats in any way:

e. If applicable, verify that bridge/structure work will occur only in the winter months:

12. Please confirm the following:

Proposed project(s) adhere to the criteria of the range-wide programmatic informal BA (see Section 2.0).

All applicable AMMs will be implemented, including3:

Tree Removal AMM 1:

Tree Removal AMM 2:

Tree Removal AMM 3:

Tree Removal AMM 4:

Bridge AMM 1:

Bridge AMM 2:

Bridge AMM 3:

Bridge AMM 4:

Structure AMM 1:

Structure AMM 2:

Structure AMM 3:

Structure AMM 4:

Lighting AMM 1:

Lighting AMM 2:

Dust Control AMM 1:

Water Control AMM 1:






Wetland/Stream Protection AMM 1:






3 See AMMs Fact Sheet (Appendix B) for more information on the following AMMs.

vchase

Text Box

025101360014300

Project Location

Service Layer Credits: Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed

Pro

ject No

: 86

753.0

9

Dra

wn

By: vch

ase

Date

: 8/26/2

015

NHDOT 23737



SWANZEY, NH

0 2,000 4,0001,000Feet

AUGUST, 2015

EXHIBIT DWAP TIER 1 HABITAT

LegendWAP TiersGRIDCODE

Highest Ranked Habitat in NH

Highest Ranked Habitat in Biological Region

Supporting Landscapes

¯1:12,000

Project Location

Service Layer Credits: Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics,CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the

Pro

ject No

: 86

753.0

9

Dra

wn

By: vch

ase

Date

: 9/9/20

15

NHDOT 23737



SWANZEY, NH

SCALE:

0 2,000 4,0001,000Feet

SEPTEMBER, 2015

EXHIBIT E - FLOODPLAINS Data Source: Federal Emergency Management Agency. DIGITAL FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP DATABASE,CHESHIRE COUNTY, NEW HAMPSHIRE 1986.

Legend

1:2,400

FEMA MAPPED FLOODPLAIN WITH BASE FLOOD ELEVATION

Cultural Resources Effect Memo

Project Town: Swanzey (::;

State No.: 23737 IT fli S ~ Date: 3/9/2015

Federal No. (as applicable): Swanzey, X-A002(758)

Pursuant to attached concurrence memo, and for the purpose of compliance with the regulations of National Historic Preservation Act and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's procedures for the Protection of Historic Properties (36 CFR 800), the NH Division of Historical Resources and, when applicable, the NH Division of the Federal Highway Administration or the US Army Corps of Engineers have coordinated the identification and evaluation of cultural resources relative to the repair and improvement of the rip rap and scour protection of the Cresson Covered Bridge (State Bridge No. 136/143) that carries Sawyer's Crossing Road over the Ashuelot River in Swanzey, New Hampshire. The State of NH received funds from the National Historic Covered Bridge Preservation Program for this municipally-owned historic covered bridge. The project involves constructing scour countermeasures to prevent scour damage at the historic covered bridge site. Bridge impacts are limited to scour protection areas.

A Phase lA-1B archaeological survey undertaken for the site concluded that that the proposed construction activities within the APE are unlikely to adversely affect intact archaeological resources associated with Pre-Contact cultures or the Euroamerican occupation of Swanzey. The study recommended no further archaeological survey, so long as the project parameters remain within the limits of the APE and do not include subsurface impacts. NHDHR concurred with this conclusion on 8/19/14 (See attached concurrence memo).

Based on a review of the project, as presented on this date, it has been determined that:

o No Historic or Archaeological Properties will be Affected

[2;1 There will be No Adverse Effect on Historic or Archaeological Properties Describe any outstanding commitments: Project parameters shall remain within previously delineated APE, and there shall be no subsurface impacts,

o There will be an Adverse Effect on Historic or Archaeological Properties or Resources describe the effect, measures to minimize harm and proposed mitigation. _______________ _ _______________________________ (.attach pages as Necessary).

In accordance with the Advisory Council's regulations, we will continue to consult, as appropriate, as this project proceeds.

The NH State Historic Preservation Officer concurs with these findings~: y~~~~~~~:2::~~~~.:::. :.-__

There Will Be: No 4(f) [2;1; Programmatic 4(f) 0; Full 4 (f) 0; or

o A finding of de minimis 4(f) impact as stated: In addition, with NHDHR concurrence of no adverse effect for the above undertaking, and in accordance with 23 CFR 774, FHWA intends to, and by signature below, does make a . finding of de minimis impact. NHDHR's signature represents concurrence with both the no adverse effect determination an the d minimis findings. Parties to the Section 106 process have been consulted and their concerns

h e,""o "'""~" 't,ref7':; ~;frem'''" of S~f"" 4{D h,,~ '- ,.f,f",d, Fed a1 Highway Adnnmstration

Army Corps of Engineers

Cc:FHWA, NHDHR, ACOE ( <= as applicable fl )

vchase

Text Box

Exhibit F

Job Swanzey 23737 Computed By TPL Date 2/24/2014

Description Sawyers Crossing over Ashuelot River Checked By FB Date 2/28/2014

Riprap

References:

1. NHDOT/CHA Scour Critical Bridge Plan of Action Report , June, 2010

Determine Required Thickness and Layout Dimensions for Riprap Design Guide 14 Ref. 2

Need to determine required riprap size Example 14.4 Ref. 2

Determine appropriate SBR

SBR < 5.0 From review of Existing Site Plan

Channel Avg Velocity, Vavg = 3.60 fps Ref. 1

Flow depth adjacent to abut., y = 11.90 ft = WSE -El. @ Toe of Abut. Ref. 1

Determine d50

gravitational accel, g = 32.20 ft/s2

Specific gravity of riprap, Ss = 2.65

Froude Number, Fr = 0.184

Abutment Type = vertical wall

Abutment Type Factor, K = 1.02

d50 = 0.25 ft Equation 14.1 Ref. 2

Select Class III Riprap Table 12.1 Ref. 2

Use d50 = 1.00 ft

Determine Minimum Riprap thickness Assumed placed in dry conditions

tmin = 2.00 ft = max (1.5 d50 or d100) Section 14.3 Ref. 2

Contraction Scour = 0.00 ft Ref. 1

Bed forms = 0.00 ft Ref. 1

Use tmin = 2.00 ft Use tact = 2.00 ft

Determine Minimum Riprap extents

minimum extent into floodplain = 18 ft =1.5 y Section 12.4 Ref. 2

extent downstream embank. = 19 ft =75% of 25 feet for partially grouted riprap

197 Loudon Road, Suite 310

Concord, NH 03301

2. HEC-23: Bridge Scour & Stream Instability Countermeasures: Experience, Selection, & Design Guidance -

3rd Edition, Vol. I & II

T:\Projects\New Hampshire\Swanzey 23737 Winchester 23738\23737_23738\Computations\Revetment Design - Swanzey\Riprap Design Calcs_Swanzey 23737.xlsx ABUT

vchase

Text Box

Exhibit G



GRANULAR FILTER DESIGN

References:

1. NHDOT River Bed Sample Sieve Test Results, October 18, 2013

3. NHDOT Standard Specs for Road & Bridge Construction, 2010

Determine Key Indices for Base Soil

d50s = 0.18 mm Interp. Grain Dist Chart Ref. 1

d10s = 0.075 mm Ref. 1

d60s = 0.203 mm Ref. 1

Cu = 2.71 = d60/d10

Determine Key Indices for Riprap Use Class III Table 12.1 Ref. 2

d50 = 305.00 mm Table 12.1 Ref. 2

d15 = 203.00 mm Table 12.1 Ref. 2

d85 = 406.00 mm Table 12.1 Ref. 2

Cu = 2.00 = d85/d15

Determine Maximum Allowable d50R for Riprap directly on Base Soil

A50 = 12 Using Cisten-Ziems chart (Fig. 16.2) Ref. 2

d50R = 2.16 mm = A50(d50s)

NG, FILTER REQUIRED

Determine Key Indices for Filter Use NHDOT Spec 304.4 - Crushed Stone (Fine)

d50 = 4.75 mm Section 304, Table 1 Ref. 3



Cu = 12.67 = d60/d10

Minimum thickness = 150.00 mm Section 12.4 Ref. 2

Determine Maximum Allowable d50f for Filter


d50f = 5.04 mm = A50(d50s)

OK, FILTER SUITABLE


Concord, NH 03301



T:\Projects\New Hampshire\Swanzey 23737 Winchester 23738\23737_23738\Computations\Filter Design\Granular\Filter Design_Riprap_Calcs_Swanzey 23737.xlsx HA-6




Concord, NH 03301

Determine Maximum Allowable d50R for Riprap directly on Filter


d50R = 47.50 mm = A50(d50s)

NG, INTERMEDIATE FILTER REQUIRED

Determine Key Indices for Intermediate Filter Use NHDOT Spec 304.6 - Crushed Stone (Very Coarse)




Cu = 15.79 = d60/d10


Determine Maximum Allowable d50f for Intermediate Filter


d50f = 152.00 mm = A50(d50s)

OK, INTERMEDIATE FILTER SUITABLE

Determine Maximum Allowable d50R for Riprap directly on Intermediate Filter


d50R = 337.50 mm = A50(d50s)

OK, NO ADDITIONAL INTERMEDIATE FILTER REQUIRED

Check Hydraulic Conductivity of Filter Layer

Base soil properties do not match types listed in Table 16.1 Ref. 2

Calculate estimated hydraulic conductivity of the base soil

Kozeny-Carman Equation Ks = (g/v)*5.556*10-3

[n3/(1-n)

2]*d10

2

gravitational accel, g = 9.81 m/s2

kinematic viscosity, v = 1.307E-06 m2

/s @ 50o

F

porosity, n = 0.8279 = 0.255 (1+ 0.83Cu)

Ks = 0.44950814 cm/s

Kfilter > 4.49508136 cm/s must be > 10Ks





Concord, NH 03301

Calculate estimated hydraulic conductivity of the filter layer

porosity, n = 2.9359 = 0.255 (1+ 0.83Cu)

Kfilter = 63.4028334 cm/s must be > 10Ks OK

Calculate estimated hydraulic conductivity of the intermediate filter layer

porosity, n = 3.5968 = 0.255 (1+ 0.83Cu)

Kfilter_I = 649.723332 cm/s must be > Kfilter OK



Description Sawyers Crossing over Ashuelot River Checked By RTG Date 9/4/2014

GRANULAR FILTER DESIGN for A-JACKS

References:

1. NHDOT River Bed Sample Sieve Test Results, October 18, 2013

3. NHDOT Standard Specs for Road & Bridge Construction, 2010

Note: A-Jacks require an uppermost filter layer: AJ-24 units

Required d50 = 50-75 mm Table 19.5 Ref. 2

Determine Key Indices for Base Soil

d50s = 0.18 mm Interp. Grain Dist Chart Ref. 1

d10s = 0.075 mm Ref. 1

d60s = 0.203 mm Ref. 1

Cu = 2.71 = d60/d10

Determine Key Indices for Uppermost Filter Layer Use NHDOT Item 585.3 - Stone Fill, Class C

d50 = 50.00 mm Section 585.2.1.3 Ref. 3

d15 = 37.50 mm Section 585.2.1.3 Ref. 3

d85 = 100.00 mm Section 585.2.1.3 Ref. 3

Cu = 2.67 = d85/d15

Determine Maximum Allowable d50R for Uppermost Filter Layer directly on Base Soil


d50R = 2.34 mm = A50(d50s)

NG, INTERMEDIATE FILTER REQUIRED

Determine Key Indices for Filter Use NHDOT Spec 304.4 - Crushed Stone (Fine)




Cu = 12.67 = d60/d10


Determine Maximum Allowable d50f for Filter


d50f = 5.04 mm = A50(d50s)

OK, INTERMEDIATE FILTER SUITABLE


Concord, NH 03301



T:\Projects\New Hampshire\Swanzey 23737 Winchester 23738\23737_23738\Computations\Filter Design\Granular\Filter Design_AJacks_Calcs_Swanzey 23737.xlsx HA-6


Description Sawyers Crossing over Ashuelot River Checked By RTG Date 9/4/2014


Concord, NH 03301

Determine Maximum Allowable d50R for Uppermost filter layer directly on Intermediate Filter


d50R = 52.25 mm = A50(d50s)

OK, NO ADDITIONAL INTERMEDIATE FILTER REQUIRED

Check Hydraulic Conductivity of Filter Layer

Base soil properties do not match types listed in Table 16.1 Ref. 2

Calculate estimated hydraulic conductivity of the base soil

Kozeny-Carman Equation Ks = (g/v)*5.556*10-3

[n3/(1-n)

2]*d10

2

gravitational accel, g = 9.81 m/s2

kinematic viscosity, v = 1.307E-06 m2

/s @ 50o

F

porosity, n = 0.8279 = 0.255 (1+ 0.83Cu)

Ks = 0.44950814 cm/s

Kfilter > 4.49508136 cm/s must be > 10Ks

Calculate estimated hydraulic conductivity of the intermediate filter layer

porosity, n = 2.9359 = 0.255 (1+ 0.83Cu)

Kfilter = 63.4028334 cm/s must be > 10Ks OK

Calculate estimated hydraulic conductivity of the uppermost filter layer

porosity, n = 0.8194 = 0.255 (1+ 0.83Cu)

Kfilter_I = 98988.1331 cm/s must be > Kfilter OK

T:\Projects\New Hampshire\Swanzey 23737 Winchester 23738\23737_23738\Computations\Filter Design\Granular\Filter Design_AJacks_Calcs_Swanzey 23737.xlsx HA-6

NHDES Standard Dredge and Fill NHDOT

Swanzey 23737 over Ashuelot River

Exhibit H ‐ Photographs

Photo 1 Cresson Covered Bridge, view southeast. All photos June 12, 2015.

Photo 2 Sandbar downstream of center pier.




Photo 3 Center pier

Photo 4 View west from east bank of center pier and sandbar




Photo 5 View west

Photo 6 River substrate viewed from east bank, typical of area




Photo 7 River substrate, view from bridge looking upstream

Photo 8 Example of A‐Jacks installation at another site.

Image from http://www.conteches.com/products/erosion‐control/hard‐armor/a‐jacks.aspx. Accessed June 28, 2015.

NH.gov - Swanzey 23737 Wetland Application · 2017. 8. 23. · Permit Application - Valid until...

Documents

Transcript of NH.gov - Swanzey 23737 Wetland Application · 2017. 8. 23. · Permit Application - Valid until...